One element of a premises liability claim is that a property owner knew about or should have known about a dangerous condition. If this cannot be proven, a property owner may not be liable for damages. In some cases, this element proves to be the detail standing between an injured party and compensation because it is not immediately clear if the property owner had knowledge that a hazard existed.
In other cases, though, it can be very easy to show that a property owner knew about a safety issue. Just contact the people who complained about it. This is what happened in one case involving a woman who slipped on a rug that multiple people had complained about.
The incident occurred in a city recreation center. The woman involved said she tripped on a rug that she had previously complained about to people at the center. Others evidently made the same complaint. Still, nothing was done to remove or repair the rug.
That failure to address a known unsafe condition led a jury to award the woman $547,128 for the concussion, back pain and neck issues she experienced as a result of the accident. The woman also settled a claim with the supplier of the rug for $20,000.
Of course, there are other elements to building a successful premises liability claim, but establishing that a property owner knew about a specific hazard is often one of the more difficult elements to prove.
In many cases, Pennsylvania property owners will go to great lengths to fight this statement. They might say a hazard had just appeared before an accident, or argue that he or she could not have reasonably expected the hazard to exist in the first place. Under these circumstances, the property owner may not be liable for injuries suffered as a result of a slip-and-fall or tripping accident.
However, with the help of an experienced personal injury attorney, you can gather evidence, including witness statements, to solidify this and the other elements of your claim to secure the compensation you deserve.