12

In an episode of Friends, Chandler is in an ATM vestibule when a power blackout happens. The door to the vestibule automatically locks and he (and a supermodel) are trapped inside until the power comes on. Is this legal? There is this related question:

Can I legally trap someone on my property that has committed a crime?

But no one has answered it. It seems like banks are allowed to detain you even though you've done nothing wrong. It's easy to think of scenarios that would make this worse. Instead of a supermodel for company, instead you have a full bladder. Or you popped out for a second to get cash and now your kids are home alone for hours.

I recently read a similar (real) story about a guy in the UK getting trapped. So either a US or a UK answer would be of most interest to me.

ohwilleke
  • 211,353
  • 14
  • 403
  • 716
B. Goddard
  • 497
  • 1
  • 4
  • 10
  • 1
    @Trish But the question isn't about decisions. In the flowchart for how the door is programmed, there is a diamond that says "Is the power on?" If "yes" do nothing. If "no" shut and lock door. This has no bearing on the question. It's just the way the door works. The potential criminal is the bank. – B. Goddard Feb 19 '24 at 14:03
  • 36
    This is a poorly researched question with bad wording. It doesn't accure to the OP that it just a badly designed electonic door. Instead it assumes criminal intent without looking up was the words used (in the legal sense) means: Kidnap: abduct (someone) and hold them captive, typically to obtain a ransom. Instead of telling others to be quite, the OP should write the question taking all relavent aspects into account. – Mark Johnson Feb 19 '24 at 14:06
  • 5
    Frame challenge - foyer doors were never intended to keep people in. Instead its there to keep the weather out initially and reduce heat loss. Then it was mechanised for convenience. Finally an ingress system was fitted to stop homeless from camping out in a sheltered place. Trapping people is not the purpose. – Criggie Feb 20 '24 at 01:39
  • Worth noting that the bank is probably a tenant and that the landlord, rather than the tenant, would usually be the party with civil or criminal liability for a defectively designed or not up to code ATM vestibule. – ohwilleke Feb 20 '24 at 02:12
  • 3
    @Criggie I've seen videos of jewelry stores that have bars or cages slam down to keep thieves from escaping. My impression of the episode was that the bank was doing something similar. My question remains the same: Would such a thing be legal? – B. Goddard Feb 20 '24 at 04:43
  • 2
    I was trapped in a lift, which first fell, then was trapped by a safety brake, and then "just sat there". This was on a Sunday morning when I'd briefly visited my office before starting a 500 mile drive. The thought of suing anyone did not occur. As that was about 35 years ago it's probably now a bit late to think about it. – Russell McMahon Feb 20 '24 at 09:02
  • 2
    This question would be much improved by a link to the story about "a guy in the UK getting trapped". I'm guessing it was this one? https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bank-customer-locked-inside-branch-4682173 which appears to have been a fault with the locking mechanism rather than a power loss. – Jack Aidley Feb 20 '24 at 11:07
  • 3
    I would agree this is a framing question. The problem isn't that the bank is "trapping" you... it's that it's badly designed system failure state. When power fails or a security system fails, does it fail closed or fail open? if the electric goes out, should the door be locked or open? The true answer is that the door should be openable from the inside (as mentioned by others). I would think the bank could be sued because in case of other emergencies (IE: Fire) the people should be able to get out. – WernerCD Feb 20 '24 at 19:32
  • 1
    @WernerCD My question is "is it legal for a bank to trap you like this to protect their interests." – B. Goddard Feb 21 '24 at 00:06
  • @Criggie Do you not realise half the purpose of modern automatic doors is that they will lock you in when the operator wants to? – Robbie Goodwin Feb 21 '24 at 00:55
  • Clearly it would not be legal for a bank to trap you in an ATM vestibule without reason, which should mean the vestibule was designed to fail open, not closed.

    However, that story wasn't about banks or law or vestibules, was it?

     – Robbie Goodwin Feb 21 '24 at 00:59
  • Could you turn 'Can I legally trap someone on my property that has committed a crime?' round and instead ask, are there jurisdictions in which I may not trap someone who has committed a crime on my property?

    What matters is whether you mean to keep that person in your own custody, or hand him or her over to the authorities at the first possible opportunity.

    FYI here in the UK you're entitled not only to 'trap' an intruder, but if the incident is unequivocally within the curtilage of your own property, to use lethal traps.

     – Robbie Goodwin Feb 21 '24 at 01:07
  • 1
    It's also worth noting that banks don't actually trap criminals in real life. That's a hollywood thing. If they trapped criminals, that just creates a hostage situation and people would end up dead. – Mooing Duck Feb 21 '24 at 04:25
  • @Mooing_Duck I know a UK bank that has an "airlock" system for getting in and out You go through one door into a glass corridor. You cannot open the door in front of you until the door behind you has closed. I assumed that if a robber was trying to run away the staff would lock both doors with the robber between them, IF there were no other people in the glass corridor with him. I expect intending robbers draw the same conclusion and rob elsewhere! – nigel222 Feb 21 '24 at 09:43
  • 1
    Is it a vestibule? Maybe it's an atrium. – Paul D. Waite Feb 21 '24 at 12:32
  • In the flowchart for how the door is programmed, there is a diamond that says "Is the power on?" If "yes" do nothing. If "no" shut and lock door. This has no bearing on the question. It's just the way the door works. The potential criminal is the bank. What is this software supposed to be running on, bearing in mind that there is no power to the building? – Stuart F Feb 22 '24 at 13:52
  • @StuartF Even my kitchen faucet has a battery nowadays. – B. Goddard Feb 22 '24 at 14:28

3 Answers3

68

A power failure is an obvious example of force majeure. Nobody would talk of kidnapping, as you tagged your question, if a power failure trapped a lift between floors.

