Negligent Security

The idea, in one sentence

A property owner who invites the public in has to take reasonable steps to keep them reasonably safe from harm the owner could see coming.

That is the whole principle. The rest is a factual argument about what the owner knew and what they did about it.

Where these claims come from

• Apartment complexes with broken gates, dead locks, and burned-out lighting
• Parking structures and lots with no lighting, no cameras, and no patrols
• Hotels and motels with doors that do not secure and no staff presence at night
• Bars and nightclubs that overserve, then have no security when it turns violent
• Shopping centres and offices where prior incidents were reported and ignored

The question that decides the case: was it foreseeable?

An owner is not an insurer of everything that happens on their property. The claim turns on whether the danger was foreseeable and whether they responded reasonably.

That is proved with history. Prior crimes at the same address. Police calls to the location. Complaints from tenants that went unanswered. Incident reports the property wrote itself. Security that was promised in a lease and never provided.

A property with a documented history of the same kind of crime, and no meaningful response, is a very different case from one where nothing like it had ever happened.

Why these cases have to move fast

Almost all of the proof is in someone else's hands and most of it is on a deletion schedule.

• Security footage, which is typically overwritten within weeks
• Guard logs, incident reports, and staffing schedules
• Maintenance records for gates, locks, and lighting
• Prior police calls to the address
• Tenant complaints, which are frequently in writing

Once a property understands it is exposed, none of this gets easier to obtain. It should be demanded in writing early.

The criminal case is separate

If your attacker is prosecuted, that case is the state's. It is about punishing them, and it may result in restitution that is small relative to what happened to you. Your claim against the property is a different case with different deadlines. Waiting for one to finish before starting the other is a mistake.

This is a hard call to make. Boyd will take it.

These cases involve telling a stranger about the worst night of your life. Boyd will not make you tell it more times than necessary, and the first conversation is free.