Proving Inadequate Security In Premises Liability Claims

When someone enters somebody else’s premises, there is always an assumption that has adequate security. Property owners are legally liable for ensuring the security of their tenants or guests. Unfortunately, many crimes and accidents have been caused by inadequate security. According to the website of Karlin, Fleisher & Falkenberg, LLC, crimes in premises can be prevented if only the owner took all the necessary security measures in securing their property.

There are different kinds of security measures that property owners can implement in their premises. The owner of a property can have control of what will happen to their guests while inside their premises. If they were aware of any security threats and did not do something to remove such, the property owner can be held liable if a guest or tenant gets injured while inside the premises. The Restatement of Courts states that the plaintiff should prove that their landlord failed in their duty of providing reasonable care to guests or tenants.

Inadequate security can happen in any property. Whether it’s in an apartment, parking lot, parking ramps, shops, banks, ATM machines and others, proper security measures must be in place for the sake of the guest. In proving inadequate security, the plaintiff needs to prove that they were physically present on the property of the owner and that there was a breach in the duty to provide reasonable security.

Foreseeability is another important issue when proving inadequate security. It is up to the court to determine whether there were similar crimes in the same property or whether the owner knew or should have been aware of it. Likewise, the court may determine whether the previous crimes were violent personal crimes or just property crimes.

Adequate security may vary from one case to another. In some states, property owners hire a security team to protect premises. Other security measures include installing lights, adding locks and corresponding duplicate keys.