The Landlord Who Wanted Forced Entry
A property-management company hires you, a forensic locksmith, after a tenant vacates a commercial suite and the landlord files an insurance claim for 'forced entry damage' to the rear service door. The maintenance supervisor has already replaced the deadbolt and strike plate and discarded them. He supplies phone photographs of the damaged frame and a receipt for a new lock. The landlord asks you to state in your report that entry was made by force through the rear door so the insurer will pay. At the site visit you learn that the tenant returned a key at move-out, that the front door access-control log shows the tenant's card entering at 21:10 on the alleged date, and that the rear door frame damage appears old: there is rust in the splintered wood and paint bridges the gouge. There is no written engagement letter and no defined scope of work.
1. Identify the ethical, legal, and evidentiary problems and explain how you respond to the client's request.
Read the worked answer
Ethical
The request is to supply a conclusion the evidence does not support. An examiner's duty is impartiality; writing a predetermined finding for an insurance payment is misrepresentation and may expose the examiner and the client to fraud or insurance-fraud consequences. Decline clearly, in writing, and record that the request was made. If pressure continues, withdraw and return the retainer.
Evidentiary
- The deadbolt and strike plate, the primary items, were replaced and discarded. No examination of the actual lock is possible.
- The photographs are phone images with no scale, no documented provenance, and altered scene conditions after replacement work.
- The rust in splintered wood and paint bridging the gouge indicate the damage predates the recent paint and has been exposed to moisture: it is old damage, not fresh forced entry.
- The access log showing the tenant's card at 21:10 is inconsistent with a forced rear entry and points to ordinary key or card access.
Legal/professional
No engagement letter means no defined scope, no identification of the client, no fee terms, and no record of the instructions. The client is the property manager, but the report may be relied on by an insurer and later by a court; that must be discussed before work begins. Document the conflict between the landlord's account and the physical evidence, and do not destroy or edit the photographs supplied.
2. What opinions can you support from the available material, and what must your report say about the missing lock and strike?
Read the worked answer
Supportable
- The rear door frame shows impact or lever damage of indeterminate age; the presence of rust within the splintered wood fibres and paint bridging the gouge indicates the damage predates the most recent painting and has been weather-exposed for a substantial period.
- The deadbolt and strike plate were replaced; no opinion is possible on the mode of entry through that hardware, on cylinder condition, or on key operation.
- The provided photographs are of limited evidentiary value: no scale, no metadata verification, and the scene has been altered.
- The access-control record is consistent with the tenant entering through the front door by card at 21:10 on the alleged date.
What the report must state about the missing items
The original deadbolt and strike plate were removed and discarded by the client's maintenance staff before examination. This is a significant loss of evidence and it prevents confirmation or exclusion of forced entry through the lock. The report should describe what was discarded, when, by whom, and that the examiner was not given the opportunity to examine it. It should also note that the new lock and receipt establish only that a replacement occurred, not why.
Bottom line for the insurer
There is no support for the statement that entry was made by force through the rear door, and the physical evidence tends to contradict it.
3. What should have been in place before the site visit, and what do you put in writing now?
Read the worked answer
Before the visit
- A written engagement letter naming the client, the purpose, the scope, the items to be examined, fee terms, and the understanding that the report will state findings impartially whether or not they support the claim.
- A conflict check and disclosure of any prior relationship with the landlord, tenant, or insurer, and clarification of who will receive the report.
- A request to preserve the deadbolt, strike plate, and photographs before replacement; preferably an instruction to stop work on the door.
- A documented evidence list and chain-of-custody forms for anything received.
Now, in writing
- A letter or email declining to state forced entry, with reasons tied to the rust, paint bridging, and missing hardware.
- A scope and limitations section in the report listing what was not examined and why.
- A record of the request to state forced entry and of your refusal.
- A note that the scene was altered before examination and that no chain of custody exists for the original lock.
- An invitation for the client to produce the original hardware if it can be recovered; if it cannot, say so.
If the matter proceeds to litigation, the same impartiality applies: the duty is to the court, and the report must survive the question of why the examiner declined to adopt the client's desired conclusion.