What if the doors are not secure, kind of flimsy, easily broken into, and then after the burglary the landlord comes and nails the door completely shut. Is he liable for securing the property?

What if the doors are not secure, kind of flimsy, easily broken into, and then after the burglary the landlord comes and nails the door completely shut. Is he liable for securing the property?


What do you mean by "is he liable for securing the property?" I don't understand what you are asking.

Liable in that he is legally, reasonalbly repsonsible for making sure the property is secured with deadbolts, or whatever the area requires in order to be safe.

Liable in that he is legally, reasonalbly repsonsible for making sure the property is secured with deadbolts, or whatever the area requires in order to be safe.


As the tenant it is up to you to bring any "defects" to the attention of the landlord. And if that's the way you rented it, then you should not have moved in.

If you moved in and then something changed, yes, it is the landlord's responsibility to put it back into the shape it was in on move-in day.

First its not a good idea to piggyback your question on someone else's. This can lead to confusion. You should start a new thread. So I've moved your question to its own thread.

The landlord is responsible for providing a lockable door. I don't know if there is any rules on how secure that lock has to be. If they are they are probably very localized.

If however, there is a history of burglary in the unit, the landlord may be required to increase security. A landlord cannot, however, nail a door shut because that could present a safety hazard.

Contact your local building dept and ask them about the nailing shut of the door. They will come and fine the landlord and make him put up a more suitable door in a heartbeat.

If he "nailed" it shut as a temp way to secure the door, and he has ordered a new one that is what most home owners would do.

Thank you for responding. I think we need to find out what are the codes or ordinances for securing property. Yes, there are locks on doors. Yes, this is a high crime area, not sure if the house has been burglared before, but will find out. I don't think nailing door is temporary, just lazy. The house was rented with flimsy doors, however in light of house being burglared I would think further security is warranted. Yes, a city inspector is needed. The house will be burglared again, I'm afraid, unless more security added.

Hello d,

I think the people here have been telling you that the there is no law that requires people to lock their things up. A city inspector if going to laugh at you if can ever get hold of him.

You have TWO choices. YOU can either beef up the security yourself or you can MOVE.

excon

Yes, unless you have some some specific city code that requires a dead bolt lock, or unless they are not using exterior doors, but in general they are not required to provide "security" if you feel that this area is too dangerous to live in, you should move to a better area to live.

Now they are required to fix the door.

The house was rented with flimsy doors, however in light of house being burglared I would think further security is warranted.

OK, so you rented the house with what you feel are flimsy doors. You knew what the neighborhood was like. What gives you the idea that the landlord has to provide increased security?

As long as everything is up to code, they don't have to do a thing.

[QUOTE=excon]Hello d,

I think the people here have been telling you that the there is no law that requires people to lock their things up. A city inspector if going to laugh at you if can ever get hold of him.

You have TWO choices. YOU can either beef up the security yourself or you can MOVE.



If the door is nailed shut how do you get in and out of the apartment?

I'll ask them to check on whether this hse. Was burglared in past. I don't live in this place, however I don't think moving is their option. I do think there has to be some responsibility to secure a property, and some reasonable measurement has to exist for this, providing a door, any kind of door is not reasonable. Providing ADT on the renters part is reasonable, but having to add items such as burglar doors, and windows is not. I'm going to say it looks like a high crime area, but police says it is not.

Frankly, I think you are wasting your time, but its your time to waste. If the police say that statistically its not a high crime area then you have very little, if anything, to base your complaint on. Other than providing doors and locks, I think you will find that the landlord's responsibility is non exisitent.

I'll ask them to check on whether this hse. was burglared in past. I don't live in this place, however I don't think moving is thier option. I do think there has to be some responsibility to secure a property, and some reasonable measurement has to exist for this, providing a door, any kind of door is not reasonable. Providing ADT on the renters part is reasonable, but having to add items such as burglar doors, and windows is not. I'm going to say it looks like a high crime area, but police says it is not.


I disagree - I think that the tenant should have looked more closely before he/she moved in. I also had a renter (for whatever reason) install an alarm system without permission, causing changes to the wiring and phone systems, alarms going off and upsetting other tenants (because they couldn't seem to remember they had a system and kept setting it off), I kept getting phone calls in the middle of the night that the alarm was going off and had NEVER given them permission to install the system nor had I ever had the building burglarized - and then the tenant moved out and I had to pay to get the system removed and the "damage" repaired. Needless to say we ended up in Small Claims because the cost was more than the security deposit.

Why would an alarm company install a system without the permission of the property owner? I have no idea.

Would you come back and let us know how this works out? As a landlord I'm interested.

I do think there has to be some responsibility to secure a property, and some reasonable measurement has to exist for this...Hello again, d:

You're actually correct in your above statement. Your landlord is required to supply you with "reasonable" security.

The key word here, is "reasonable".

In civil law, that word is used a lot. It's defined by nothing more than the question, “what would a reasonable person do in similar circumstances?”

It's the consensus of opinion here, that the landlord has acted reasonably and met his responsibility by providing a door. We further believe, that if YOU want more security, it's reasonable for YOU to pay for it.

It's YOUR opinion that it's the landlord who needs to do more.

You're not going to find any law anywhere, or any city ordinance, or any city inspector or anybody in government who is going to help you force the landlord to add security. It's just not going to happen.

Therefore, it's our opinion that since he's not going to DO that, and you can't make him do it, either you do it yourself, or move.

excon