The real issue would be one of fire safety and other safety. How is a bank allowed to design a room open to the public if escape becomes impossible in the case of power failure? In , powered doors would most likely need a manual override in the exit direction, but specific issues of fire safety are way too complicated for a generic answer on the web.

Glorfindel
  • 439
  • 1
  • 7
  • 18
o.m.
  • 17,538
  • 3
  • 37
  • 64
  • Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed. – Dale M Feb 20 '24 at 19:40
46

Many US jurisdictions have adopted the NFPA 101 Life Safety Code (which falls into the general category of building codes). The 2024 edition states

4.5.3.2 Unobstructed Egress. In every occupied building or structure, means of egress from all parts of the building shall be maintained free and unobstructed. Means of egess shall be accessible to the extent necessary to ensure reasonable safety for occupants having impaired mobility.

The code is long and provides alternative ways to satisfy requirements, but I think the trope one sees in books, tv, and movies of buildings automatically locking people in would usually be a building code violation.

Gerard Ashton
  • 4,704
  • 14
  • 29
  • 1
    Exactly. Design a building like this in the U.S. and you will have yet another lock placed on it - by the fire marshal, upon condemning the building. – reirab Feb 19 '24 at 15:35
  • 6
    @reirab yes and no: There are buildings that, in case of power out have to lock shut in such a way that nobody can enter or exit until emergency power kicks in. Those are for example S3 labs that work with for example Ebola. – Trish Feb 19 '24 at 15:51
  • 3
    @Trish No such exception would apply to a bank ATM vestibule, though (or virtually anywhere else where the general public would be allowed to enter in the first place.) At any rate, I would be surprised if even those places weren't required to have some kind of override to allow for emergency egress during a fire. – reirab Feb 19 '24 at 16:06
  • 6
    @reirab Just saying that BSL-3 & 4 are special and that normal rules are massively altered and follow special guidelines. It's more typical to have a fully autonomous firefighting system that first extinguishes the fire while egress is only possible into a room still inside the containment area to prevent contamination outside. – Trish Feb 19 '24 at 16:20
  • 17
    @Trish Fair, but hopefully research on deadly airborne pathogens is not being conducted in a bank ATM vestibule. :) – reirab Feb 19 '24 at 16:24
  • 3
    Just like how the Nakatomi building loosing power and then the doors open is a poor way to design a bank vault. That's the one situation where fail-safe is remain closed, not requires power to stay locked. Anywhere else with 'occupancy' would be a fire hazard. – Mazura Feb 19 '24 at 19:54
  • 6
    Nuclear weapon facilities, TS/SCI archives, high-risk chemical and biological labs are examples where containment takes precedence over occupant safety. They are, however, even more difficult to enter than they are to leave. – Therac Feb 19 '24 at 20:29
  • @reirab Have you seen the recent antics of the CDC w.r.t. deadly airborne pathogens – Jiří Baum Feb 20 '24 at 10:21
  • @reirab My bank's ATM vestibule usually has one to three homeless gentlemen in them late at night so I'm not so sure it isn't happening. – Spehro Pefhany Feb 20 '24 at 11:12
  • 1
    @Mazura Something that remains locked in the event of power loss is known as fail-secure, rather than fail-safe. – T.J.L. Feb 20 '24 at 13:08
  • @Therac "In event of emergency, press handle for five seconds. Alarm will sound and door will open." There's no entrance when the power is out, but exit is still possible. I worked in a space which had previously been a SCIF and a lot of the signage was left up. – user3067860 Feb 20 '24 at 19:13
  • @Mazura: It's nuts. The bank vault should be openable from inside the vault on power failure. – Joshua Feb 20 '24 at 22:21
  • @Mazura Usually with a bank vault like that, I think the door is not supposed to be closed while somebody is inside. – A. R. Feb 21 '24 at 18:28
18

Is it legal for a bank to trap you in an ATM vestibule?

If this was done intentionally, and outside of a citizen's arrest (s. 494, Criminal Code), this would make out the tort of false imprisonment: intentional confinement of a person without legal justification.

I see you have tagged this , but that requires the additional element of moving the person from one place to another.

Jen
  • 54,294
  • 5
  • 110
  • 242
  • 6
    @Cœur I don't think so. As I understood the episode, the door is rigged purposefully to trap people inside in the case of power outage so that they can't get away with theft. My question is whether such a thing is legal. – B. Goddard Feb 19 '24 at 21:43
  • 4
    What if the ATM is on a ship and the ship is moving? :-) – gerrit Feb 19 '24 at 22:09
  • 1
    The passenger (now 'victim') voluntarily boarded the ship so as long as not intentionally diverted from the original destinations/itinerary any movement is also voluntary. – civitas Feb 20 '24 at 01:05
  • Had a sort of pre-law school class MANY years ago, but I recall a case where a guy's car was being repossessed and he refused to get out of it. The repo guys lifted it with a tow truck and started driving it away with him still in. He sued and won for false imprisonment (at least I think that was what it was called). Now someone who actually knows about this, please give the corrections/details to this story. If someone had decided to close the ATM's door to trap a thief, that would be closer to what I remember, but still seems related. – Schneb Feb 20 '24 at 05:27
  • 3
    @Schneb: I don't know about your case specifically, but the principle of law is correct. There are several reasons why you can't repo the vehicle while it's occupied and kidnapping is one of them. Another one being it's not legal in most states to ride in a trailer while a vehicle is moving, and the towed vehicle is a trailer under the law. – Joshua Feb 20 '24 at 22:27