Squatters Rights Axed [Archive]

Geordie Stu

31-08-12, 01:53 PM

Squatters who take up residence in property that does not belong to them now face prison or a fine following the scrapping of squatters' rights.

A new law comes in on Saturday for England and Wales making it an offence for squatters to enter or occupy an abandoned or empty property without the owner's permission.

The introduction of the offence - which will carry a maximum sentence of up to six months in jail for persistent offenders, a £5,000 fine or both - follows a Government consultation on the issue last summer.

Ministers said the move would shut the door on squatters once and for all and help protect homeowners.

I personally agree been far too long that Squatters take up residence in unoccupied property & then the Landlord has the expense trying to evict them. It's difficult to prove that they have entered illegally "Breaking & Entering".

They then avoid paying rent, property tax, fuel bills...etc.

Kevinb

31-08-12, 01:56 PM

£5000 fine. They will have time to save up if they aren't paying rent, council tax, etc..

Ideal solution. Gun to the head. Pull trigger. Job done. Only cost is the bullet.

Dan505

31-08-12, 03:10 PM

finally some sense at last....squatters still end up with what they want tho....a place to stay paid for at our expense, even if it is only a 6 x 4 box

A13X4ND7A

31-08-12, 03:36 PM

Saw this on the news this morning.

I think that squatters shouldn't have any rights in taking up residence in a property that does not belong to them but I do wonder how they would possibly pay any fine (especially if they are homeless/jobless etc) and aren't our prisons over crowded as it is?

Had to laugh when some women was defending squatters saying "oh but these buildings are abandoned anyway"... just because something isn't in use by whoever owns it doesn't mean anyone else should be able to do what they like with it... if they want it, go work and buy themselves a derelict building.

Wes

31-08-12, 04:36 PM

Good sense prevails at last, for once :)

redken1

31-08-12, 05:10 PM

Worth noting that the civil law was already in place to remove squatters. By changing it to a criminal offence it transfers the financial burden of removal from the property owner on to the taxpayer.

The vast majority of squatters are homeless and have taken up residence in empty buildings in our cities, of which many are owned by wealthy business men/women sitting on an investment.

The cost of evicting everyone who currently lives in a squat could reach £790m if they instead started claiming housing benefits, according to a report commissioned by Squatters Action for Secure Housing (Squash).

Of course, this figure doesn’t take in to account the legal cost of removal to the taxpayer and subsequent hotel bill at HMPs for those squatters who decide that 3 hot meals a day is a favourable option to sleeping on the streets.

And with the number of homeless people in England alone having reached 50,000 - up 14% since 2010-11 and 26% since 2009-10 - it might well be the case that squats and other temporary accommodation help disguise the true extent of the problem, according to Leslie Morphy, chief executive of homeless charity Crisis.
"These figures are just the tip of the iceberg," she says.

Mitch9128

31-08-12, 05:23 PM

Squatters 'rights', note the word 'rights'. Just another erosion of rights, besides the bankers and wealthy tories don't want dirty homeless people in one of their portfolio.

Swanny

31-08-12, 07:03 PM

I don't see this as being a good thing. I wonder what happens as this recession deepens and more people find themselves homeless??
I'm sure some of you here actually believe the government is working for your best interests ;D

redken1

31-08-12, 08:04 PM

And some people still think the Paralympics’ main sponsor really cares about the disabled.

Personally, I don’t think they give ‘ATOS’

:-?

voodoo

31-08-12, 09:23 PM

they seem to have forgotten about (ignored) those who don't vacate after their rental contract expires though. they've left that one squarely at the foot of the landlords

redken1

01-09-12, 08:07 PM

We are the first to complain that there are not enough police officers on the beat.

This new legislation will tie up even more officers at a time when police budgets are facing a 20 per cent reduction.

Col

03-09-12, 01:26 AM

::) awww gawd more twaddle--fine them with no money is a feckin joke and/or bung 'em in nick is a waste of our money too ?

Why these places empty anyway ?

