Can You Hold a Property Owner Liable for Inadequate Security in Washington?

Violent crime can happen anywhere, anytime. To protect customers and tenants, the Washington Supreme Court has ruled that property owners have a legal duty to ensure adequate security measures are in place. When violent crime results in personal injuries on someone else’s property, the injured person can seek compensation from a property owner who failed to provide adequate security. While each case is unique, a negligent security lawyer in Washington can best advise regarding a victim’s available remedies.

Key Takeaways

• In 1997, the Washington Supreme Court ruled that businesses have a special relationship with their customers which requires that businesses take reasonable steps to protect customers from imminent or reasonably foreseeable harm.
• For rental properties, landlords must provide reasonably adequate locks to protect tenants. They also must use reasonable care to safeguard master or duplicate keys.
• Washington State’s comparative negligence statute does not apply in negligent security cases. A property cannot use an unidentified assailant to reduce their proportionate share of fault. However, when apportioning damages, harm caused by the intentional act must be segregated from harm caused by negligent security.
• In Washington State, most claims for personal injuries arising from negligent security must be filed within three years of the date of harm.
• Even if the injured person was partially at fault, they can still recover compensation under Washington’s pure comparative fault law. Their compensation will be reduced by their share of fault.

What Washington Law Actually Requires of Property Owners

In Nivens v. 7-11 Hoagy’s Corner (1997), the Washington Supreme Court ruled that business owners have a legal duty to protect customers from the criminal acts of third parties and must take reasonable steps to protect them from “imminent criminal harm or reasonably foreseeable criminal conduct.” However, the court’s ruling stops short of requiring that businesses provide security personnel to prevent criminal acts. When a violent crime causes injuries to a business invitee, courts must evaluate whether the risk of harm was imminent or reasonably foreseeable and whether the business’s actions were reasonable.

What Makes a Crime Foreseeable in the Eyes of the Law

Whether a crime was foreseeable is an issue of fact typically left to the jury. Judges in Washington courts rarely make determinations of foreseeability, except in clear-cut situations.

When evaluating whether a crime was foreseeable, common facts the jury can consider include prior similar crimes on or near the property, tenant or customer complaints about inadequate lighting or broken locks that went unaddressed, and a location’s known crime history. A Washington negligent security lawyer will know what arguments to make in court.

How Washington Gives Renters an Extra Layer of Protection

Under RCW 59.18.060(6)-(7), residential landlords must “provide reasonably adequate locks and…keys to the tenant” and use reasonable care to safeguard any master key or duplicate keys. In the context of a negligent security claim, broken or inadequate locks are not considered a maintenance complaint. They can be used as evidence that the landlord breached a specific legal duty.

What Happens When the Attacker Is Never Identified

In many negligent security claims, the attacker is never identified. Nonetheless, a property owner cannot point to the unidentified attacker to reduce their share of fault. The Washington Supreme Court ruled in Welch v. Southland Corp. (1998) that intentional criminal acts are not included in the definition of “fault.” However, under Tegman v. Accident & Medical Investigations (2003), when calculating damages, a jury must identify which damages resulted from the intentional act and which resulted from the property owner’s negligent security.

Steps to Take After an Assault on Someone Else’s Property

When an attack on someone else’s property causes injuries, you can safeguard your legal rights by acting quickly. Be sure to:

• Seek medical care as soon as possible.
• Report the attack to the police.
• If possible, photograph the area and the conditions involved, such as a broken lock, poor lighting, or missing or broken security cameras, before they are repaired.
• Keep medical records, police reports, and other documentation about the attack.
• Ask the property owner to preserve any security camera footage before it is overwritten.
• Contact a negligent security lawyer as soon as possible.

This documentation can be used to establish both that the property owner knew about the potential for criminal activity on or around the property, and that they failed to meet their duty to provide adequate security.

Contact a Washington Negligent Security Lawyer

When an attack causes serious personal injuries or death, the property owner can be held liable for failing to provide adequate security. But proving your case can be challenging, and success often depends on establishing that the criminal act was reasonably foreseeable and that the property owner’s security measures were inadequate. An experienced Washington negligent security attorney can gather the evidence needed to prove your claim and help you navigate this challenging and nuanced area of the law to achieve a successful outcome.

Attorney Brett B. Herron has unparalleled experience handling complex premises liability cases and has brought lawsuits against many corporate retail stores in connection with dangerous conditions that have caused clients to suffer injury. He has represented clients in claims against The Home Depot, Lowe’s, Macy’s, Safeway, Fred Meyer, and commercial property management companies.

With locations in Burien and Bellevue, Herron Law Office, PLLC, helps people throughout Washington who were injured in preventable attacks caused by a property owner’s negligent security. We welcome you to contact us for a consultation to discuss your case by calling 425-451-9110.