Squatting to become a criminal offence.... Hurrah!

[Frankito]

So do we think it will happen or will the brown rice and sandles brigade find some other way round what IS a criminal activity? Ffs already.....

I challenge any squatter out there to convince me that they should ever have rights to steal someone else's home...

>:D<

[DJKillaQueen]

Squatters don't steal a gome they illegally 'occupy' it...there's a clear legal difference.

My view is that no home owner should have to go through the current prolonged and expensive process of evicting people who are illegally occuping a home. It should be possible to evict immediately.

However I would also say that there is an equally valid argument to be be had about proerties that lie empty for years when there is such a dire shortage of affordable accomodation (esp in London). Don't know what the answer there is but many properties that do become illegally occupied are in this catagory.

[Otta]

What DJKQ said.

[Otta]

Doesn't the very mention of the word "squat" raise memories of eating pop tarts at 4am with blokes called things like Pickles, who are surrounded in myth.

Happy Daze

[Loz]

Squatting should be criminalised. Full stop. Easy. No brainer, really.

The long term empty buildings issue is a bit harder, but one I have some sympathy for. But whatever the solution is, it must be controlled by councils. Councils should be able to identify long-term empty buildings and through a legal process be granted a lease to use by the court. This process would involve an attempt to contact the owner.

But what do you do with the building then? Let's take an example - the old Thai Pavillion on Melbourne Grove, closed now for about 10 years. Who is going to take on the cost of turning into somewhere habitable? And, when returned to the owner, make good the changes, as it supposed to be a restaurant.

The only other way would be some sort of compulsory purchase scheme. But that takes money as well.

[computedshorty]

My parants died I had to sell the family house. I was not living there, squatters moved in, and caused damage to such an extent that I had to get them removed, the value was at that time for houses adjasent value of ?110,000, I had to sell at ?70.000. Split by !2 My share was ?3.333.00

This is a 12 roomed house, a one bedroom flat in the house is on the market for ?229,950, If it had not been for the squatters I would be a Millionair now.

[DJKillaQueen]

It is a multi-pronged issue. There are different kinds of squatters too. Some squatters can afford to pay rent but just choose not to. I think it is also reasonable to make squatters liable for the cost of repairing any damage they cause (whether they have the means to pay or not).

Clearly home-owners have to be able to remove squatters as soon as they are discovered (that is only fair) and I'm guessing that making it a criminal offence is purely a means to give Police and Bailiffs the powers to quickly get a warrant for forced removal. So that makes sense.

Councils already do have some powers to force action on property owners that allow their properties to fall into a state of disrepair. I think if councils were to be allowed to requisition empty properties then there would have to be some agreement on maintenance and so on. Again the sensible thing to me would be to work under some kind of complsary lease scheme, that would guarantee the owner that the property wuld be maintained and returned in good order but that would also act as an incentive to force property owners to do something with their properties rather than leaving them empty for years on end and risking a complusary lease.

[ianr]

>So do we think it will happen or will the brown rice and sandles brigade find some other way round

>what IS a criminal activity?

I wear sandals and eat brown rice. What are my crimes?

[ianr]

> Squatters don't steal a gome they illegally 'occupy' it...there's a clear legal difference.

It can come conceptually very close.

Take the example we talked about here year or two ago, that of a large house bought by developers for conversion into flats, but then squatted. The squatters gained free accomodation. The developers, for each additional dead week in which they could do no work on it, suffered losses in the shape of any interest payments, other lost opportunities for investment, and absence of any rental or sales income. The squatters' gain was effectively the developers' irrecoverable, and most probably disproportionately greater, loss.

[Brendan]

It seems a bit harsh for it to be a criminal offence. I know it isn?t very pleasant and we?d all prefer it not to happen but everyone gets caught short once in a while.

[DJKillaQueen]

It's not the same thing though ian. Someone can crash into your car and drive off...the car may even be irrepairable but the hit and run driver hasn't stolen it. A house can never 'disappear', never to be seen again (unless it's demolished). It can be damaged, it can be vandalised, it can be burgled, and it can be illegally occupied, but stolen? no.

Squatters are simply illegal tenants and even legal tenants paying rent, damage property, and sometimes stop paying the rent too - landlords factor for this into the maintenance costs of renting property and account for it in rent levels accordingly.

Another interesting point to make is that it takes around eight weeks for a landlord to evict a sitting tenant under contract for non payment of rent (via legal due process). A squatter can be removed within four-six weeks in most cases as the law currently stands (if the landlord acts quickly enough).

[DaveR]

"Squatters are simply illegal tenants"

No they're not. A tenant has a right of occupation either granted by someone with a superior right or arising by operation of law. Squatters are trespassers, and because the UK common law never developed an offence of criminal trespass squatting has never been a crime in itself. Squatting is also conceptually almost indistinguishable from theft in that it involves the deliberate taking of a valuable property right. Theft of land is specifically carved out of the statutory offence because it would otherwise be caught by the basic defintion. I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be included where there is deliberate unlawful occupation of property.

