When accidents happen on a person’s property, the owner may be held legally responsible. This means the owner should pay the losses incurred by the victim.
When you are injured on someone else’s property, hiring an experienced premises liability lawyer is necessary if you want to secure fair and reasonable compensation. Understanding when an owner can be held liable is crucial, especially to those injured because of unsafe conditions.
What Are the Legal Basis for Property Owner Liability?
The level of responsibility in premises law depends on the legal status of the visitor, which can be grouped as follows:
- Invitees. These are people invited to a property for business purposes, such as customers in a grocery store. Property owners have a high duty of care in maintaining their safety.
- Licensees. This refers to social guests, such as personal visitors, who enter your property for non-business reasons. As a property owner, you must inform them of potential hazards.
- Trespassers. For individuals entering without permission, owners owe them little to no duty of care except in the case of children or intentional harm.
Examples of Situations Where a Property Owner Can Be Liable
Several conditions can make a property owner liable for an accident. A common example is slips and falls, which occur because of wet floors, uneven surfaces, poor lighting, or loose rugs.
Another instance is negligent security when an owner doesn’t provide enough security, leading to criminal activities and harm to visitors. Also, when the conditions are generally unsafe, such as exposed wiring, broken railings, or the risk of falling objects, which can be a danger to the surroundings.
Property owners are responsible for injuries caused by their pets, particularly dog bites. This only applies if you fail to warn people about an animal’s aggressive behaviors.
Factors that Determine Liability
A property owner is not automatically liable for accidents on their property. Courts consider other factors, such as knowledge of the hazard. Did the owner know about the dangerous conditions? Should they have known about hazards, probably through routine inspection?
Another element considered is the failure to address the danger. Did the owner fail to take the necessary steps to fix the problem or warn visitors? The plaintiff must prove this.
There is also a factor of comparative negligence. If the injured person was careless or ignored a clear warning, the compensation is reduced according to their fault.
Expectations and Defenses Property Owners Can Use
Owners can argue trespassing since they typically do not have a duty of care towards trespassers. As mentioned, this is exempt in instances involving intentional harm or hazards to children, like swimming pools.
They can also use the open and obvious defense. If the danger was visible, such as a hole with a warning sign, the owner may not be vulnerable. Another defense is the assumption of risk. That is, a person knowingly engaged in a risky activity on someone else’s property.
Conclusion
Property owners have a legal obligation to maintain safe conditions. However, the liability depends on different factors. For those injured because of unsafe conditions, consider consulting an attorney to know your legal rights and the compensation you might be entitled to.