AdvertisementAdvertisement
By Elena L., Lisbon14 September 2026The bathroom door was off its hinges. Not damaged. Off. Lying on the tiles, with the frame split where the top hinge had been.
The guest said it had been like that when they arrived. They had "not wanted to make a fuss". They had photos, taken, they said, on the first morning. The photos had no date on them that anyone could rely on.
The repair was 1,400 euros. The deposit was 300. Without proof it was going to be my word against theirs, and I had been told by a lawyer what that costs.
This is how it ended in an afternoon, and what was on the wall that ended it.
The bathroom door was off its hinges. Not damaged. Off. Lying on the tiles, with the frame split where the top hinge had been.
The guest said it had been like that when they arrived. They had "not wanted to make a fuss". They had photos, taken, they said, on the first morning. The photos had no date on them that anyone could rely on.
The repair was 1,400 euros. The deposit was 300. Without proof it was going to be my word against theirs, and I had been told by a lawyer what that costs.
This is how it ended in an afternoon, and what was on the wall that ended it.
The bathroom door was off its hinges. Not damaged. Off. Lying on the tiles, with the frame split where the top hinge had been.
The guest said it had been like that when they arrived. They had "not wanted to make a fuss". They had photos, taken, they said, on the first morning. The photos had no date on them that anyone could rely on.
The repair was 1,400 euros. The deposit was 300. Without proof it was going to be my word against theirs, and I had been told by a lawyer what that costs.
This is how it ended in an afternoon, and what was on the wall that ended it.
I did not have a camera. I am not allowed one, and I would not want one. What I had was a sensor on the living room wall that logs when the room is in use, and a small sensor on the bathroom door that logs when it opens and closes. I had put them in eight months earlier for a different reason: to know whether the flat was empty when it was supposed to be.
I opened the app on Sunday night after the cleaner rang me. The bathroom door sensor had a history. So did the living room.
The bathroom door opened and closed normally eleven times on Friday. At 02:14 on Saturday it opened and never closed again, because the half of the sensor on the door was now lying on the floor with the door.
That is the whole of it. A door that was "broken on arrival" opened and closed eleven times on the first day. At fourteen minutes past two on Saturday morning it opened for the last time, and the living room was in use twenty minutes later.
No picture of anyone. No sound. Not a single thing recorded about the guest. Just a door that closed eleven times and then stopped closing.
I sent one screenshot to the platform's resolution team on Monday morning. The log, with the times. I did not write an argument under it. There was nothing to argue.
By Monday afternoon the platform had released the deposit and approved the rest of the claim under its damage protection. The guest did not reply. My lawyer, who had already told me what a small claims case costs in time, said it was the first one she had seen settled by a door sensor.
The sensor cannot tell you who did it or how many people were there. It told me when a door stopped closing. That was the only fact that mattered, and it was enough.
Mine cost 86.45 euros for the sensor and the two door sensors, eight months before I needed them. The lock I added afterwards, because the same weekend taught me I had no idea how many keys to that flat were in the world.
The sensor and door sensors I had, and the lock I added
What proof cost, against what no proof costs
The presence sensor tells you the flat is occupied, and when. The two door sensors put a time on every open and close. 86.45 EUR against 101.70 bought separately, no monthly fee. The smart lock is offered on the next page, below its shop price.
The sensor does not count people and nothing lawful will; it tells you a room is in use and when.
"The Presence Gen 4 is fast and accurate, the interface is convenient."
"After one month of use, I can say that the LOQED lock works consistently and reliably. However, the interior handle could be improved: there should be a little more space between the handle and the main LOQED unit, and the handle itself could be longer and shaped more ergonomically to fit the hand better. The display is also rather dim, and the text is not always easy to read through the dark cover. I would appreciate alternative handle designs being offered as accessories."
The door sensor has a mixed record: several buyers report slow or unreliable updates, and support suggests a firmware update. The lock's reviewers want a fully touch-sensitive screen. The full, unfiltered reviews are on the manufacturer's store.