Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I miss squats, when I were young and a student they were everywhere in London and part of the culture. But much of that was becuase Local Authorities (and ironically mainly Labour ones) were just leaving their housing stock empty and rotting. Squatting then largely felt resonable rather than 'stealing' private property.

Sorry, long overdue. I never understood how you could have such a bizarre concept in the first place. I mean, we don't say, "ooh - an unlocked car. I think I'll drive it around until the real owner gets a court order to make me give it back."


This will clear a significant part of the squatter problem - the middle class 'anarchist' - away in a stroke. I mean - look at the squatter the BBC found to interview. She hardly looks like she has been begging in the streets, does she?


For those that *really* need shelter, well there are enough loopholes (i.e. commercial buildings) that they will make do.

"Housing minister Grant Shapps said: "For too long, hardworking people have faced long legal battles to get their homes back from squatters, and repair bills reaching into the thousands when they finally leave.


"No longer will there be so-called squatters' rights. Instead, from next week, we're tipping the scales of justice back in favour of the homeowner and making the law crystal clear: entering a property with the intention of squatting will be a criminal offence."


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19429936


It would appear so

Loz Wrote:

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

> Sorry, long overdue. I never understood how you

> could have such a bizarre concept in the first

> place. I mean, we don't say, "ooh - an unlocked

> car. I think I'll drive it around until the real

> owner gets a court order to make me give it

> back."

>

> This will clear a significant part of the squatter

> problem - the middle class 'anarchist' - away in a

> stroke. I mean - look at the squatter the BBC

> found to interview. She hardly looks like she has

> been begging in the streets, does she?

>

> For those that *really* need shelter, well there

> are enough loopholes (i.e. commercial buildings)

> that they will make do.



Humans will always find way to make do wont they. Like cockroaches, the poor have an unnerving habit of self preservation

I am glad there is some sort of law to, protect members of the public who go on holiday and come back to find you have squatters that is very distressing for the person involved and then have to go through the long process of having them evicted. It was not too long ago this happen to someone on this forum so yes in that particular case yes. In this economic climate there will be more homeless people who use derelict buildings as a form of shelter this should be an issue for the government to look into rather than relying on Charities like Shelter.


I was listen to LBC last night on this topic and a woman rang up and called all squatters scum I was a bit annoyed that she made such a blanket statement people squat for all sorts of reason not just because they are lazy and cannot be bothered to work. It very easy to take the moral high ground when you are not in want.

???? Wrote:

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

> I miss squats, when I were young and a student

> they were everywhere in London and part of the

> culture. But much of that was becuase Local

> Authorities (and ironically mainly Labour ones)

> were just leaving their housing stock empty and

> rotting. Squatting then largely felt resonable

> rather than 'stealing' private property.


That's why we love you quids. Your were soo "edgy", but now just a mortgage man like the rest of us. (Well you might not have a mortgage but you know what I mean)

  • 2 weeks later...

The Minkey Wrote:

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

> Why on earth does it exclude tenants overstaying a

> lease I wonder?


Squatters aren't people who have overstayed a lease. If you have/had a contract then you are not a squatter. A squatter (or an adverse possessor in legal terms) is not a tenant and cannot be on or in the property with permission.


I think this is an interesting development in the law and will have to be tested. For individuals who are living in property where the owner died years ago or where there is no registered owner what is the rationale for kicking them out or criminalising them?


I think it would have been better for the government to legislate to speed up the process of legally evicting squatters rather than making residential squatting illegal.


Charlie

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • was the price not displayed on the menu?
    • It has come to this author’s attention that the world of 4+ admissions — that most enigmatic of educational rites — continues to bewilder even the most composed of parents. Fear not. For in a former life, I was not merely a humble observer, but a seasoned educator of over twenty years, and Head of Pre-Prep for a distinguished dozen. Now, with quill exchanged for touchscreen, I have taken to that most modern of salons — Instagram — to dispense guidance, answer frequently whispered questions, and illuminate the shadowy corners of school selection with clarity and calm. Each post bears my signature twist: a blend of insight, levity, and the occasional raised eyebrow. Should you find yourself adrift in the sea of admissions, I suggest you peruse my latest dispatch. It may well be the lifeline you seek. The Delicate Dilemma of the Summer-born 4+ Scholars Yours in solidarity and scholastic savvy, Lord Pencilton  🎩✏️
    • Perhaps Gooseygreeny was not familiar with the wildlife before Gala was imposed on the park, since when its value to wildlife has deteriorated. The Park had never been disturbed before, as the council had respected it as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation, so only the Common was licensed by them as a site for events. The first time Gala held their event, there was a tree with woodpeckers nesting in it right in the middle of the main field they used and thrushes, blackbirds and great tits nesting within the shrubs and trees immediately surrounding the field. The woodpeckers were thriving on ants from the anthills in the grass. To those of us who used to enjoy watching the wildlife, it was very obviously a Site of Importance for a variety of birds. Despite being accessed by the public and their dogs, it had been relatively undisturbed,  which was one of the main reasons why it was so special and why I have been opposed to the Gala festival being held during the bird nesting season.
    • So dangerous!    Can you be more specific about the road this was in and when you report it?  Maybe there’s some CCTV footage available
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...