A split decision by the Maine Human Rights Commission on Jan. 5 found reasonable grounds to believe Greyhound Lines failed to provide a reasonable modification to a passenger with a disability after a wheelchair lift malfunctioned, the commission said, and ordered the parties into conciliation.

The commission’s finding stems from a complaint by Deborah King, represented by Kristen Aiello, who told commissioners that when a Greyhound operator could not operate a lift in Lewiston the driver “said, ‘we're not set up for handicap today,’” left King waiting and offered no clear contact information or on-the-spot accommodation. Aiello said the passenger and her daughter were left on the curb and were told the only remedy might be a refund if they called and “talk nice.”

Greyhound counsel Steve Silver contested that account. He told the commission the lift’s failure was an isolated mechanical problem and that the driver tested the lift before departure, attempted to troubleshoot by calling the Boston maintenance garage and concluded another bus would have taken an estimated four hours to arrive. Silver said the driver inquired about alternative options and that a single mechanical failure is not, on its own, a denial of a reasonable modification under the ADA and related precedent.

Investigator Jane O’Reilly, who reviewed the record and the issues-and-resolutions conference notes, recommended a finding of reasonable grounds on the denial-of-modification claim because the record lacked conclusive evidence that Greyhound made appropriate follow-up efforts or provided alternative accommodations that would have allowed King to complete her trip that day. O’Reilly distinguished the reasonable-modification question from a separate claim that Greyhound imposed inferior “terms and conditions,” concluding the latter was not supported by the record.

At the hearing, commissioners debated credibility of opposing accounts and the practical expectations for a carrier when on‑board equipment fails away from a maintenance hub. The commission voted to adopt O’Reilly’s split recommendation: reasonable grounds on the failure-to-modify claim and no reasonable grounds on the terms-and-conditions claim. Staff said the commission will send both parties a letter outlining the findings and will open a conciliation process on the reasonable‑grounds determination.

The complaint now proceeds to conciliation, giving the parties an opportunity to negotiate a remedy before any formal enforcement step. The commission’s letters will outline next procedural steps.