October 23, 2021

Volume XI, Number 296

Advertisement
Advertisement

October 22, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

October 21, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis
Advertisement

Does Your Bank's Website Violate Americans with Disabilities Act?

There has been a recent surge in claims brought by people with visual and hearing impairments alleging that company websites violate the accessibility standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Until now, these claims have typically been made against companies outside of the banking industry. We recently learned, however, that at least one community bank in Texas has received a demand letter from a consumer-protection law firm alleging that the bank’s website does not comply with accessibility standards that are currently under consideration by the Department of Justice (DOJ). In light of the present uncertainty as to the future website accessibility standards under the ADA, we expect more community banks will receive similar claims or threats of claims.

Banks are considered places of “public accommodations” under the ADA.  As such, most bank websites must comply with the ADA, which includes being accessible to people with visual and hearing impairments.  Unfortunately, there are currently no regulations or standards explaining precisely what a website must provide to avoid violating the ADA. The DOJ, which enforces the ADA, announced that it does not expect to publish regulations concerning the accessibility of businesses’ websites until 2018. 

Nevertheless, recent actions by the DOJ strongly suggest that the DOJ considers a website accessible under the ADA if it complies with Level AA of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (“WCAG”) 2.0. These guidelines, which were developed by the World Wide Web Consortium, cover a wide range of recommendations for making websites more accessible to those with disabilities. Although they are voluntary standards, the DOJ, in several negotiated settlements with non-banking industry companies, required these companies to modify their websites to meet these standards.  Also, in its Supplemental Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to governmental entities, the DOJ recently stated that it believes that WCAG 2.0 Level AA is “the most appropriate standard.” The DOJ’s insistence on compliance with WCAG 2.0 Level AA in the resolution of claims brought against non-governmental entities suggests that the DOJ will likely require the same accessibility standards for other private entities.

Despite the DOJ’s apparent preference for the standards set forth in WCAG 2.0 Level AA, a court could still determine that a bank’s website complies with the ADA, even if it does not meet these standards. However, until the DOJ publishes regulations on the issue in 2018, it is difficult to predict what minimum level of accessibility a court will require a bank’s website to provide to comply with the ADA. Even without clarity, or perhaps because of this uncertainty, plaintiffs’ attorneys are starting to focus their attention on the banking industry.  As a result, banks should reach out to their third-party service providers and/or companies specializing in website compliance now to determine whether their websites provide accessibility to people with visual and hearing impairments.

© 2021 Bracewell LLPNational Law Review, Volume VI, Number 320
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Bryan S. Dumesnil, Bracewell, commercial litigation attorney, contingent fees lawyer
Partner

Bryan Dumesnil has nearly 20 years of experience as a trial attorney.  He handles complex litigation matters, with an emphasis on three primary areas: commercial litigation, contingent fee litigation, and lender liability litigation.

His practice includes representation of commercial clients in diverse civil litigation matters, including contractual disputes, business torts, and energy-related litigation.  Bryan also represents commercial and individual clients as plaintiffs on a contingency basis.  This practice includes the representation of...

713-221-1520
G. Waverly Vest, Bracewell, federal regulatory compliance lawyer, fiduciary responsibilities attorney
Partner

G. Waverly Vest represents and counsels financial institutions, holding companies and their officers, directors and owners. He provides guidance in all areas of state and federal regulatory compliance; fiduciary responsibilities and liabilities; operational transactions, mergers and acquisitions; and public and private securities offerings of equity and debt.

Frequently retained in the face of complex circumstances, Mr. Vest has decades of experience in advising and representing clients in mergers, acquisition of branches, conversions and...

713-221-1332
Annette L. Tripp, Bracewell, mergers acquisitions lawyer, public private transactions attorney
Partner

Annette Tripp’s practice focuses on financial institution matters. Her experience includes bank and financial services, regulatory law, and mergers and acquisitions, including public and private transactions for banks, thrifts and other financial institutions.

She advises and represents clients on conflict-of-interest matters, affiliate and insider transactions, corporate governance, proxy contests, change-in-control procedures, policy review, executive compensation, stock repurchase programs, corporate applications, privacy and data protections...

713-221-1188
Austin J. Muck, Bracewell, patent infringement lawyer, products liability attorney
Associate

Austin focuses his practice on general civil litigation, including commercial litigation, business torts, patent infringement, and products liability.

While in law school, Austin interned for the Alliance Defense Fund.

EDUCATION

J.D., cum laude, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law, 2013

B.S., Texas A&M University, 2009

713-221-1250
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement