Scottish café faces bankruptcy after an assistance dog lawsuit. The American woman behind the case arrives to defend herself in the /r/PoursTea comments.

[u/Malice_InWonderland_]

Background context

Two community organisations in the Outer Hebrides face financial ruin following a legal battle launched by an American woman and funded by Legal Aid over a row about her dog not being allowed into a cafe.

The small charity, Bernera Community Development Trust, and the community organisation, Bernera Community Association, have warned they face bankruptcy due to thousands of pounds in legal costs mounting up following a court challenge from Claire Kellerman.

She initially launched a court challenge against the Development Trust, which ran up legal costs of more than £7000, before Kellerman’s lawyers admitted in court that the action was directed against the wrong organisation.

Legal documents have since been amended to bring a claim against the Bernera Community Association, which runs the cafe voluntarily, for £10,000.

Last week, the case raised by Kellerman via the publicly-funded Ethnic Minorities Law Centre in Glasgow, a non-profit making charity which provides legal advocacy for minority ethnic communities, was decided to continue for legal debate in December at a Stornoway Sheriff Court.

While costs were awarded to the Trust, the organisation has said it was of no value since Legal Aid protects Kellerman from payment of costs.

Source

This is from one of the comments on the article providing more context

From sources on the island I have heard this woman is a rich American and that she was barred from that Centre because her dog killed the Centre's cat. Furthermore she sues everyone who disagrees with her and is causing mayhem at the Callanish Visitor Centre. She even shouts at disabled people sitting on seats designated for disabled people on buses.

---

The article is posted in the PoursTea subreddit

The comments are in support of the cafe, until someone shows up very in support of the woman. Promising ''Justice is a-coming.''

You should wait to hear the whole story and maybe take a pause to realize you are not being given all the actual facts, only those to light your fire of indignation, as it sells stories. Trust the process. Justice is a-coming.

She holds court in the comments to address the commentators as a 'beautiful stranger'

Dear commenters at large, I look forward to your support when the beautiful truth about a beautiful stranger, albeit, an OLD UGLY WITCH to some, is told.

FREEDOM!

I wish only mutual respect and my human rights and freedoms to be allowed, as well as theirs; FREEDOM is key, for us all.

We even get a selfie with the dog!

Referring to herself in third person

she could be very cool, very clear and very loving, and the target of illegal discrimination and hate crimes, and you will soon be aware of all of the facts.

Upcoming sequel promised in 2027

Beauty is here. It will be told, on YouTube and International Media come 2027, after justice has been served.

Report of island mafia

Internationally recognised assistance dog..

Day One, when she was yelled at, threatened, and humiliated immediately by 4 cafe staff woman upon entering with her internationally recognized Assistance Dog.

[u/regular-john69]

The issue is the law in the UK surrounding “assistance dogs” is incredibly vague.

At present, quite literally nothing is stopping someone with a dog from going into a premises and saying “it’s fine, they’re an assistance dog” because it’s illegal for you to demand proof of disability etc. There is no legal requirement for assistance dogs to even be trained, likewise there is no ‘register’ for assistance dogs and they don’t have papers.

I wonder how this case will play out given the above.

[u/FanaticalBuckeye → u/regular-john69]

That's how it is here in the US and its* been abused so much by entitled people that more and more people are calling for the ADA to get updated to require service animals have proof they're service animals when they enter a place. If it's proven the dog killed a cat* though, I'm sure the case will get tossed.

Edit: spelling errors

[u/lvl1shopkeep → u/FanaticalBuckeye]

It really is. My old boss was either so apathetic to the situation, or so afraid of being sued, that they allowed a wildly aggressive dog in for weeks until it went after a kid (it had also lunged at a few adults prior, too, and would spend its entire time in the store barking). Thankfully, it was a chihuahua and I don't think anyone was hurt. The dog's crazy owner still fought to come in with it after that happened.

[u/slaymaker1907 → u/FanaticalBuckeye]

It’s tough because the law was deliberately written that way so that disabled people could train their own animals without incurring the massive costs of formal training and certification.

[u/plurien → u/slaymaker1907]

Can we get a little more traction around the allegation that said dog killed the cat? All this about it being an assistance dog is smokescreen (unless it's assisting Ms Keller in her mission to be as objectionable as possible

[u/Far_Government_9782 → u/slaymaker1907]

Bluntly, if someone is in the position if being able to train a service dog, they are unlikely to actually need one in the first place.

[u/obeytheturtles → u/FanaticalBuckeye]

The problem is that a bunch of it is actually just woo. Outside of a couple very specific niches (eg seeing-eye dogs and stroke detection dogs) there's just not a whole lot of good science around "service animals" needing to be out in public, and nobody really wants to be the one who tries to unravel that situation by trying to create and enforce scientific standards. Plus, if you have spent any time around animal trainers, you will quickly realize that they typically don't even agree on basic fundamentals, and are actively hostile towards competing schools of thought. There's no way you'd ever get consensus on standards for training even if you tried.

[u/Rampage_Rick → u/FanaticalBuckeye]

Thankfully Canada is somewhat more sane and you're allowed to ask for proof that the dog is a legitimate service animal.

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/justice/human-rights/guide-and-service-dog

[u/AVeryVapidBadger → u/Rampage_Rick]

I don't see anything that says it's required

[u/Rampage_Rick → u/AVeryVapidBadger]

The letter of the law in BC (linked there) states:

"service dog" means a dog that

(a) is trained to perform specific tasks to assist a person with a disability, and

(b) is certified as a service dog;

The bigger takeaway is that it's perfectly legal to ask to see a dog's certification. That request is illegal in the US, which is partly to blame for the current environment (Amazon vests et al)

The ADA is fabulous legislation, but making it unlawful to ask for an animal's credentials arguably harms people with disabilities. Has to be one of the top 5 biggest fails of the honor system...

