Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know what the council's policy is on squatters. The old bank is a council building that has been left unfilled for over two years. Outside is a main thoroughfare for kids going to school in the mornings. Police have been called a number of times due to disturbances but don't have the power to remove.

PXL_20231101_122030096.jpg

PXL_20231101_122139361.jpg

If I was cold, skint, homeless and vulnerable then I think any four walls and a roof would be my preferred option.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I would be keen to know if any curtain-twitching neighbours here on the forum can expand on the nature of any disturbances they might have imagined...

Presumably the squatters are reserving their sinister antisocial spectacles for those moments that the kids are journeying to and from school.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Many organisations with empty buildings waiting to be sold/redeveloped etc go for the guardianship options. Approved tenants pay a set rent inclusive of bills per room until the owners of property are ready to start work. My granddaughter and partner are in such a scheme in North London - a former care home. One room and ensuite loo and wash basin, communal kitchen and showers. Unfortunately the building has now received planning consent for flats so they will have to move. Joining the many other young couples seeking affordable London accommodation. When they were living at home - were paying £60 pw fares each. Both are NHS workers.

  • Like 1
On 16/11/2023 at 14:15, alice said:

Squatters are quite often children of the middle-class, having fun rather than people from the homeless or council waiting lists. 

This is just lazy Daily Mail regurgitation. The facts are available here from Crisis: https://www.crisis.org.uk/media/236930/squatting_a_homelessness_issue_2011.pdf

  • Like 4
  • 3 weeks later...

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

    • It's called The Restorative Place. Also, the Fired Earth storefront is under offer too, apparently. How exciting...!
    • Perhaps the view is that there are fewer people needing social housing in London, going forward, or to cap it as it is rather than increasing it. We already see the demographic changing.
    • But actually, replacing council housing, or more accurately adding to housing stock and doing so via expanding council estates was precisely what we should have been doing, financed by selling off old housing stock. As the population grows adding to housing built by councils is surely the right thing to do, and financing it through sales is a good model, it's the one commercial house builders follow for instance. In the end the issue is about having the right volumes of the appropriate sort of housing to meet national needs. Thatcher stopped that by forbidding councils to use sales revenues to increase housing stock. That was the error. 
    • Had council stock not been sold off then it wouldn't have needed replacing. Whilst I agree that the prohibition on spending revenue from sales on new council housing was a contributory factor, where, in places where building land is scarce and expensive such as London, would these replacement homes have been built. Don't mention infill land! The whole right to buy issue made me so angry when it was introduced and I'm still fuming 40 odd years later. If I could see it was just creating problems for the future, how come Thatcher didn't. I suspect though she did, was more interested in buying votes, and just didn't care about a scarcity of housing impacting the next generations.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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