“Labor Omnia Vincit” McKay Law
Inadequate security claims are particularly challenging and sensitive in Weatherford, OK. When businesses or landlords ignore foreseeable dangers and crime victims pay the price, the legal path to justice involves proving what should have been prevented. McKay Law advocates for negligent security victims throughout OK. These cases are fundamentally different from typical premises liability claims—showing the owner knew or should have known about the risk and failed to act. Common locations for negligent security incidents include properties where owners cut corners on safety despite known risks. Common types of incidents include assaults and batteries in poorly lit parking lots, sexual assaults in apartment buildings with broken locks, shootings at venues with inadequate security personnel, robberies at businesses without cameras or alarms, and wrongful death from preventable attacks. Establishing the property owner’s responsibility takes specialized expertise—often involving review of prior crime history, security policies, and industry standards. Our Weatherford premises liability attorneys investigate every angle—crime statistics, security audits, employee testimony, and physical evidence from the scene. These cases typically need industry specialists to demonstrate how proper measures would have prevented the attack. Liable parties may include property owners, property management companies, security companies hired to protect the premises, business operators and tenants, hotel and motel franchises, and parent corporations that set security policies. Negligent security cases raise complex insurance questions—with coverage disputes over intentional acts exclusions and additional insured issues. Common harm includes gunshot wounds, traumatic brain injuries from beatings, sexual assault trauma, stab wounds, broken bones, severe psychological injuries including PTSD, and wrongful death. We fight for every dollar including economic and non-economic losses from every responsible party. The other side will argue the attack was unforeseeable—you deserve representation that understands how to win these challenging cases. Every negligent security case is handled on a contingency basis—you pay nothing unless we win. Contact McKay Law today for a free consultation with a Weatherford, OK premises liability attorney who will hold every negligent property owner and entity accountable.
Property owners must provide reasonable security. When security failures lead to crime victimization, the property owner can be held liable. These are negligent security cases. Common locations include apartments, hotels, parking lots, malls, and bars where poor security led to crime. Our firm fights for negligent security victims in Weatherford and throughout Oklahoma.
Adequate security depends on the situation:
To prove a negligent security case, you must establish that the crime was foreseeable. Foreseeability is proven by:
Sexual assault cases involve unique considerations:
The deadline in Oklahoma is 2 years from the date of the incident to file (Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 95). Sexual assault statutes may extend deadlines. For child victims, the limitations period may extend.
We get to work immediately to secure surveillance video before it’s deleted, investigate crime statistics at the property and in the area, obtain prior complaints, retain security experts, coordinate civil and criminal cases, protect client privacy in sensitive cases, coordinate with treating physicians and mental health professionals, and prepare every case as if it will go to trial.
A: Yes, if the crime was foreseeable and security was inadequate.
A: Nothing. We only get paid if we win.
A: Yes, if the attack was foreseeable and security was inadequate.
A: You may have a strong claim. Multiple security failures often create liability.
A: Reasonably predictable. Foreseeability is shown through evidence of prior crime.
A: Yes — wrongful death claims are available against negligent property owners.
A: No. Talk to a lawyer first.
A: Yes, if safety permits. Visual evidence of inadequate security is important.
A: 2 years from the date of the incident (Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 95). Sexual assault cases may have different deadlines.
These cases combine premises liability with criminal conduct by third parties. The injury was caused by a criminal — but the case isn’t against the criminal. The case is against the property owner who failed to provide adequate security. This is its own area of law. An attorney familiar with this distinctive area builds these cases around the actual legal framework.
The central legal issue involves owner responsibility for criminal acts of others.
Default rule.
But several theories create exceptions.
Foreseeability is the central concept.
Owner liability attaches when foreseeable criminal conduct.
Foreseeability is typically established through evidence of prior similar incidents.
Special relationships impose stronger duties for security:
Prior incidents on the premises establishes foreseeability directly.
Prior crime evidence should include:
Neighborhood crime data can establish foreseeability when the property’s location demonstrates risk.
Area crime evidence sources include:
Owner knowledge of crime risk can establish foreseeability:
Some properties have inherently elevated security risks:
Robbery incidents.
Physical assault in parking lots, garages, building common areas.
Sexual assault in hotels, apartment complexes, garages, and other premises.
These cases produce particularly significant damages.
Shooting cases create distinct case scenarios.
Active shooter incidents can support negligent security claims.
Apartment-related crime is a major negligent security category.
