Got Your CASp Inspection Report? Here's What You Actually Need to Fix
A Small Business Owner's Guide to ADA Compliance, Accessibility Repairs, and Lawsuit Risk
You just received your Certified Access Specialist (CASp) inspection report. You open it and find a long list of accessibility issues involving parking, entrances, restrooms, doors, ramps, and more.
Your first thought might be: Do I really have to fix all of this? And what happens if I can't afford it?
These are reasonable questions, especially for small-business owners working with limited budgets.
The good news is that accessibility laws recognize differences between existing buildings, new construction, and renovations. Not every finding in a CASp report necessarily requires an immediate, expensive renovation.
However, ignoring the report is not the answer either. Understanding which requirements apply to your business is how you make informed decisions and reduce your legal exposure.
1. Does My Existing Business Have to Meet Today's ADA and Building Codes?
Not necessarily every current construction requirement, but your business still has accessibility obligations.
The first thing to understand is that an older building is not automatically exempt from accessibility laws.
The applicable requirements depend on when the building and its individual features were constructed or altered, what standards applied at those times, and whether additional accessibility work is required today.
For example, a store built in 1985 may have different construction obligations than a store built in 2018. A restroom renovated in 2020 may also have different requirements than an untouched restroom from 1985.
In certain situations, an existing feature that meets the 1991 ADA Standards may qualify for a federal safe harbor against incremental changes introduced by the 2010 Standards. That protection is element-specific and has limitations.
The takeaway: Before deciding what to fix, determine which requirements actually apply to each finding.
References: 28 CFR §§36.304(d)(2), 36.406; 2025 CBC §§11B-202.3 and 11B-202.4, Exception 2.
2. What Does "Readily Achievable" Mean?
For existing places of public accommodation, the ADA requires removal of architectural barriers when doing so is readily achievable.
This means the correction can be completed without much difficulty or expense.
For a small business, readily achievable corrections might include:
Repositioning merchandise displays to improve access.
Replacing inaccessible door hardware.
Installing grab bars where feasible.
Lowering an inaccessible dispenser.
Correcting accessible parking signs or markings.
Example: Your CASp report identifies a paper towel dispenser mounted too high in your restroom. Relocating it may be inexpensive and relatively simple. That could be a readily achievable correction.
Compare that with reconstructing an entire entrance ramp, which might require substantial grading, drainage modifications, or structural work.
Whether that larger project is readily achievable depends on the actual work required and the business's circumstances.
There is no universal dollar amount that every business must spend. Financial resources, correction costs, operational impacts, and other statutory factors are considered.
Important: Readily achievable barrier removal is an ongoing obligation. A correction that is not readily achievable today may become achievable later.
References: 42 USC §12181(9); 28 CFR §§36.104 and 36.304.
3. Can I Provide Alternative Access Instead of Making Expensive Changes?
Sometimes, yes.
Under the ADA, when a business can demonstrate that removing an existing barrier is not readily achievable, it must provide access to its goods or services through alternative methods when those methods are readily achievable.
Example: Your store has several steps at the front entrance. Installing a compliant ramp would require extensive reconstruction that is not presently readily achievable.
Depending on your business, alternative measures could include curbside service, home delivery, or providing merchandise at another accessible location.
A doorbell or call button may help customers request assistance, but installing a doorbell alone does not automatically satisfy the ADA.
An alternative-access policy needs to work in practice. Staff should be trained, assistance should actually be available, and customers with disabilities should not be charged extra for the accommodation.
Most importantly, alternative service is not a substitute for a physical improvement that is otherwise required and readily achievable. Nor does it excuse accessibility requirements triggered by new construction or alterations.
References: 28 CFR §§36.301(c), 36.304 and 36.305.
4. What Is "Technically Infeasible" or "Maximum Extent Feasible"?
These terms generally become important when making alterations to existing buildings.
Technically infeasible involves existing structural or site conditions that prevent full compliance with applicable accessibility requirements.
For example, imagine renovating an older restroom where an essential load-bearing structural member prevents achieving the required layout.
If the existing conditions meet the applicable criteria for technical infeasibility, the project may be permitted to provide accessibility to the maximum extent feasible, rather than achieving every new-construction requirement.
Under the California Building Code, the enforcing authority must determine technical infeasibility, and its finding must be documented. California's provision also recognizes equivalent facilitation.
This does not mean you can simply choose the dimensions that fit your budget.
Cost alone is not proof of technical infeasibility. The existing physical constraints must support the determination, and accessible features that can be provided must still be provided.
References: 2025 CBC §11B-202.3, Exception 2; 2010 ADAS §202.3, Exception 2; 28 CFR §36.402(c). The historical 1991 ADAAG addressed this issue in §4.1.6(1)(j).
5. What About the 20% Path-of-Travel Rule?
This is one of the most commonly misunderstood accessibility requirements.
The 20% rule does not mean you only have to spend 20% of your CASp report's estimated repair costs.
It applies to certain additional accessibility improvements associated with construction projects.
Under the federal ADA, alterations affecting an area containing a primary function—such as a store's sales floor—can trigger improvements to the accessible path of travel serving that area.
The federal rules generally consider those additional path-of-travel improvements disproportionate when their cost exceeds 20% of the primary-function alteration cost.
California has separate and potentially broader requirements under CBC §11B-202.4.
For qualifying California alteration projects at or below the annual valuation threshold, Exception 8 limits required path-of-travel expenditures to 20% of the adjusted construction cost.
For 2026, that valuation threshold is $209,208.
A Simple Example
Let's say you spend $60,000 remodeling your store's sales area.
If the project triggers the applicable path-of-travel requirements, 20% equals $12,000.
