49 C.F.R. § 37.165

Lift and securement use

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) This section applies to public and private entities.

(b) Except as provided in this section, individuals using wheelchairs shall be transported in the entity's vehicles or other conveyances.

(1) With respect to wheelchair/occupant combinations that are larger or heavier than those to which the design standards for vehicles and equipment of 49 CFR part 38 refer, the entity must carry the wheelchair and occupant if the lift and vehicle can accommodate the wheelchair and occupant. The entity may decline to carry a wheelchair/occupant if the combined weight exceeds that of the lift specifications or if carriage of the wheelchair is demonstrated to be inconsistent with legitimate safety requirements.

(2) The entity is not required to permit wheelchairs to ride in places other than designated securement locations in the vehicle, where such locations exist.

(c)(1) For vehicles complying with part 38 of this title, the entity shall use the securement system to secure wheelchairs as provided in that Part.

(2) For other vehicles transporting individuals who use wheelchairs, the entity shall provide and use a securement system to ensure that the wheelchair remains within the securement area.

(3) The entity may require that an individual permit his or her wheelchair to be secured.

(d) The entity may not deny transportation to a wheelchair or its user on the ground that the device cannot be secured or restrained satisfactorily by the vehicle's securement system.

(e) The entity may recommend to a user of a wheelchair that the individual transfer to a vehicle seat. The entity may not require the individual to transfer.

(f) Where necessary or upon request, the entity's personnel shall assist individuals with disabilities with the use of securement systems, ramps and lifts. If it is necessary for the personnel to leave their seats to provide this assistance, they shall do so.

(g) The entity shall permit individuals with disabilities who do not use wheelchairs, including standees, to use a vehicle's lift or ramp to enter the vehicle. Provided, that an entity is not required to permit such individuals to use a lift Model 141 manufactured by EEC, Inc. If the entity chooses not to allow such individuals to use such a lift, it shall clearly notify consumers of this fact by signage on the exterior of the vehicle (adjacent to and of equivalent size with the accessibility symbol).

[56 FR 45621, Sept. 6, 1991, as amended at 58 FR 63103, Nov. 30, 1993; 76 FR 57936, Sept. 19, 2011]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2024 · leading case: Seldon v. Suburban Mobility Auth. for Reg'l Transp., 824 N.W.2d 318 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Seldon v. Suburban Mobility Auth. for Reg'l Transp., 824 N.W.2d 318 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “Further, 49 CFR 37.165(f) provides that the personnel of transit operators “shall assist individuals with disabilities with the use of securement systems” “[w]here neces *439 sary or upon request.”

Keirnan v. Utah Transit Auth., 339 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2003). · cites it 3× “” 49 C.F.R. § 37.165 (b) (2002). In an Interpretative Guidance, the DOT unequivocally stated that mobility devices that exceed the common wheelchair standard do not have to be carried.”

Martin v. Metro. Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth., 225 F. Supp. 2d 1362 (N.D. Ga. 2002). “” 49 C.F.R. § 37.165 (g). On fixed route systems a public entity providing transportation services “shall announce stops .”

Rowe v. Mass Transit Admin., 303 F. Supp. 2d 596 (D. Maryland 2003). · cites it 2× “(Rowe asserts that 49 C.F.R. 37.165 required Sullivan to assist Rowe in buckling her seatbelt.”

Stiner v. Brookdale Senior Living, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2024). · cites it 4× “See 49 C.F.R. § 37.165 (e). Plaintiffs therefore 21 contend that the Fleet Safety Policy on its face violates Title III of the ADA, and, necessarily, the 22 Unruh Act.”

Jones v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. (N.D. Cal. 2019). · cites it 2× “” 49 C.F.R. § 37.165 , App. D. There is no evidence that 26 Gonzalez failed to do this.”

Jones v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. (N.D. Cal. 2020). “8 , 2006) (“Because the ADA was not designed to protect those with disabilities from 1 and regulations, the Court notes again that 49 C.F.R. § 37.165 reflects “a mandate to use best 2 efforts to restrain or confine the wheelchair to the securement area.”

Dowlin v. Cmty. All., 2009 DNH 125 (D.N.H. 2009). “4 The only identifiable statutory or regulatory provisions appearing to support Dowlin’s request for injunctive relief, as pleaded, are 49 C.F.R. §§ 37.165 (duties to use securement systems to secure wheelchairs, and assist disabled individuals in using those systems); 37.”

— 49 C.F.R. § 37.165(f) — 1 case

Seldon v. Suburban Mobility Auth. for Reg'l Transp., 824 N.W.2d 318 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). “Further, 49 CFR 37.165(f) provides that the personnel of transit operators “shall assist individuals with disabilities with the use of securement systems” “[w]here neces *439 sary or upon request.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.