Chicago Negligent Security Lawyer

Negligent security is a type of premises liability claim that applies when someone is harmed by violence or other criminal activity on property where the danger was predictable and the owner did not take reasonable steps to reduce the risk.

In everyday terms, negligent security litigation focuses on whether a business owner or other responsible party failed to provide reasonable security measures in a setting where an attack was foreseeable based on prior incidents, repeated complaints, or known safety issues.

These cases can involve both commercial property (hotels, parking garages, bars, shopping centers, gas stations) and private property (apartment buildings, residential complexes, gated communities), especially when the property invites people onto the premises and profits from their presence.

The central question is not whether the owner could stop every crime, but whether the harm occurred due to negligent security, meaning the property’s safety plan, staffing, or physical safeguards did not match the level of risk.

In Illinois, property owners generally owe lawful visitors a duty to act with reasonable care under the circumstances, which can include taking steps to protect people from foreseeable violence when warning signs exist.

When security risks become predictable (such as repeated assaults in a parking garage, ongoing trespassing at an apartment complex, or violent incidents outside a bar), owners may be expected to adjust their approach, which can include better lighting, controlled access, working surveillance, and trained staff.

When a property owner’s failure leaves gaps that allow an attacker to target someone more easily, those failures may become the basis for a negligent security claim.

Many cases also involve third-party vendors, including security personnel and security companies, because security is often outsourced or managed through contractors rather than handled directly by the property owner.

Negligent security cases often come down to whether the property’s safety decisions were reasonable for the circumstances.

In practice, the duty of care analysis usually looks like this:

1. The property invited people onto the premises (or otherwise allowed lawful access), creating an obligation to take reasonable steps to keep the property safe.
2. There were warning signs that criminal activity was a realistic risk, such as prior incidents, repeated complaints, police calls, or known access issues.
3. Reasonable security measures were available, meaning the risk could have been reduced through practical steps like functioning locks, access control, lighting, surveillance coverage, or staffing.
4. The property did not take those steps, or failed to maintain them, creating a gap in protection that made an attack more likely or more severe.
5. Someone was harmed as a result, and the evidence supports that the attack was connected to those security failures rather than being an unavoidable event.

Negligent security cases also follow a clear practical pattern: the stronger the evidence of foreseeable risk, the stronger the argument that additional security would have made a difference.

That is why filing negligent security claims often depends on documenting the property’s history of incidents, the conditions that made violence easier, and whether the owner ignored complaints, reports, or obvious warning signs.

If a person is attacked and there is proof that a reasonable property owner would have taken additional safety steps, yet those steps were missing, victims may have the right to pursue damages for medical expenses, lost income, and other losses.

In that sense, negligent security claims are about accountability for predictable risks, not the criminal act itself, and they exist so victims can seek compensation when negligent property owners failed to take practical steps to reduce the chance of a preventable attack.

Illinois Law, Local Chicago Laws Relevant to Negligent Security Claims

Negligent security lawsuits in Chicago are usually brought under Illinois premises liability law, which requires property owners and occupiers to act with reasonable care under the circumstances.

That standard often becomes a security issue when a violent incident is tied to inadequate security measures in a place where criminal risks were foreseeable.

Illinois law also imposes strict filing deadlines for both personal injury and wrongful death cases, which affects how quickly victims and families must act after an attack.

Chicago has municipal licensing requirements for certain types of private security and “special policemen,” which can matter when a claim involves guards, security contractors, or failures to provide adequate security measures in high-risk settings.

Relevant Illinois and Chicago laws for negligent security claims include:

• Illinois Premises Liability Act (740 ILCS 130): Establishes that the duty owed by an owner or occupier to lawful entrants is “reasonable care under the circumstances” for acts done or omitted on the premises, which is the baseline framework for negligent security claims.
• Illinois Personal Injury Statute of Limitations (735 ILCS 5/13-202): Requires most personal injury lawsuits, including negligent security claims based on assault-related injuries, to be filed within two years of when the cause of action accrued.
• Illinois Wrongful Death Act (740 ILCS 180/2): Requires wrongful death claims to generally be filed within two years of the date of death, which is relevant when a negligent security incident results in fatal injuries.
• Chicago Municipal Code – Special Policemen and Security Guards (Municipal Code Ch. 4-340): Defines and regulates “special policemen” and requires licensing for certain security guards hired to protect people or property within the City of Chicago, which can become relevant when a negligent security claim involves staffing, training, or oversight failures.
• Chicago Municipal Code (general): Chicago’s Municipal Code is the city’s compilation of ordinances; depending on the property type (bars, venues, hotels, residential buildings), local licensing and regulatory requirements may affect how security obligations are evaluated in a specific case.

