Premises Liability: When Negligent Security Leads to Assault

When you're robbed in a parking garage, assaulted in an apartment stairwell, or attacked in a hotel room, the criminal is obviously to blame. But there's often a second responsible party: the property owner who failed to provide adequate security. This is the legal theory of negligent security—a subset of premises liability law that holds property owners accountable when their security failures contribute to criminal attacks on their premises.

Negligent security cases are important because they often provide the only realistic path to compensation for crime victims. Criminals are rarely caught, and even when they are, they typically have no assets to pay a judgment. Property owners, on the other hand, carry liability insurance precisely for situations like this.

The Legal Basis: Premises Liability

Oklahoma premises liability law imposes a duty on property owners (and occupiers) to maintain their property in a reasonably safe condition for visitors. The scope of this duty depends on the visitor's status:

Invitees

People invited onto the property for business purposes (customers, tenants, hotel guests). Property owners owe invitees the highest duty of care—they must:

• Inspect the premises for dangerous conditions
• Warn of or repair known hazards
• Take reasonable steps to protect against foreseeable harm—including foreseeable criminal acts

Licensees

Social guests and others on the property with permission but not for business purposes. Owners must warn of known, hidden dangers.

Trespassers

People without permission. Owners generally owe minimal duty (except for certain situations involving children or known trespassers).

Most negligent security cases involve invitees—customers at stores, guests at hotels, tenants and visitors at apartments, patrons at bars and restaurants.

The Core Question: Foreseeability

Property owners are not insurers of visitor safety. They are only liable for foreseeable criminal acts—meaning criminal acts they knew about or should have anticipated based on the circumstances.

Prior Similar Incidents

The strongest evidence of foreseeability is prior criminal activity on the same property. If there were five muggings in the parking garage in the past year, another mugging is foreseeable.

Types of prior incidents that establish foreseeability:

• Previous assaults, robberies, or break-ins on the property
• Complaints from tenants or guests about safety concerns
• Police reports or calls for service at the property
• Crime affecting neighboring properties in the immediate area

Crime Statistics and Location

Even without prior incidents on the specific property, foreseeability can be established by:

• High crime rates in the surrounding neighborhood
• The type of business (e.g., convenience stores are known robbery targets)
• The property's characteristics (isolated, poorly lit, lacking barriers)

Obvious Security Deficiencies

Sometimes the security failure is so obvious that foreseeability is established regardless of prior incidents:

• A hotel with no locks on guest room doors
• An apartment with a broken security gate for months
• A parking garage with no lighting and disabled cameras

What Constitutes "Negligent Security"?

Negligent security claims focus on what the property owner failed to do to protect visitors. Common failures include:

Inadequate Lighting

Dark parking lots, stairwells, and common areas create opportunities for criminals to hide and ambush victims. Proper lighting is a basic, low-cost security measure.

Broken or Absent Locks and Gates

• Apartment complex security gates that don't work
• Hotel room locks that can be easily bypassed
• Broken locks on exterior doors
• Failure to re-key locks after tenant turnover

Lack of Security Personnel

In high-crime areas or venues with known risks (nightclubs, late-night stores), failing to hire security guards or off-duty police may constitute negligence.

Non-Functional Security Systems

• Security cameras that aren't monitored or don't record
• Alarm systems that are disabled or ignored
• Emergency call boxes that don't work

Failure to Respond to Known Dangers

• Ignoring tenant complaints about suspicious individuals
• Failing to evict tenants engaged in criminal activity
• Not calling police about known trespassers

Negligent Hiring or Supervision

Sometimes the criminal is an employee—a security guard, maintenance worker, or hotel staff member. If the employer failed to conduct background checks or ignored warning signs, they may be liable.

Common Locations for Negligent Security Claims

Apartment Complexes

Tenants are entitled to reasonable security measures. Common issues:

• Broken security gates and intercoms
• Inadequate lighting in parking areas and hallways
• Failure to address known criminal activity by other tenants
• Failure to re-key locks between tenants

Hotels and Motels

Guests trust that their rooms are secure. Common issues:

• Doors and locks that don't work properly
• Failure to monitor access to guest floors
• Inadequate lighting in parking areas
• Allowing unauthorized persons to access guest information

Parking Lots and Garages

With their isolated location and limited visibility, parking structures are prime crime locations. Common issues:

• No lighting or burnt-out lights
• No security cameras or patrols
• Poor design with hidden corners and blocked sightlines
• No emergency call stations

Shopping Centers and Retail Stores

Customers expect a safe shopping experience. Common issues:

• Understaffed or absent security
• Poor lighting in peripheral areas
• Failure to address known criminal activity
• Inadequate parking lot security

Bars and Nightclubs

The combination of alcohol, crowds, and late hours creates predictable risks. Common issues:

• Insufficient bouncers or security
• Failure to remove aggressive patrons
• Overserving intoxicated customers
• Inadequate parking lot security

Proving the Case

A negligent security claim requires proving four elements:

1. Duty

The property owner owed you a duty of care. For invitees, this is usually straightforward.

