This paper explores the legal and practical dimensions of hotel security as it relates to the safekeeping of guests' valuables. It argues that hotels, as public places frequented by affluent travelers, are inherently susceptible to criminal activity and are therefore obligated—both legally and ethically—to provide adequate security measures, including secure deposit boxes and in-room safes. Drawing on statutes from Hawaii, Pennsylvania, and Vermont, as well as policies from several hotels, the paper examines how limiting-liability laws define the conditions under which hotels are and are not responsible for guests' losses. It also surveys non-legal security measures such as CCTV systems, electronic key locks, and staff identification protocols.
The hotel industry is susceptible to crime, and hotels need to provide adequate security measures — including security boxes for the safe custody of guests' valuables. Hotels shall not be liable for any loss if a guest neglects to deposit valuables in the security box, unless the hotel keeper caused the loss through fault or negligence. This paper examines that premise by analysing the relevant statutes and the measures taken — or to be taken — by hotels for the security of guests' valuables.
Hotels are essentially service businesses, and security is of prime importance to their success. Security concerns extend beyond guests themselves to include the safety of valuables and other belongings that guests are likely to carry during travel. Hoteliers are responsible for the protection of property just as they are for the security of their guests. Although a hotel's legal liability is often limited — with primary responsibility resting on guests themselves — hotels must maintain essential security systems and provide safe-locking facilities as part of their standard services. This obligation is mandated by statute in several states.
Hotels are susceptible to criminal activity because they are public places with a high turnover of wealthy visitors. Poor security systems raise the risk of crime against guests significantly. Exposure to crime not only intimidates guests but also adversely affects the reputation and goodwill of a hotel, and ultimately its business. As one industry observer noted: "In customer interviews and surveys, security is now a top priority. Fifteen years ago, it wasn't even one of their concerns" (Etheridge, 2003). Security is therefore an indispensable investment, not an optional expenditure.
Before examining the susceptibility of hotels to crime, the legal requirements of security and safekeeping of guests' valuables, and the various security measures adopted by hotelkeepers, it is useful to define the key terms used throughout this paper. For this purpose, the definitions provided in Statute 486K of the Consumer Action and Information Center of Hawaii are applied and described below.
"Guest" means a person who is registered at the hotel and to whom a bedroom is assigned. The term includes not only the guest but also members of the guest's family who accompany them.
"Hotel/Hotel-condo" means an establishment consisting of any building or structure used primarily for providing transient accommodation lodging facilities for consideration, and that furnishes, as part of its routine operations, one or more customary lodging services — other than living accommodations and the use of furniture and fixtures — including, but not limited to, restaurant facilities, room attendant, bell, telephone switchboard, laundering, or concierge services, and is subject to the transient accommodations tax.
"Keeper" includes any person, firm, or corporation actually operating a hotel.
"Security box" means any metal or alloy box used in a hotel for the safekeeping of valuables, which may be securely locked with a locking mechanism that meets or exceeds Underwriters Laboratories standards and which is secured in a manner that precludes its removal from the room.
"Valuables" includes money, bank notes, bonds, precious stones, jewellery, ornaments, watches, securities, transportation tickets, photographic cameras, checks, drafts, and other negotiable instruments, business papers, documents, and other papers, and other articles of value.
Criminal jurisprudence holds that crime can occur to anyone, at any time, in any place — provided that the three elements of crime (intent, opportunity, and offender) are present simultaneously. Viewed in that light, hotels are as susceptible to crime as any other location. However, being public places with a high turnover of wealthy and affluent guests, they are more susceptible than most. Globalisation, liberal world trade, and the burgeoning tourism industry bring a significant proportion of the world's affluent class to hotels for both business and leisure purposes. These guests typically carry valuables in the form of cash, checks, jewellery, or important documents. Because most such guests are outsiders who rarely make repeat visits, they are frequently targeted by local burglary networks as part of organised crime — quite apart from opportunistic, unorganised criminal activity centred on hotels.
Within hotels, crime occurs in both public and private areas. As a crime prevention measure, hotels must assess risk in both areas and implement appropriate preventive strategies to deter criminals and protect guests and their property. Hotels need to conduct thorough risk assessments and put comprehensive security systems in place. Because the risk of criminal attack against persons and property is higher in non-public areas — such as guest rooms and corridors — than in public areas, hotelkeepers need to ensure enhanced security measures in those spaces in particular.
