P.F. Chang’s Restrooms Violate Disability Laws, Class Action Says

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

A California man has filed a proposed class action lawsuit against the Asian-inspired restaurant chain P.F. Chang’s, alleging the company violated California anti-discrimination statutes, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and the California Disabled Persons Act (CDPA) by not providing an accessible restroom area.

Both the CDPA (1968) and the Unruh Act (1987) were enacted to cover persons with disabilities, prohibit discrimination on the bases of disability and require full and equal access to services, facilities, and advantages of public accommodations. The laws also mandate that any building constructed after 1970 must comply with standards governing the physical accessibility of public accommodations.

Plaintiff Rafael Arroyo, who is a paraplegic and requires a wheelchair to move about, claims that on Dec. 15, 2015 he had lunch at P.F. Chang’s Sherman Oaks location and suffered discrimination as a result of being denied full and equal access to restrooms. Specifically, Arroyo alleges that he was unable to access the restroom without the assistance of others because of the “excessive force required by him to open the restroom door.”

Additionally, Arroyo reports that he was deterred from using the toilet because the stall door hardware was not handicap accessible. Arroyo also states he was not able to wash his hands because he feared burning his legs from exposed pipes under the sink and that the soap dispenser was mounted excessively high and out of reach.

According to the complaint, Arroyo attempted to resolve the dispute without litigation on Dec. 17 by bringing the matter to the attention of P.F. Chang’s restaurant manager through a written letter detailing his experience and requesting the restrooms be made accessible to disabled persons. Arroyo asked that the problems be fixed within 30 days.

Arroyo claims he received no response to his letter. “Despite receiving notice and an opportunity to cure from plaintiff, defendant has refused to address its accessibility violations,” the class action lawsuit states. “The aforementioned violations are ongoing and continue to result in the plaintiff and unnamed mobility impaired class members suffering discrimination as a result of being denied full and equal access to these restaurants.”

As a result of his experience at P.F. Chang’s and the lack of response to his letter, Arroyo decided to file the class action lawsuit. His attorneys hired professional building experts to investigate approximately 20 California-based P.F. Chang’s restaurants to determine if they also violate the CPDA by discriminating against disabled persons, an ongoing investigation that has purportedly uncovered at least 125 instances of discriminatory violations.

“Plaintiff has reasonable grounds to believe that defendant will continue to subject him and other disabled individuals to discrimination in violation of the laws of the state of California, given that the defendant has failed to bring existing restaurants into compliance for over 10 years and has allowed new restaurants to be constructed that were similarly out of compliance,” the lawsuit states.

Arroyo is seeking to represent a Class of all mobility impaired/wheelchair bound persons in California who have patronized P.F. Chang’s restaurants and were denied “the full and equal enjoyment of the good services, programs, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any of the P.F. Chang’s locations identified herein.”

Arroyo is represented by Evan J. Smith of Brodsky & Smith LLC.

P.F. Chang’s operates of 38 restaurants across the United States with 20 locations in the State of California.

The P.F. Chang’s Anti-Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit is Arroyo, et al. v. P.F. Chang’s China Bistro Inc., Case No. BC613340, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.