Federal web accessibility lawsuits under Title III of the ADA reached 3,117 in 2025 — a 27% increase over 2024 and the second-highest annual total on record — and the pace hasn’t slowed: Q1 2026 alone saw 1,037 cases filed, up 5.49% from the same period a year earlier. Against that backdrop, 94.8% of websites fail basic accessibility standards outright, which means the overwhelming majority of sites currently online are exposed to this risk whether anyone’s noticed yet or not.
Why Dealer Sites Specifically Carry More Risk
Plaintiff’s firms increasingly target consumer-facing sites with online transactions built in — ecommerce checkouts, financing applications, appointment scheduling — and a modern dealer site typically has all three. Filing patterns have also become more targeted and repeat-driven: firms track prior accessibility failures and specific industries, so a dealer site that’s been flagged once, or that resembles others already sued in the same space, is an easier target to find again.
The Numbers
| Metric | Data |
|---|---|
| Federal ADA web accessibility lawsuits, 2025 | 3,117 (up 27% YoY) |
| Q1 2026 lawsuits filed | 1,037 (up 5.49% YoY) |
| Websites failing basic accessibility standards | 94.8% |
| Total ADA lawsuits filed in 2025 | 5,114 |
Settling Isn’t the End of the Exposure
A site that settles a lawsuit without actually fixing the underlying accessibility issues stays just as exposed as before — plaintiff’s firms specifically track businesses that have already been sued once, since a settlement with no real remediation is a documented, easy-to-verify repeat target. The actual fix has to be the code and content, not just the legal resolution.
What This Means Practically for a Dealer Site
- Treat this as risk management, not just compliance box-checking — the lawsuit trend is accelerating, not leveling off, and consumer-facing transactional sites are squarely in the targeted category.
- Prioritize the transactional paths first: financing application forms, service appointment scheduling, and checkout/inquiry forms are exactly the features plaintiff’s firms look for.
- Fix the underlying issues, not just the specific complaint, if you’ve already had a claim — a narrow fix followed by a new claim on a different page is a common pattern.
- Re-audit periodically, not just once — new pages, plugins, and theme updates can reintroduce accessibility issues that were previously fixed.
We cover the practical remediation checklist in Car Dealer Website Accessibility: ADA Guide for 2026, and the specific color-contrast piece of it in Color Contrast in Block Themes: A Practical WCAG Guide. Want your dealership site’s accessibility risk assessed? Get in touch.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is this risk specific to large dealer groups, or does it affect small independent dealers too?
Filing patterns show increasing targeting by industry and platform pattern rather than just company size — a small independent dealer running the same common site-building patterns as others already sued is not automatically lower risk.
Does fixing accessibility issues after a lawsuit protect against future claims?
Genuine remediation reduces risk, but only if it actually addresses the underlying issues site-wide rather than the narrow page or feature named in a specific complaint.
What’s the fastest way to know if a dealer site is at meaningful risk?
Given that 94.8% of sites fail basic standards, the realistic starting assumption for any site that hasn’t had a dedicated accessibility audit is that it’s exposed — an audit is the way to find out specifically where.
Featured image: original illustration.