A dealership may be on the hook for a nice chunk of change for denying a loaner to a customer. Automotive News reports a customer is suing a Southern California dealership over not giving her a loaner vehicle because she has a service dog.
The incident happened in October 2023. Teresa Barber went to BMW of Buena Park to get her vehicle serviced. In the suit, Barber is described as a disabled military veteran who has a service dog because she has “fibromyalgia and post-traumatic stress disorder.” Initially the dealer, like most, offered her a loaner vehicle while her vehicle was in service. However after seeing the service dog, the dealer’s service manager decided to not give her a loaner; apparently the dealer has a policy of no pets in loaner vehicles. And weirdly that policy extends to service animals.
As Auto News details, even explaining the situation and attempting to educate the manager didn’t help things. He would not back down.
Barber “attempted to educate the manager that what he was doing was considered discrimination, but the manager would not relent,” the complaint said. She “did her best to explain that her dog was not a pet, but in fact a working service animal. Nonetheless, the manager doubled down on his discrimination and claimed that he could deny service to anyone for any reason.
The discrimination Barber mentioned would be because of her service animal, which could be a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act. Titles II and III of the ADA specifically detail how disabled people and their service animals are to be treated. And when it comes to transportation, accommodations for both the disabled person and their service animal must be made as detailed in title V under Transportation.
A person traveling with a service animal cannot be denied access to transportation, even if there is a “no pets” policy. In addition, the person with a service animal cannot be forced to sit in a particular spot; no additional fees can be charged because the person uses a service animal; and the customer does not have to provide advance notice that s/he will be traveling with a service animal.
The laws apply to both public and private transportation providers and include subways, fixed-route buses, Paratransit, rail, light-rail, taxicabs, shuttles and limousine services.
Ultimately, Barber didn’t get a loaner vehicle and filed suit against the dealership in the Orange County Superior Court on January 8th. Barber wants “damages and attorney fees under federal and state anti-discrimination laws.” Despite all this, Barber says in the filing that she would still like to do business with the dealership but only once it “ceases its discriminatory practices.” Both the dealer and Barber’s representing attorney declined to comment to Automotive News on the case.
