Come on people. Let the newbie play--especially when he's right. In the first post subway accurately gave the California law for premesis liability. True, he didn't apply the facts to the law, but that's because he's new.
As to some other things:
I don't think there is any negligence on the part of the OP here. One does not have a duty to hide valuables in a locked vehicle that I'm aware of. Nor does he have a duty to make sure valuables are absent from the vehicle, displayed or not. (Absent specific contractual or implied contractual issues not in our facts.) Also, California is a comparative negligence state, not a contributory negligence one.
Then OP offered an ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE by leaving the CDs in open view...
No. This is a wholly inaccurate statement of law for our facts. Attractive nuisance simply does not apply here. In the first instance, the people who are intended to be protected are not the ones hurt here and two, the none of the elements of it are here in any way.
Our OP has known for at least "a few weeks" that the gate was not functioning...
Maybe an assumption of the risk. Maybe. I don't think the element of the specific known danger knowingly dismissed is here, but, maybe.
I would have said the landlord didn't have a duty under the law because we don't have the facts of the history of a specific crime which may give rise to a duty. However, we may have a contractual duty with:
As to the gated parking being advertised as a security feature, the manager actually made the comment to me before moving in that "there is gated parking, so your car won't get broken into or stolen or anything"...
Now, proof is going to be hard. Only a manager who wants to be out of a job will admit he said this and I don't think the OP will be able to prove it. But, if he did, I think this is an explicit promise. We could argue the point in court, but if I could prove it up I'd certainly take it to court.
Manager stating an opinion is just that.....a small ipod should have been on YOU or in YOUR APARTMENT
No. A *manager* is the agent of the landlord. Even if his actual authority was limited in some way, absent some specific clause in the rental agreement a manager has apparent authority to speak for the landlord. It's not just an opinion.
Finally, I know of no case where a person has a legal duty to remove valuables from a locked vehicle or they lose the rights to sue for their loss. Would a reasonable person leave an IPOD in their car? If not, the world is full of unreasonable people. Legally unreasonable.