[Brendan]

Isn?t one of the requirements for theft that there is intention to permanently deprive the victim of their property?

If so how would you prove that a squatter?s intention was to permanently deprive the owner?

[red devil]

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

...Squatters are trespassers, and because the UK

> common law never developed an offence of criminal

> trespass squatting has never been a crime in

> itself.

Squatting is illegal in Scotland...

[DaveR]

"Isn?t one of the requirements for theft that there is intention to permanently deprive the victim of their property?

If so how would you prove that a squatter?s intention was to permanently deprive the owner?"

Under UK law the 'property' is not the physical property but the rights associated with it. The right to occupy a property for a term (either as a tenant or as a licensee) is a valuable right, whether that term is 99 years, a month, or even a day. Each day that a sqatter occupies a house the lawful owner is deprived of the ability to exercise the right of occupation for that day for themselves, or to grant it to another. That deprivation is permanent - the value of the right is lost - and for as long as the squatter is in occupation there is an intention to continually deprive the owner of that property which is renewed each day.

That's how I'd argue it, anyway.

[Frankito]

I would love to hear how those folks who don't think squatting is a problem wouldfeelif they were to cone home from work tonight to find me locked inside their home with no intention of leaving, reclining on the sofa feeding myself Doritos...

>:D<

[tog_in_sox]

Squatting should be a crime for the sake of the immediate repossession by the rightful owner - no arguments there. Convicted squatters will be required to compensate the owner from any income they attain from subsequent work or benefits, these will be deducted at source after tax. The amount will be at least the reparation cost but the term will be determined by the level of income. Should the owner('s estate) cease then money will instead be paid to the council for the remaining time.

[Puts his Red Hunter Jackboots on] Ahem...

(Pending) Convicted squatters who hold down jobs should be placed in temporary housing like those units made from shipping containers, their rent should be deducted at source after tax, they should be placed on probation for up to 1 year during which time they must find their own rented accommodation or participate in a renovation scheme as described below.

Willing, out of work squatters and probation breakers/expirees should be shifted to derelict buildings where they will be able to claim limited benefits provided they work at renovating the property at least 3 full days a week. They will otherwise have to be actively seeking employment or skilling up in the trades required to renovate. They will have no entitlement to stay once the work is complete unless they are in gainful employment in which case the landlord is encouraged to offer them first refusal on half of the units in any multi-occupancy dwellings. Those willing to use and share their new skills can be enlisted into subsequent schemes as forepersons (on enhanced wages). First and remaining units will be for social housing.

Those exempted from hard physical labour by medical exemption (properly verified) will be able to participate as planners, quartermasters, caterers and other ancilliary roles on sites.

Those in need of counseling and help to overcome substance-abuse, psychiatric or mental health issues, etc will also be assisted whilst participating in a workfare agreement where possible.

Local community groups will be in charge of the integration of the renovated properties into the wider community.

Landlords and owners of buildings that fall into disuse and disrepair should be subject to compulsory occupancy arrangements by the local council after one year since last occupancy lasting 12 months or more (short lets do not stop the clock). These will be brought back into use (see above and by other workfare or renovate to rent schemes for law-abiding citizens looking for better accommodation as well as commercial regeneration efforts). The landlords will be subject to at least a decade of capped rental rates ensuring that those in residence will be guaranteed rents 60% of the area mode rent value as the principal disincentive from exploiting the compulsory occupancy scheme. For each additional property in their portfolio that they also neglect the councils will be able to enact compulsory temporary possession for 10 years where the landlords will receive no more than 20% of the area mode rent, the remaining 40% will return to council housing budget. Absentee landlords will lose all rights at the end of the 10 years and rental income will go to the councils whilst they are absent. Councils will acquire ownership after 10 years and must use the property for housing unless there is a surplus of social housing capacity.

After 10 years, those landlords retaining possession will be allowed to retain all rental income which will be allowed to rise no more than 5% pa as it returns to the market rate.

[Here's my favourite bit...]

Those who refuse to participate and aren't sectionable will be moved to containment camps (Yay!) conveniently situated by sea cliffs where they will have to make their own shelter and grow their own food. They will receive minimal benefits which they will accrue whilst interred and can only gain access to in order to trade externally for resources and supplies. Building and fuel materials will be provided from reclamation and reconstitution processes from landfill. Camps would be provided with energy generators capable of utilising the waste bought in and generated by the camp.

[sTAMP! STAMP! STAMP! STAMP!]

Feel better now, another dull day made up for ;)

[Frankito]

I not not who you are Togie but should you be running for local elections any time soon, I will personally deliver all your leaflets on a home-made skateboard.

*turns dog upside down, attaches wheels and zooms off down Forest Hill rd*

[Applespider]

Can't wait to tell my personal trainer... do you think they could add lunges to the offences too? ;-)

[new mother]

Agreed.

[Frankito]

Only if the offender was wearing tie dye at the time and lounging from inside your house....