to think that squatting in abandoned buildings is a good idea?

[BoojaBooja]

I used to live in a London borough where there seemed to be a lot of empty buildings. I'd lived there for years and would see buildings left to go to ruin through neglect. Two buildings became occupied by squatters (one was an old house and one was an ex-Post Office). They became lived in. The house suddenly had a garden at the front and was well kept.

On the bus one day I saw a group of people outside of the house with loads of things on the pavement, including a TV and other bits of furniture. On the way back, the people were gone and the windows were all boarded up. Someone had evicted them. Talking to a friend who worked at the council, it turned out that the house was owned by the council and they were squatters. Two years later (I then moved so don't know if this is still the case) the building was still empty, boarded up and covered in graffiti.

As far as I know, the squatters in the Post Office are still there. They'd certainly improved the look of the place, and were apparently taking care of it.

So, AIBU is thinking that a safe, empty building should be occupied if nobody else is living in there. When there are so many people living on the streets, isn't this a good thing?

Isn't the squatting law there to prevent rich speculators with cash to burn from buying up cheap buildings and sitting on them (doing nothing, leaving them vacant) til the property values go up so they can flip it and make a profit? By allowing squatters in those buildings, it means that owners will be less likely to buy them and leave them empty for years on end, essentially abandoned.

Definitely agree the law should better protect those who are selling a house and it's empty for a brief period. The squatters who check on Rightmove to find a temporarily empty house to turn into a shithole should be arrested for trespassing immediately.

It's like travellers isn't it.

Park on a bit of land/ squat in a disused building and look after it, join in the local community and have a social conscience = fine

park on a bit of land/ squat in a disused building and act like an entitled arsehole = not fine.

I think we all know the more common type, sadly.

Yabu.

The squatting law is about to be changed so it is illegal, I believe it already is in scotland. The damage they cause to the houses they squat in is unbelievable.

they are a drain on society with the tax payer picking up the bill once again!

There is no 'squatting law'. Squatters do not have any rights at all.

In order to regain possession of any building an owner/landlord must (unless suqatters have caused damage) issue procession proceedings, whether the occupier is a tenant/licensee/squatter. That does not confer rights on the squatter.

The rules state that there should be five clear days between issue/service of the possession papers on the squatters and the first hearing - in practice this means that they get, at least, an extra week in the property. IMO immediate possession orders are almost always made at the first hearing.

A bailiff must evict. This takes anywhere from a few days (rare) to several weeks (most commonly 2 weeks).

Most squatters, even professional ones, leave squatted properties severely damaged IMO.

You wouldn't be happy if someone took your car without your consent because you were using it, so why is a vacant (note VACANT - not abandoned) property any different? There are very very few properties that are 'abandoned' and you can never guess the circumstances of the owners as to why a building is left unoccupied.

yesmaam that's not true, there is such a thing as squatters rights, which gives them the right to squat in a property as long as the squatters living there did not break into the property.. If they had no rights then owners and councils could use the police to get them out immediately, however at the moment it is a civil case.

The government are in the process of changing the law so that squatters have no rights which will then permit the police to remove them. Currently an eviction process has to take place, this will be abolished.

iceandsliceplease, your story sounds awful. It must have been so upsetting. I've seen similar in the news when people return from visiting sick relatives or come back from their holidays.

I do wonder why more people don't just take the law into their own hands with these things though. I mean, whilst bills are being run up and damage is going on to a house, what's to stop people just getting turfed out? I mean literally. Hire bodyguards and literally turf them out. Warn the police if you have ti. Wouldn't it be cheaper and quicker than taking them to court and so on?

My mind boggles at the idea that you can PROVE you own a property with legal documentation, etc. but can't physically get rid of people inside.

What could the Police do to stop you? I'm sure there's something but I do wonder what they could charge you with? Possibly assult? Would that even fly if you were a 40 year old mum of two wanting to get back into your own home (for example)? What crime would you actually get convicted of?

I'm sure that there will be new laws coming into force giving squatters far less rights....and rightly so.

Have heard of too many cases where owners of properties have gone on holiday and returned to find their home occupied and them not being able to get into their own home....or evict those who've taken over.

After months of proceedings, when the rightful owners manage to take ownership again they often find the place left in a completely state of squalor and with graffiti all over the walls.

It's devastating...and shouldn't be allowed to happen (whatever the circumstances).

Councils should try very hard to ensure that their homes are quickly filled once vacated and not left to squatters who don't pay any bills, council tax or rent.

Stop blithering about squatters rights if your only source of knowledge is the Daily Mail. There aren't any, apart from adverse possession law which is an entirely different thing.

Squatters' Rights
If an occupier has no ownership documents, no lease or tenancy agreement, no record of having paid rent to a landlord, and no other evidence of occupancy rights exist, then the occupier is a squatter.
It is perhaps of no consolation to landlords that squatters often believe they have a perfect right to occupy when properties are left vacant, especially for long periods.
Even so, the squatter has rights. Squatters cannot be legally evicted from premises without a court possession order, unless they leave voluntarily or the owner secures peacable re-entry.

siamo is that at me??

siamo is that at me??

"So a beautiful old building is falling down..."

There was a rather attractive and historic mill building in our town until about a month ago. It was standing empty so squatters were known to have moved in.

Then they managed to set fire to it. The damage was so great that after the fire was put out there was no option but to demolish what was left. There is still a rather sad pile of rubble waiting to be cleared away.