That amount may limit the required additional path-of-travel improvements under the qualifying rules.
But it does not excuse accessibility requirements within the remodeled area itself. It also does not erase your separate obligation to remove existing barriers when readily achievable.
And if your California project exceeds the valuation threshold, you cannot automatically assume the same 20% spending cap applies. Full path-of-travel compliance is generally required unless an applicable exception or approved hardship determination provides relief.
There is another important distinction: California CBC §11B-202.4, Exceptions 3 and 4, provides scope limitations for certain projects performed specifically to correct accessibility barriers. Fixing an existing accessibility issue does not necessarily trigger a renovation of the entire property's path of travel.
The takeaway: Before starting construction, determine whether the work is barrier removal, an alteration, an addition, or another type of project. The classification matters.
References: 2025 CBC §11B-202.4, Exceptions 3, 4 and 8; 2010 ADAS §202.4; 28 CFR §36.403.
6. What If Accessibility Changes Cause My Store to Lose Money?
The ADA does recognize legitimate financial and operational concerns, but not every loss of revenue creates an exemption.
Consider a small retail store with narrow aisles.
Moving every display rack to create accessible aisles might eliminate a significant amount of merchandise display space.
Under 28 CFR §36.304(f), rearranging movable furniture and display racks is not considered readily achievable to the extent that doing so causes a significant loss of selling or serving space.
This does not mean you can leave all aisles inaccessible. You may still need to improve selected aisles and provide assistance accessing merchandise in remaining inaccessible locations.
Now consider a different situation: A restroom renovation is required as part of your construction project, but the additional accessibility work makes the project financially difficult.
California recognizes a concept called unreasonable hardship in certain building-code applications.
For qualifying projects above the valuation threshold, CBC §11B-202.4, Exception 8 allows the enforcing agency to consider an unreasonable hardship based on factors including construction cost, financial feasibility, and the accessibility gained or lost.
The enforcing agency must make and document that determination. Even an approved hardship does not eliminate the minimum path-of-travel obligations specified in that exception.
You may also hear the phrase undue burden. Under federal ADA Title III, that term applies in other contexts, including certain auxiliary aids and communication services. It is not a blanket financial exemption from physical-access requirements.
The takeaway: Financial difficulty can matter, but the legal test depends on the type of accessibility obligation involved.
References: 28 CFR §§36.104, 36.303 and 36.304(f); 2025 CBC Chapter 2, definition of Unreasonable Hardship, and §11B-202.4, Exception 8.
7. Can I Still Get Sued After Receiving a CASp Report?
Yes.
A CASp inspection does not automatically eliminate liability or prevent someone from filing an accessibility lawsuit.
But obtaining a qualifying CASp inspection before a lawsuit can provide important legal benefits under California law.
Depending on eligibility, those benefits may include a 90-day stay of court proceedings, an early evaluation conference, and potential reductions in minimum statutory damages.
Certain qualifying small businesses may also receive a 120-day period of protection from specified minimum statutory damages for violations identified in their inspection report, provided all statutory conditions, notices, and correction requirements are satisfied.
These protections are not automatic lawsuit immunity.
A CASp inspection certificate is proof that an inspection occurred—not certification that your business is fully compliant.
If your report identifies barriers, California Civil Code §55.53 requires a qualifying CASp report to include a reasonable correction schedule.
That makes your next steps especially important. Maintain your schedule, document completed improvements, and address unresolved barriers under the appropriate legal requirements.
References: California Civil Code §§55.53, 55.54 and 55.56; California Division of the State Architect, CASp Property Inspection guidance.
8. What Should I Actually Do With My CASp Report?
Rather than treating the report as one enormous construction project, develop a plan.
Understand the findings. Ask your CASp which standards apply to each item, whether the feature was required to comply when constructed or altered, and whether readily achievable barrier removal was assessed.
Address straightforward barriers. Prioritize readily achievable work that improves parking, entrances, accessible routes, customer areas, and restrooms, based on the conditions at your facility.
Get estimates for expensive work. Obtain contractor proposals and determine whether a correction involves structural constraints, significant expense, or loss of operating space.
Evaluate legitimate exceptions. Work with your CASp, design professional, and local building department when technical infeasibility, equivalent facilitation, path-of-travel limitations, or unreasonable hardship may apply.
Document your decisions and progress. Keep estimates, correspondence, supporting financial information, correction records, approvals, and your implementation schedule. Reevaluate outstanding barriers as circumstances change.
If you lease your property, involve your landlord early. Under 28 CFR §36.201(b), both landlords and tenants may have ADA responsibilities, even when their lease allocates the cost of particular improvements between them.
The Bottom Line: Don't Ignore Your CASp Report, but Don't Panic Either
Receiving a long CASp inspection report does not automatically mean you must spend tens of thousands of dollars correcting every listed condition immediately.
It does mean you should understand your obligations and take appropriate action.
Some barriers may be readily achievable to remove. Some existing features may comply with applicable historical standards. Other corrections may be required because of previous construction or new alterations. And certain projects may qualify for specific exceptions or limitations.
The goal is to turn your CASp report into a realistic, legally informed accessibility improvement plan—not to make assumptions about what you can afford to ignore.
A knowledgeable Certified Access Specialist can help explain the applicable requirements, distinguish existing-condition obligations from alteration requirements, and identify matters requiring further review or approval.
Helpful Legal Resources
Disclaimer: This article provides general information for privately operated California businesses open to the public. Requirements depend on the property's use, construction history, applicable code editions, alterations, and site conditions. It is not a determination of compliance for any particular facility or legal advice. Other requirements may apply to public agencies, housing, historic properties, or specialized facilities.
Comments