The ADA is mostly enforced by private plaintiffs, that's the way the law was written.

Nationally the ADA doesn't allow for private plaintiffs to profit from ADA lawsuits, however, a few states (like California) have statutes that do.

Of course, a big problem is the businesses don't have a mandatory warning with a grace period to become compliant, it's just now you have a lawsuit. This can create "professional plaintiffs." Then again, the ADA is a civil rights law, and other civil rights laws aren't like that, you don't get "one free racial discrimination," and I don't think that many people would want that.

The obvious solution here is that the government takes a portion of this money to remove the gambling-like incentives.

>The other option to opt for a settlement was not in the cards either, added Tran, who said she could not afford paying a massive $60,000 payout.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_Civil_Rights_Act

>Combined with the California Disabled Persons Acts, disability access plaintiffs are allowed to tack on state claims for money damages onto requests for injunctive relief in ADA lawsuits. The act allows plaintiffs to claim treble damages with a minimum of $4000 per access violation plus attorneys fees.