In practice, litigating negligent security cases in Chicago often depends on tying these legal standards to concrete facts: what the property knew about prior incidents, what security steps were missing, and whether those omissions contributed to the harm.

Illinois’s “reasonable care” standard does not require perfect security, but it does require owners to respond reasonably to foreseeable threats, especially when a pattern of violence or repeated warnings exists.

Because filing deadlines are strict and evidence can disappear quickly, applying these laws to an individual case often starts with immediate evidence preservation and a careful analysis of whether the property’s security decisions fell below what the law considers reasonable under the circumstances.

“Foreseeability” in Chicago Negligent Security Cases

Foreseeability is one of the most important issues in Chicago negligent security cases because it helps define the property owner’s responsibility to protect people from violence on the premises.

The core question is whether the risk of criminal harm was predictable based on what the property knew or should have known before the incident occurred.

That can involve prior assaults or robberies on the property, repeated disturbances, police calls for service, tenant complaints, or clear security breakdowns that made dangerous conditions obvious.

When the risk is foreseeable, the argument becomes that the property should have implemented proper security measures that matched the level of danger, such as functional locks, controlled access, adequate lighting, monitoring, and trained security personnel.

Property owners and insurers often claim the attack was random and unavoidable, but evidence can show the harm followed a recognizable pattern that should have prompted action.

For victims, foreseeability matters because it is often the foundation needed to prove liability, showing the attack was not simply bad luck, but the result of security failures in a high-risk setting.

A negligent security claim becomes stronger when the facts show the property had multiple warnings and still failed to take reasonable steps to reduce the chance of an attack.

A negligent security case arises when a violent crime occurs on someone else’s property and there is evidence the danger was foreseeable but the property failed to take reasonable safety steps.

These claims are common in high-traffic locations where security gaps make it easier for criminals to target residents, customers, or visitors.

While every case depends on the facts, negligent security lawsuits often involve severe physical harm and long-term emotional trauma.

In many situations, the key question is whether the property owner or operator may be legally liable because reasonable security measures could have reduced the risk or changed the outcome. ‘

These cases can involve everything from assaults and shootings to robberies and sexual assaults, especially where prior incidents or known threats made the risk predictable.

Incidents commonly tied to negligent security claims in Chicago include:

• Apartment complex assaults in stairwells, hallways, entryways, or parking areas
• Sexual assaults at hotels, motels, apartment buildings, and short-term lodging properties
• Parking lot and parking garage robberies, shootings, and carjackings
• Bar and nightclub violence, including fights that escalate into serious injury
• Convenience store, gas station, and ATM attacks in poorly monitored areas
• Attacks near building entrances where access control was broken or ignored
• Workplace assaults on properties with recurring trespassing or prior threats
• Retail and shopping center incidents involving repeated criminal activity or poor lighting

Common Negligent Security Injuries

Negligent security incidents often result in severe injuries because the underlying event usually involves intentional violence, firearms, or physical assault.

Many victims require emergency medical care, surgery, and long-term rehabilitation, and the effects can extend beyond physical recovery.

In addition to bodily harm, people frequently experience psychological symptoms that disrupt sleep, work, and daily functioning long after the incident.

The specific injuries vary, but negligent security claims often involve life-altering trauma with lasting medical and emotional consequences.

Common negligent security injuries include:

• Gunshot wounds and internal organ damage
• Stab wounds and deep lacerations
• Traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) and concussions
• Broken bones, fractures, and orthopedic injuries
• Facial injuries, dental trauma, and disfigurement
• Spinal cord injuries and paralysis
• Soft tissue injuries and nerve damage
• Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and depression
• Wrongful death

What Is Considered Inadequate Security?

