A negligent security claim in Georgia arises when a person is harmed by the criminal act of a third party on a property, and the owner failed to provide reasonable security against a foreseeable risk. The claim concerns the owner’s response to a danger posed by others rather than a physical defect.
Foreseeability is the threshold. The claim turns on whether the criminal act was reasonably foreseeable, often based on prior similar incidents in the area. An apartment complex that saw a string of break-ins stands differently from a property where such harm was unforeseeable.
Reasonable measures come next. Once foreseeability is met, the question becomes whether the owner responded to the known risk with steps such as adequate lighting, working locks, or security staffing. A property that ignored a pattern of trouble differs from one that added patrols after the first sign.
A third party’s conduct sets it apart. Unlike a typical premises claim built on a physical hazard, a negligent security claim involves harm caused by another person’s criminal act. That extends the owner’s duty into how it guarded against the acts of others.
A negligent security claim turns on the foreseeability of the criminal act, the reasonableness of the security measures, and the involvement of a third party’s conduct. Because foreseeability often rests on prior incidents, a property’s history of similar crime can be central, separating a setting where the owner should have anticipated the danger from one where the harm came without warning.