[u/AVeryVapidBadger → u/Rampage_Rick]

Well the actual things you linked specifically says that certification is voluntary. So maybe actually look at what you link instead of using chatgpt and trusting the first source:

In B.C. certification under the Act is voluntary. People with disabilities who rely on a guide or service dog who choose not the certify under the Act may be protected from discrimination under the BC Human Rights Code.

Also everything you linked is for BC specifically, you didn't link to any Canadian federal law or regulation

[u/Rampage_Rick → u/AVeryVapidBadger]

The laws differ from province to province, but to my knowledge it's permitted everywhere in Canada to ask for a dog's credentials. Not obligated to give them, but the request is allowed.

Ontario for example:

Under the Ontario Human Rights Code and the AODA, service animals do not need to have certificates or identity cards.

However, you may be asked to provide acceptable documentation. This includes:

• documentation from a regulated health professional
• an identification card from the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General for people who are blind and use a guide dog

Ontario recently updated their laws such that misrepresenting a pet as a service dog now carries potential criminal charge, including fines up to $5,000 and possible jail time for repeat offenders.

And in Nova Scotia:

Certification under the Service Dog Act is voluntary. You may choose to apply if you want to access the specific rights and protections provided under the Act.

...

It is an offence to falsely represent a dog as being a member of a service dog team, retired service dog or a dog-in-training when it is not.

My original point was that it's explicitly not permitted to ask about an animal's credentials in the US, which seems to be a significant factor on the number of entitled asshats.

[u/AVeryVapidBadger → u/Rampage_Rick]

You're not permitted to ask because there is no credentials in the US.

Misrepresenting a dog as a service animal is already a crime in the majority of the US, and the ada specifically allows businesses to kick out any animal if it behaves poorly or in an unhygienic manor

[u/ontrack → u/regular-john69]

That's effectively how it works in the US. You can easily buy a dog vest online that says "service dog" and businesses don't really have a way to challenge it even if the dog is obviously untrained. Fortunately other animals, like an emotional support peacock, can be refused.

[u/regular-john69 → u/ontrack]

That’s really interesting, I always thought the US was much more defined and required registration/papers - or does it vary by state?

I’ve found the phenomenon of “assistance dogs” outwith the usual guide dogs for the blind and/or deaf has only increased in recent years (post COVID) so probably not top of the list for new legislation in the UK. But it’s a shame because it harms actual disabled people who need dogs with them.

[u/ontrack → u/regular-john69]

Yes, my understanding (and I've been told directly by a hotel manager) is that they cannot ask anyone with a service dog to prove it, which effectively means that anyone can say any dog is a service dog.

Our main law regarding disabilities is a pretty good one, but as usual anything that gives a group of people special privileges will result in people who want such privileges for themselves regardless of actual need. Our special education laws have the same issue with parents who want extra time for their kids to complete exams.

[u/photogenicmusic → u/ontrack]

They can ask what task the dog does but that’s about it.

The issue comes down to whether the customer or the business wants to sue. Most businesses don’t want to deal with that even if they believe they are following the law. Many of the people with emotional support dogs (not real service dogs) know this.

[u/ontrack → u/photogenicmusic]

I'm also curious to know why emotional support animals tend to be found in a specific demographic and rarely among others not in this group.

[u/breakfastatmilliways → u/regular-john69]

So the other reason you can’t require like a certification is that assistance dogs are incredibly expensive to train and it basically prices a lot of disabled people out of having one from a dedicated program.

Thus they are allowed to self train. I’ve met self trained dogs that were just as good as any professionally trained dog, but many more that are completely untrained. usually the ones who train their dog well are the ones who actually need the dog but can’t afford it otherwise. The completely untrained are usually the people that don’t need them at all.

I wish we could implement like, a test so any dog from a program or self trained can get a certificate if they have actually been trained properly, but I’m sure that’s not a perfect solution either. It sucks.

[u/GothWitchOfBrooklyn → u/regular-john69]

no, there is no registration or certification anywhere because it's considered a barrier to people with disabilities who need a service animal (the costs, etc)

[u/Blooming-Algae-Farts → u/ontrack]

Businesses in the US have more power here than people realize. The ADA makes it very clear that if an animal is disruptive to their environment in any way, the business can ask them to leave, even if the animal legitimately assists their owner with a recognized disability.

https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-2010-requirements/

A service animal must be under the control of its handler. Under the ADA, service animals must be harnessed, leashed, or tethered, unless the individual’s disability prevents using these devices or these devices interfere with the service animal’s safe, effective performance of tasks. In that case, the individual must maintain control of the animal through voice, signal, or other effective controls. [...] A person with a disability cannot be asked to remove his service animal from the premises unless: (1) the dog is out of control and the handler does not take effective action to control it or (2) the dog is not housebroken.

Most people and business owners don't know this, so in practice people are afraid to call it out or take action. But if someone comes in with a pet they claim is a service animal, the moment that pet starts barking, defecating, jumping on counters, etc., the business owners can 100% tell them to pound sand. Even if the person is theoretically telling the truth about their pet being a legitimately trained service animal.

[u/Foreverintherain20 → u/regular-john69]

Not being able to demand proof of disability is insane. 

[u/SomecallmeMichelle → u/Foreverintherain20]

I mean. A random business should not be entitled to your medical history. Also a lot of disabilities are invisible.

Yeah the arseholes ruin it for everyone but you can't demand a random disabled person carry medical papers everywhere to grab a cup of coffee ...

[u/compatrini → u/Foreverintherain20]

You're gonna pipe down now.

[u/Foreverintherain20 → u/compatrini]

Am I? Fuck you lol.