In general, property owners are required to keep their premise safe from preventable hazards. While this applies to slipping hazards or aggressive animals, it also applies to third-party criminal conduct. Particularly owners or managers of apartment complexes or commercial buildings need to provide adequate security measures to keep guests safe from harm.
If you or a loved one were injured or suffered losses due to unsafe conditions on a person’s property, an experienced attorney might be able to help you seek legal recourse. By contacting a Phoenix negligent security accident lawyer, you could put yourself in a better position for a favorable resolution to your case.
Property owners and managers must provide a heightened level of security when there are reports of high crime in the area. However, the adequacy of the security depends on the type of business that is being run and the particular facts of the case.
For instance, if there is a popular nightclub in a high crime area that only has one bouncer for hundreds of people, that could be argued as inadequate security. However, for a bar in the same area that can host only 30 people, one bouncer could be sufficient security. A local attorney reviewing your case could determine if the property owner provided inadequate security measures to prevent a crime from taking place.
As sometimes crimes cannot be expected or prevented, property owners are only required to provide adequate security for foreseeable crimes. For instance, when there is a pattern of offenses happening at a specific establishment, those would be considered foreseeable crimes. Additionally, if the area is known for having a high crime rate, those too could be considered foreseeable.
For instance, if there have been a series of car thefts in the parking lot of a supermarket, the management may be required to place video surveillance or security to ward off future crimes. Failure to do so could be grounds for action should a patron’s car gets robbed. On the other hand, if there was a random act of vandalism in a parking lot, that crime would likely not be foreseeable meaning the property manager could not be held liable for the incident.
Determining whether a crime is foreseeable is easier with the help of a negligent security accident attorney in Phoenix. A hardworking attorney could investigate whether there has been a series of crimes on the Phoenix property and whether the owner or manager of the premise put security measures in place to prevent them.
In most cases involving inadequate security measures, a Phoenix attorney could hold the property owner liable for not providing sufficient security to prevent visitors from being the victim of third-party criminal acts. However, in some cases, a separate party could hold some liability.
Sometimes, premise owners hire a separate company to provide the property with sufficient security. If this company is negligent in their efforts, such as by providing less security guards than required, then that company could potentially be a defendant in an ensuing legal claim.
Regardless of who the defendants in a negligent supervision claim are, a claimant and their local attorney must file action before the legal deadline expires. In most cases involving a corporation or public company, the statute of limitations is two years from the date of the incident. However, if the county or city is responsible for the insufficient security, that legal deadline can be much shorter.
While it is known that property owners are responsible for harm caused by hazards on their premises, many people do not know that property owners are also responsible for third-party criminal conduct on their land. If a landowner or manager fails to provide reasonable security measures, a local attorney could hold them financially liable for the resulting losses.
If you were the victim of a third-party criminal act on the property of another, you should speak with a Phoenix negligent security accident lawyer about your options. Call today to discuss filing a claim for civil recourse.