Inadequate security refers to security conditions or practices that fail to match the level of risk on a property, especially when a property owner knew or should have known that violence or criminal activity was likely.

These cases often involve situations where a property did not provide adequate safety measures despite prior incidents, repeated complaints, or obvious security threats.

In many negligent security claims, the problem is not a single mistake but a pattern of ignored maintenance issues, understaffing, or missing safeguards that made an attack easier to carry out.

When an incident occurs, evidence like security footage and maintenance records can help show what protections were missing and how long those issues existed before the crime happened.

Examples of inadequate security measures include:

• Broken locks on doors, gates, stairwells, or residential units
• Unsecured entry points, propped doors, or missing access control systems
• Inadequate lighting in parking lots, garages, hallways, stairwells, or exterior walkways
• Missing, nonfunctional, or poorly placed security cameras
• Failure to monitor cameras or preserve security footage after an incident
• Lack of security guards or inadequate staffing in high-risk areas
• Untrained personnel or failure to follow emergency response procedures
• Failure to remove trespassers or enforce bans against known offenders
• Ignoring prior complaints, threats, or reports of criminal activity
• Poor maintenance of fences, gates, alarm systems, or intercom systems

After an assault or attack on someone else’s property, it is normal to feel disoriented, angry, and unsure of what comes next.

Many victims also struggle with fear and hypervigilance, especially when the incident happened in a place that was supposed to be a safe environment, like an apartment complex, hotel, parking garage, or business open to the public.

The trauma can affect sleep, concentration, and daily routines long after physical injuries begin to heal. If you suspect the attack was connected to a lack of security, the legal process often depends on facts that are easiest to document immediately.

Surveillance footage can be overwritten quickly, and properties may repair locks, lighting, or access points after an incident, changing the conditions that existed when you were attacked.

You also may receive calls from insurers or property representatives asking for statements that can later be used to reduce or deny a claim.

When a case involves property owner’s negligence, early documentation and evidence preservation can make the difference between a strong claim and a case with missing proof.

The steps below can help protect your health, preserve evidence, and keep your options open while you focus on recovery.

Steps to take after an assault or attack:

1. Call 911 and request police assistance so the incident is formally documented and the scene is addressed quickly.
2. Seek medical care immediately, even if injuries seem minor, and follow all treatment recommendations.
3. Preserve evidence by taking photos of the area, your injuries, damaged clothing, and any visible security failures like broken locks or poor lighting.
4. Collect witness information, including names and phone numbers for anyone who saw the attack or noticed unsafe conditions before it happened.
5. Write down your recollection of what happened while details are fresh, including the timeline, location, and anything that seemed unsafe.
6. Request a copy of the incident report from the property or business if one exists, and note the names of managers or employees involved.
7. Avoid recorded statements or signing releases for an insurance company or property owner until you understand the legal impact.
8. Contact a negligent security attorney.

These cases often involve proof that only exists in the property’s records, including surveillance systems, maintenance logs, and prior incident reports.

An attorney can send preservation letters to help secure that evidence before it disappears and can begin investigating whether the risk of violence was foreseeable.

If you are dealing with emotional trauma, legal support can take pressure off your recovery by handling communications, evidence requests, and deadlines.

Taking action early protects your ability to pursue a claim and strengthens the argument that the harm was preventable, not just inevitable.

A negligent security lawsuit may be an option when you are harmed by a violent crime on someone else’s property and the risk was foreseeable based on prior incidents or obvious security problems.

You may qualify if you were legally on the property and the owner or manager failed to take reasonable safety steps that could have reduced the danger.

These cases are often stronger when there is evidence of repeated criminal activity, prior assaults, tenant or customer complaints, or police calls that made the threat predictable.

Proof of security failures, such as broken locks, poor lighting, missing cameras, or lack of trained security personnel, can also support a claim.

You also need evidence linking those failures to the incident, showing the attack was connected to the security gaps rather than being an unavoidable event.

Your injuries and damages matter as well, including medical treatment, lost income, emotional trauma, and any long-term impact on your ability to work or function.

