Temporary security solutions often look cheaper on paper. In practice, they can become one of the most expensive ways to manage a vacant property.
Many property managers start by boarding buildings with plywood or other substandard covers. When those measures fail, contractors are sent back out to re‑secure the property — sometimes repeatedly.
Each visit adds cost, coordination, and administrative overhead.
“We were spending $200 to $500 every time we had to send someone out to re‑secure a property.”
The Re‑Securing Cycle
The pattern is familiar:
- Plywood is installed
- It’s removed
- Other substandard board-up materials go up
- Those get removed too
Every failure triggers another repair and another invoice.
Over time, these “small” costs compound — often exceeding the cost of a permanent solution.
When Permanent Security Makes Sense
For properties with recurring break‑ins, some teams choose to install permanent steel security designed for vacant buildings. While the upfront investment is higher, the ongoing costs drop sharply.
“You’re going to spend a couple grand, but it saves you a lot of time and effort of having to re‑secure the same property over and over again.”
Breaking the Cycle
Permanent security helps eliminate:
- Repeat contractor visits
- Emergency re‑securing
- Ongoing damage and liability
- Staff time spent managing recurring incidents
Instead of reacting to each breach, property managers can stabilize sites and focus on higher‑value work.
The Takeaway
If a vacant property has recurring access issues, temporary security is rarely the lowest‑cost option. When viewed through a total‑cost‑of‑ownership lens, permanent physical security often delivers better financial and operational outcomes.
