So, about an hour ago a friend called me, bitching, moaning and complaining about getting drug into a premises liability lawsuit because he is the VP over operations at a distribution center. Even worse the distribution center is a rented property and the owners was drug into this civil suit along with the real-estate agency who rented them the warehouse.
So to make a long story short we have been friends for the past 20 years, we both served in the military and have been friends for a long time and he called me early last year when he got his promotion and asked me about a area they was looking to rent and redo for a distribution center and what I would do as far as security since this was his first task.
Welp his first mistake was not hiring us, in all fairness I wasn’t set up there to provide services except consulting to set up his services and apparently his boss thought I costed too much, But I pointed him in the right direction on things and who too call and set up security services, cctv, alarms, etc.….
Well he decided to go with a security company just because of the name and disregarded everything else I told him on what to ask for in his contract, and what a reputable security company will accomplish and do for what they are paid for.
He hired a security firm to patrol the parking lots and handle the inside, he did not hire them because of the skills this company had he hired them because of a name, they were cheap, and cost was bottom line on his project. After talking for a few minutes, he also did not use any of the CCTV companies I referred him too again because of cost and that night the CCTV did not work.
So, he explains the guards who patrolled the parking lot failed to go check an occupied vehicle that had been sitting in the parking lot for about a half hour and that they normally didn’t do anything but sit in one spot.
He says that during shift change the people sitting in that car in the parking lot got into an argument over a girlfriend with one of the workers and then a fight broke out. When security did finally come over and get involved one of the occupants of the vehicle brandished a knife and the security got back in the car and left to another area of the parking lot apparently to call police.
In the meantime, other co-workers “He does not know how many because CCTV was down” got into the middle of this fight happening and somehow the person who initially brandished the knife got stabbed by someone and no one has been caught or taken responsibility.
So, after 3 months of investigations by both the police and corporate they land into a lawsuit because the man who shouldn’t have been on the property to begin with got stabbed by someone who may or may not have even worked for the distribution center and he is suing because security did not stop him from being stabbed a few times.
So, the initial defendant in a felony assault case is now the plaintiff in a premises liability suit all because security did not do what they were paid to do. The suit is not because of anything that security did but it was because security did not do what they were paid to do.
Now, after talking to him he did say security was unarmed so I will say that they done right by backing off because I would never expect an unarmed security guard who does not even carry mace to get into that situation.
But after telling me the brand name he chose to use I laid into him, I told him that not only did I tell him what to ask for in his contract, but I told him what not to hire and that was unarmed guards. Neither of those directions was followed.
So now to the present….
He is now calling me for help because not only do I investigate claims of premises liability but he found out my firm handles PI work for the attorney suing, well if he would have hired us to begin with that attorney couldn’t have sued because of a conflict of interest, but because he didn’t I had to promptly hang up on him and send him a Email that this is a conflict of interest, he was a dumb ass and that I will probably be contacting him on a settlement agreement.
I have yet to get a response.
Moral of the story is simple. The Supreme Court has ruled that a business can be not only sued for not having security to stop a criminal act but can be sued for security lacking to stop a criminal act.