In many states, the law recognises hotels' liability for the safe custody of guests' valuables and requires hotels to provide a safe or security box for that purpose. Hotels are also required to inform guests of this provision by posting a prominent notice in the guest's room stating that a safe or vault is available for the deposit of valuables.
Section 4 of Statute 486K of the Consumer Action and Information Center of Hawaii specifies the following requirements for safe or security boxes and sets out the limitation of liability for deposited valuables:
(a) If the keeper of any hotel provides a safe or vault in its office for the safekeeping of valuables belonging to guests, and prominently posts a notice in the room or rooms occupied by the guest stating that a safe or vault is provided in which valuables may be deposited, and if any guest neglects to deliver valuables to the person in charge of the safe or vault, the keeper of the hotel shall not be liable for any loss of valuables sustained by the guest by theft or otherwise, unless the loss is due to the negligence or fault of the keeper of the hotel.
(b) If the keeper of a hotel provides a security box in the guest's room and prominently posts a notice stating that a security box is provided in which valuables may be deposited and explaining the liability for losses therefrom, the keeper of the hotel shall not be liable for any loss sustained by the guest unless the loss is due to the negligence or fault of the keeper of the hotel.
The Pennsylvania statute for Hotel and Lodging Houses (Title 37) also addresses the safekeeping of guests' valuables and covers non-liability for valuables not deposited in a safe in section P.S. 61, which states: "…shall be liable for the loss or injury suffered by any guest, unless such guest has offered to deliver the same to such innkeeper or hotelkeeper, for custody in such metal safe or vault, and such innkeeper or hotelkeeper has omitted or refused to take it and deposit it in such safe or vault for custody, and to give such guest a receipt therefor: Provided, however, That the keeper of any inn or hotel shall not be obliged to receive from any one guest, for deposit in such safe or vault, any property hereinbefore described exceeding a total value of three hundred dollars, and shall not be liable for any excess of such property, whether received or not."
The limiting liability statutes section of the Outline and Notes on Hospitality Law and Ethics by Fisher also acknowledges the limited liability of hotels and the mandatory provisions regarding the safekeeping of guests' valuables, with particular reference to the State of Vermont. It reads as follows:
"In order to qualify for limited liability, hotels generally must meet the following conditions:
Provide safes — which must be a 'proper' safe and must be available when guests want to deposit their valuables. Post notices announcing the availability of the safes; hotels must strictly comply with posting requirements, and notices must be conspicuous (i.e., a reasonable person would notice them) and generally must be posted in several locations. Post notices announcing that the hotel's liability is limited. Generally, the following property must be deposited in the safe: money, jewels, ornaments, precious stones, bank notes, bonds, and negotiable securities. In Vermont, the ceiling is $300 for personal property — with an exception where the guest provides a statement of value over $300 and the hotel acknowledges the property's value." (Fisher, 2002)
With these legal requirements in place, the responsibility to offer a safe and secure stay has become as important as providing a comfortable one — indeed, comfort comes only with a sense of security. In their efforts to increase security and limit hotelkeeper liability, "properties are increasingly turning to the use of in-room safes to protect personal valuables if an intruder does gain access" (Etheridge, 2003). Guests are increasingly encouraged to store valuables in room safes or safe deposit boxes, which are kept locked and under the surveillance of security staff. Safe deposit rooms are provided with cameras to record all transactions and to warn against unauthorised entries.
"CCTV, key control, and staff ID measures"
"Real hotel policies on guest property liability"
Hotels have started to acknowledge the need to provide safekeeping for guests' valuables, and most hotels today provide security boxes or in-room safes for the safe custody of valuables. However, they limit their responsibility to the extent that if a guest neglects or fails to deposit property in such a safe custody system, the hotel is not responsible for the loss. The legal requirements in many countries and states also limit hotels' responsibility to that same extent. Security, therefore, must be viewed as a shared responsibility — one that is legally defined, practically enforced, and central to the success of any hotel operation.
You’re 71% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.