Even if you are unsure whether the property can be held responsible, an attorney can review the facts, explain the legal standard, and identify what evidence may exist.

Our law firm can evaluate your case, preserve critical evidence, and help you understand whether pursuing a negligent security claim makes sense under Illinois law.

Gathering Evidence for a Negligent Security Claim

Evidence is often the deciding factor in negligent security claims because it can show what the property knew about criminal risk, what safety measures were missing, and how those failures contributed to the attack.

Strong documentation also helps counter the common defense argument that the incident was random and unforeseeable.

Acting quickly matters because surveillance footage can be overwritten, witnesses can disappear, and conditions like broken locks or poor lighting may be repaired soon after the incident.

Evidence that can support a negligent security claim includes:

• Police reports and 911 call records related to the incident
• Prior incident logs, crime reports, and calls for service at or near the property
• Surveillance footage and security camera coverage maps
• Photos of the scene, including broken locks, damaged gates, poor lighting, and blind spots
• Property maintenance logs and repair requests for locks, lighting, cameras, and access systems
• Tenant or customer complaints about threats, trespassing, or prior violence
• Security guard schedules, patrol logs, and post orders outlining expected duties
• Contracts with third-party security companies and communications about staffing issues
• Training materials for employees and security personnel, including emergency response procedures
• Witness statements from residents, staff members, or bystanders
• Medical records documenting injuries, treatment, and long-term care needs
• Mental health treatment records related to PTSD, anxiety, and other trauma symptoms

Damages in Negligent Security Claims

Damages are the losses a person suffers after an attack, and they are the basis for the compensation requested in a negligent security claim.

Lawyers assess damages by reviewing medical bills, treatment records, and expert evaluations to understand both the immediate harm and the long-term consequences of the injuries.

They also calculate income-related losses by documenting lost wages, work restrictions, and future earning impact when the injuries interfere with a person’s ability to earn a living.

Because violent incidents often leave lasting psychological harm, attorneys also evaluate non-economic losses like physical pain and suffering and emotional trauma, using medical documentation, mental health records, and evidence of daily-life disruption.

Common damages in negligent security claims include:

• Medical bills and related out-of-pocket expenses
• Future medical costs, including rehabilitation, therapy, and long-term care
• Prescription medication costs and assistive devices
• Lost wages and loss of future earning capacity
• Physical pain and suffering
• Emotional trauma, including PTSD, anxiety, depression, and sleep disruption
• Disfigurement, scarring, and permanent disability
• Loss of enjoyment of life
• Loss of consortium (impact on spouse or close family relationships)
• Property loss or damage connected to the incident
• Wrongful death damages, including funeral expenses and loss of companionship/support

Who Can Be Held Liable for a Negligent Security Incident?

Liability in a negligent security case depends on who controlled the property, who was responsible for security decisions, and who had the ability to fix safety problems before the attack occurred.

Many cases involve multiple defendants because ownership, management, and security operations are often split across different companies.

Identifying the correct parties is a key part of the investigation, especially when third-party contractors or corporate entities played a role in the security failures.

Potentially liable parties may include:

• Property owners
• Property management companies
• Landlords and apartment complex operators
• Businesses operating on the property (hotels, bars, clubs, retail stores, venues)
• Security companies and private security contractors
• Security guards and supervisors (in certain cases)
• Maintenance contractors responsible for locks, gates, lighting, or access control systems
• Corporate parent companies or franchisors (when they control operations or security policies)
• Event organizers or promoters (for incidents tied to crowd control or venue security failures)

TorHoerman Law represents crime victims and families whose lives were upended by violence that may have been prevented with reasonable security measures.

Negligent security cases require fast action, thorough investigation, and a clear strategy for proving foreseeability, security failures, and damages under Illinois law.

Our law firm secures critical evidence, works with qualified experts when needed, and handles communication with property owners, insurance carriers, and defense counsel so clients can focus on recovery.

If you were attacked on someone else’s property in Chicago or if your family is coping with a wrongful death, TorHoerman Law is available to review your case and explain your legal options.

Call today for a free, confidential consultation.

You can also use the chat feature on this page to find out if you qualify for a negligent security claim.