Landlord/Tenant Dispute Over Americans With Disabilities Act Lawsuit Caused 'The Bucket' to Close

Thousands and thousands of people have passed through the front door of The Bucket in Eagle Rock since it first opened in 1935, but it was one man who said he wasn't able to get to the front door that led to it closing down last week after 78 years of business. 

John Ho is a Rosemead man who used the same law firm to file hundreds of lawsuits in 2012 targeting small businesses in Southern California for alleged violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. One of the businesses Ho targeted was the Bucket, the 78-year-old burger joint on 4541 Eagle Rock Blvd., and according to both its owner and landlord, it was the fallout from the lawsuit that led to The Bucket's demise. 

The Bucket did not have a handicapped spot in its parking lot and the landlord ended up paying $20,000 to settle the lawsuit and bring the parking lot into ADA compliance. But who was ultimately responsible for the parking lot and the lawsuit, the landlord or the tenant? 

"Basically, he owed me a bunch of money and he couldn’t pay it," said Anthony Santillo, the property's landlord. "And I said, 'Look, you’ve got to pay me what you owe me. I’m not just biting the money. You owe me $20,000.'"

But George Eckley, who has owned The Bucket for over five years, didn't think the $20,000 and the parking lot was his responsibility. 

"I lease a commercial building. I’m responsible for the business and everything that’s inside. The parking lot, that’s his business," Eckley said.  

To learn more about Eckley, The Bucket's history and some memories of the place, click here for our related story. 

Eckely said the lease did not specifically mention the ADA or whether it would be the landlord or tenant that pays for the property to be in compliance with the ADA. 

Santillo's family has owned the property since 1992, and he along with partners also owns Giuseppe's Pizzeria and New Moon Restaurant in Montrose. Santillo said the issue of handicapped parking at The Bucket had never been raised before, but that he believed it was always the tenant's responsibility. 

"The lease says that [the tenants] are to comply with any governmental regulations, bla, bla, bla," Santillo said. "I never got notified of anything. It’s really the tenant's responsibility. It states right there in the lease that they are responsible for any kind of things that have to be dealing with the business or running the business. It’s their responsibility, not mine."

The law in California does not appear to have any clear guidance about whether the landlord or tenant are supposed to pay for ADA-related costs when a lease does not make it clear. 

The following is from an article by Lawyers Against Lawsuit Abuse titled "Who’s Responsible for ADA Compliance— Landlords or Tenants?" 
 
Because the terms of commercial leases vary considerably and the conduct of the parties will also have considerable bearing on this question, it is unlikely that any landlord or tenant will be able to claim that, as a matter of law, they are entitled to look to the other to take responsibility for making access improvements to the property, unless they have entered into a clear, express agreement for this purpose (which is often not the case).
With Santillo demanding the $20,000 payment before signing a new lease, Eckley said he simply could not afford the amount.

"It’s a small spot. I’m a small business. I explained to him over and over, with the tough economy and the weather, I’ve been literally one burger way from closing in the past, so I couldn’t pay the lump sum," Eckley said. "And he also stated we can work it in with the lease, with the lease increasing, but that wasn't going to work."

Rather than pay Santillo or sell the business, Eckley chose to retain the naming rights to The Bucket, as well as its liquor license. While he said he might reopen the Bucket somewhere else, he is skeptical if he actually will or if it would be a good idea.

"A new location, I don’t know if it would do the same, or be the same, or have same effect," Eckley said. "The place is totally supported by locals, that’s the true lifeblood of the place, and I'm sad to see they don’t have that place to go anymore. A new place on Colorado, it wouldn’t have the same effect."

Santillo said he was baffled why Eckley didn't simply sell the business and use the profits to pay him the $20,000 instead of shutting it down and stripping out all the interior. 

"I said, 'You realize The Bucket is because what The Bucket was. You can’t open The Bucket on Colorado and think it’s going to have the same history that this place has had since 1935,'" Santillo said. "I said, 'Why are you doing this? It’s so stupid.' I don’t understand the guy. I said you can sell this for $75,000 or $100,000. You have value here, why would you walk away? It made no sense to me at all, I don’t know why he did it."

Eckley said he suspected Santillo was pushing him out because he wanted to redevelop the property or run it himself.

"I think he might have been kind of trying to squeeze me out to try and keep the place for himself and his partners. I didn’t appreciate that. I don’t know what his intentions were," Eckley said.

But Santillo insisted he is not interested in selling or redeveloping the property, or running it himself, and wants to find a new tenant to run a restaurant.

"I don’t really care what goes in there. I like the Bucket, but if you want to run a business and pay us our rent, that’s fine," Santillo said. "I’m leaving what’s there. There’s a million people that are going to want that place."

Not long after Ho filed his lawsuit against The Bucket, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a new law state law in September of 2012 setting limits on disability access litigation and preventing firms from filing massive amounts of lawsuits. But Ho had filed his lawsuit before the law was signed. 

Ho was so prolific at filing lawsuits that Eckley said when he called his insurance company to tell them about the lawsuit, a rep told him the insurance company was also being sued by Ho over ADA issues with their building. 

"The same guy is suing 400 people. It’s just a racket of B.S.," Santillo said.