2. Foreseeability

The criminal attack was foreseeable based on prior incidents, crime data, or obvious security deficiencies.

3. Breach

The property owner failed to take reasonable security measures to protect against the foreseeable risk.

4. Causation

The security failure was a substantial factor in allowing the crime to occur. Would adequate lighting, working locks, or a security guard have deterred or prevented the attack?

The Challenge of Causation

Causation is often the most contested element. Defense attorneys argue that criminals are determined and would have attacked regardless of security measures.

Plaintiffs counter with evidence that:

• Security measures deter opportunistic crimes
• The specific security failure enabled the attack (the attacker entered through the broken gate)
• Similar properties with better security experience less crime

Expert witnesses—security consultants, criminologists, former law enforcement—are often essential to establish what reasonable security measures would have been and how they would have affected the outcome.

Damages in Negligent Security Cases

Crime victims often suffer devastating injuries. Available damages include:

Medical Expenses

• Emergency treatment
• Surgery and hospitalization
• Physical therapy and rehabilitation
• Future medical care for permanent injuries

Lost Wages and Earning Capacity

Time missed from work, and reduction in future earning ability if injuries are permanent.

Pain and Suffering

Physical pain from injuries, surgeries, and recovery.

Emotional and Psychological Trauma

Crime victims frequently suffer:

• Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
• Anxiety, depression, and panic attacks
• Fear of returning to similar locations
• Sleep disturbances and nightmares
• Relationship difficulties

Scarring and Disfigurement

Permanent physical changes from assault injuries.

Punitive Damages

In egregious cases—where the property owner consciously ignored known dangers—punitive damages may be available under Oklahoma law (23 O.S. § 9.1).

What to Do After an Attack

If you've been the victim of a crime on someone else's property:

Immediately

1. Call 911. Get police and medical help. A police report is essential evidence.
2. Get medical treatment. Document all injuries. Some injuries (internal bleeding, TBI) aren't immediately apparent.
3. Don't leave the scene without documenting conditions—if you can safely do so.

Within Days

4. Photograph the scene. Return (with someone for safety) and photograph:

   • Lighting conditions (take photos at the same time of day/night as the attack)
   • Broken locks, gates, or fences
   • Non-functional cameras or call boxes
   • The path the attacker used

5. Talk to witnesses. Other tenants, employees, or visitors may know about prior incidents or ongoing security problems. "Has this happened before?" "Has that gate been broken long?"

6. Preserve evidence. Keep clothing, personal items damaged in the attack.

For Your Legal Claim

7. Request records. Through an attorney, request the property's security incident reports, maintenance records for security equipment, and 911 call history.

8. Consult a personal injury attorney. Negligent security cases are complex. An experienced attorney can investigate, hire experts, and build the case against the property owner.

Statute of Limitations

In Oklahoma, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims is two years from the date of injury. Missing this deadline bars your claim.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I sue both the attacker and the property owner?

Yes. You can pursue claims against both. In practice, the property owner (and their insurance) is usually the only defendant able to pay damages.

What if the attacker is never caught?

You can still sue the property owner. Your claim is against them for negligent security, not against the criminal. You don't need a criminal conviction to pursue a civil case.

Does the property owner's liability reduce the criminal's responsibility?

No. They are both potentially liable—the criminal for the attack, the property owner for failing to prevent it. Oklahoma law allows you to recover from either or both.

What if I was partially at fault (e.g., I ignored warning signs)?

Oklahoma's comparative negligence rules apply. Your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault—but you can still recover if you're less than 50% responsible.

Do apartments have to provide specific security measures?

Oklahoma law doesn't mandate specific security measures for apartments. However, landlords must maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition and address foreseeable risks. What's "reasonable" depends on the circumstances, including the crime risk in the area.

---

Violent crime changes lives. When a property owner's negligence contributed to that crime, holding them accountable isn't just about compensation—it's about forcing them to protect future visitors.

At Addison Law, we handle negligent security and premises liability cases throughout Oklahoma. We investigate thoroughly, engage security experts, and fight to hold property owners responsible for their failures. Contact us for a free, confidential consultation.

---

This article is for general information only and is not legal advice.