Lodging-related crime can support negligent security claims.
Parking facility crime is a recurring case category.
Workplace crime cases.
Security needs are property-specific.
Elements of adequate security typically include:
Adequate exterior and interior lighting.
Inadequate lighting is a frequent contributing cause.
Working camera systems.
Adequate cameras require:
Security guards or personnel, particularly for risk-elevated properties.
Access controls.
Operational locking systems.
Communication infrastructure, including cellular signal in parking garages.
Maintenance that addresses security.
Documented policies, staff training on security procedures, Response procedures.
Insufficient lighting for criminals.
Cameras that aren’t recording provide no security benefit.
Insufficient security staff given the actual risk profile.
Recommendation failures carry greater exposure.
Locks that don’t work.
Inadequate training.
Ignored complaints face heightened liability.
Recoverable losses include include:
Trauma center care, Surgery expenses, Hospital stays, Rehabilitation costs, ongoing medical care, mental health treatment (often substantial).
Lost wages and long-term wage impact.
Pain damages.
Psychological consequences drive significant damages.
Loss of enjoyment.
Relationship effects.
Wrongful death claims.
Punitive damages are particularly available, especially where:
Property owners carry primary liability.
Management firms carry liability.
Security contractors can face direct liability for service deficiencies.
Different parties may own and operate the property can share liability.
Franchise operators, brand owners may share fault.
The primary defense.
Defense argues the criminal act was unforeseeable. Documentation of prior crime defeats this defense.
“We had adequate security”.
Defense argues no causal connection between security failures and the criminal act.
Comparative fault arguments.
Defense argues only the criminal is responsible. Property owners can be liable alongside criminals.
Don’t accept informal handling. Official reports matter.
Same-day medical care is essential.
The location, lighting, cameras, security personnel, access controls, and overall security.
Security deficiencies.
Lighting conditions, camera locations, access controls, and security features.
Bystanders.
Prior crime evidence should be gathered.
PTSD and other psychological consequences often require significant treatment.
Insurance company representatives. Statements without counsel create problematic admissions.
Lawyers experienced with negligent security work on contingency. Expert costs run high paid by counsel.
Negligent security cases involve time-sensitive evidence.
Camera evidence gets overwritten quickly.
Security personnel may leave employment requiring prompt investigation.
Property owners may modify security, providing evidence of prior inadequacy.
OK’s statute of limitations sets a hard cutoff.
Getting an attorney involved promptly locks down the critical evidence.
When a robbery happens in a parking lot, hotel hallway, apartment complex, or store, the criminal is rarely the only one responsible. Property owners have a legal duty to keep reasonable security for everyone they invite onto their premises — and when they ignore that duty, foreseeable crimes happen and innocent people get hurt. Negligent security claims develop when a property had a series of prior crimes that should have prompted action, when known hazards like broken locks, dead security cameras, burned-out parking lot lights, missing security personnel, and unsecured access points were ignored, and when reasonable measures — proper lighting, working surveillance, trained guards, access controls — would have stopped the attack. At McKay Law, we handle these cases by digging into the property’s crime history, prior complaints to management, security audits, police call records, and the owner’s response — or non-response — to known risks. We consult security experts, crime prevention specialists, and former law enforcement to establish exactly what a reasonable owner would have done and why this owner fell short.
Apartment complexes, hotels, parking garages, shopping centers, bars and nightclubs, ATMs, gas stations, college campuses, and event venues all carry substantial legal responsibility for the safety of the people they invite onto their property. When you come into the McKay Law family, we chase compensation that reflects the full scope of what was taken from you — physical and emotional. We pursue full compensation for emergency care, surgeries, hospitalization, ongoing rehabilitation, future medical needs, prescription costs, counseling and psychiatric care for trauma and PTSD, time away from work, lost earning capacity, the profound fear, anxiety, and emotional aftermath of being assaulted in a place that was supposed to be safe — and in the most sorrowful cases, the wrongful death of a family member. Reach us without waiting at (866) 679-9651 or get in touch online to arrange your free, confidential consultation and get a firm that considers crimes against innocent victims with the gravity they deserve on your side.
See why so many others choose McKay Law, PLLC
With over 300 five-star reviews, McKay Law, your local Personal Injury Law Firm has earned the trust and gratitude of our clients. Every case we handle is unique, and every client’s story matters. Don’t just take our word for it—hear directly from our clients about their experiences and why they confidently recommend us to others.