Good work squatters!

buildings shouldnt be left empty when there is so much homelessness.

The owners of the building can't 'turf out' the squatters as they have more rights than the owner.
Personaly I would get some friends to break into my OWN house and chuck them out by force.
But of course they would go running to the police saying that they were attacked because they had taken over someone's house.
The police would ignore that and arrest the owner because of the manhandling.
Can't believe people have to pay thousands and even lose all their savings, just because they can't get people like this out .

We would have to sell our house to raise the funds to reclaim some land my dh owns and even then there is no guarantee it would go in our favour - they have more rights than we do it seems! It's not fair and makes me extremely cross.

Dreamingbohemian

Your story sounds wonderful and I wish there were more like 'your' squatters but unfortunately they are most definitely in the minority........

About a mile from me some pikeys (I am using that word deliberately and you will see why) set up camp on some open ground. Not common land or anything like that, just a sort of wide grass verge. Five vans and caravans, about 15 or so men, women and children.

Within 2 days the area was trashed, rubbish and mess everywhere, hedges used as toilets (and not just wee), several fences 'vanished' and used as firewood, two cottages (weekend ones owned by English people - we call them 'emmetts') broken to and vandalised but worst of all was the abuse and intimidation for anyone who dared to walk past. The patch of ground is a direct route to our primary school so we everyone had to make a detour or risk being sworn at or forced to move aside.

The police were called lots of times but of course, when they arrived the pikeys were either very busy or knew nothing about anything. Eventually a crowd of the local men went out at 3 in the morning and beat them up, forced them to pack up and leave. One of their caravans was so badly smashed up they had to leave it there. It was all over by 7am.

Cornwall Council spent a week clearing up the site and I heard from one of the emmetts that it cost her £15,000 in repairs and replacing stolen furniture.

I don't know what to think about it all. On the one hand I accept some people want a travelling lifestyle and should be free to do so but the of that lot was absulotely awful and I don't blame our men for doing what they did. It would be easier if the law was not so difficult in these cases.

I don't know if they call it theft to take over a building that doesn't belong to you for your own use, but it's theft in the everyday sense. If you want a home get a fucking job and rent one.

Do you use your TV every day? if not I will take it and you can ask for it back if you need it again. It is immoral and saying the person was 'hardly using it' is no excuse and no kind of example to set kids.

Riven, it isn't just empty buildings...

www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23927319-family-suffers-weeks-of-hell-as-squatters-take-over-pound-1m-home.do

A homeowner told today how his family has endured more than a month of "hell" after squatters occupied their £1 million house.

Father-of-two John Hamilton-Brown has been negotiating with the 12-strong group through the letterbox because they refuse to speak to him face-to-face.

He said his fight to evict them from the Archway property has costs thousands of pounds. It emerged today that they occupied it despite it having no power or water, and being deemed "unsafe" by the owner while renovations were carried out ready for his family to move in.

of course i expect media reports to be inaccurate in soem of their reporting, but how can you get around that poor man's situation? it's silly!

yabu because they don't stick to empty buildings, and why should they get a free home.

iceandsliceplease

Your story sounds awful and the exact reason why I do not condone it.

For those who do condone how would you feel if you had to leave your home for a year or so to care for a disabled or dying relative and came back to find you no longer could access your own home as squatters had moved in?

I agree that abandoned buildings are a waste of precious resources and make an area look neglected.

I saw a good scheme whereby the owners of empty buildings could protect their buildings. The scheme would find low-earners such as nurses, and would rent parts of the building to them for a peppercorn rent. The tenants act as a security presence, preventing vandalism and squatters, and look after the building.

Cant remember the name of it now, but such a great idea.

Also imagine if you got home one day after a few weeks away to find this notice on your door that squatters can legally put up:

LEGAL WARNING
Section 6 Criminal Law Act 1977
As amended by Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

TAKE NOTICE
THAT we live in this property, it is our home and we intend to stay here.

THAT at all times there is at least one person in this property.

THAT any entry or attempt to enter into this property without our permission is a criminal offence as any one of us who is in physical possession is opposed to entry without our permission.

THAT if you attempt to enter by violence or by threatening violence we will prosecute you. You may receive a sentence of up to six months imprisonment and/or a fine of up to £5,000.

THAT if you want to get us out you will have to issue a claim in the County Court or in the High Court, or produce to us a written statement or certificate in terms of S.12A Criminal Law Act, 1977 (as inserted by Criminal Justice and Public Order Act, 1994).

THAT it is an offence under S.12A (8) Criminal Law Act 1977 (as amended) to knowingly make a false statement to obtain a written statement for the purposes of S. 12A. A person guilty of such an offence may receive a sentence of up to six months imprisonment and/or a fine of up to £5,000.

Signed

The Occupiers

N.B. Signing this Legal warning is optional. It is equally valid whether or not it is signed.

My problem with squatters is that they are very rarely the neediest in society. All the years I lived in London I kept meeting squatters who'd pop home at weekends to mater and pater's huge pile in the Cotswolds.
The average squatter in the south east is a middle-class trustafarian playing at being poor.
But I do think the number of unoccupied properties we have is a disgrace. Councils need new powers for complusory purchases. I don't want squatters next door but neither do I want a collapsing abandoned property.

cocoflower that was the notice the squatters put up on the front door of my parents house. It's quite something to realise that the owner of the property can't enter their own house without breaking the law.