Think the money grabbing councils should know what's vacant and impose double/treble the charge whatever they call it now to owners until they do something with the building. This would maybe 'assist' getting somat done about these empty buildings --

-or let the squat lot stay there :)

I would prefer plod deal with gun, gang and drug crime rather than kickin the arse of some homeless down and out...fairynuff if owner wants to do something to their property tho :)

Swanny

03-09-12, 09:31 AM

Make sure you keep up with the mortgage payments or the banks will have you locked up. That's what this is really about. We all know the banks are in change ....

Col

03-09-12, 10:43 AM

errrrr Swanny 'cough' d'ya mean 'charge' :-?

Swanny

03-09-12, 10:46 AM

Hehe yea I think I do :D

Col

03-09-12, 10:59 AM

'Happy to help' 8-)

'Course they could be 'in change' as in acting like responsible businesses instead of losing £billions on trying to make a quick buck and fiddling the systems then expecting 'joe taxpayer' aka 'the mugs' to bail 'em out and then still dole out mega bonus payments to useless traders/dealers ;D

Swanny

03-09-12, 11:02 AM

You're just being silly now ;D

Col

03-09-12, 11:03 AM

;D I know---spank me :D

Swanny

06-09-12, 09:31 AM

http://www.davidicke.com/images/stories/Sept20120/314143_381399241929610_1666325080_n.jpg

Kevinb

06-09-12, 01:05 PM

Mitch9128

06-09-12, 05:23 PM

http://www.davidicke.com/images/stories/Sept20120/314143_381399241929610_1666325080_n.jpg

Having more than one home if you have paid for it isn't a crime. Same as having one or more cars or motorbikes which I'm sure people on this forum have.
Wouldn't you be upset if someone just came up and sat on or got in your property?

You do know the Camerons have been squirreling money away in offshore tax havens for years? The same as the comedians he would have us scorn, so by avoiding tax, he has saved money, that otherwise would have gone into the economy, therefore ripping us off, therefore stealing from us, as he would have us believe. http://robertleather.wordpress.com/2012/06/21/wonder-if-david-cameron-pm-thinks-his-fathers-tax-arrangments-are-morally-wrong/

Snowy

06-09-12, 05:26 PM

There is a huge legal difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion.

redken1

06-09-12, 08:50 PM

Of course you are right Graeme – evasion is illegal under current legislation and avoidance is not. Just because something is legally ok doesn’t mean to say that it is not morally wrong. Human torture is still legal in many states.

Like millions of ordinary workers, I earn a modest wage of which excluding NI contributions, 20% tax is deducted at source. In contrast, thousands of the richest UK residents who can afford good accountants are members of off-shore tax avoidance schemes, paying as little as 1% tax on there earnings.

Lord Ashcroft, the biggest financial contributor to PM Cameron’s Tories since the party was formed, has avoided paying millions in tax. This does not surprise me and is par for the course. But surely even the most fanatical right-wing of the party must be embarrassed at Cameron’s claim that, “We are all in this together?” I wonder why he has never repeated those words. :-?

Snowy

06-09-12, 09:00 PM

I completely agree Ken and the law makers should put it right. We all try and avoid paying tax though and while its legal and as you say, morally wrong, its not the problem of the individuals its a problem with the law.

redken1

06-09-12, 09:12 PM

We will have to agree to disagree on that one Graeme – until the law is change (a big if) I’m delighted that the greedy wealthy individuals are named and shamed.

If they are not prepared to pay their fair share in tax, why should they have the right to a lavish lifestyle at our expense and enjoy all the benefits the state provides?

They won’t be calling their wealthy accountants when their mansions get robbed, they will ring 999.

Snowy

06-09-12, 09:23 PM

I just don't see value, other than political advantage, to place blame on individuals whoever they are if they haven't broken the law. You need to change the law to make it fair. If its wrong to break the law and also wrong to not break the law, then we just end up at confused.com.

redken1

06-09-12, 09:34 PM

Graeme, political advantage? I'll slag em whatever party they belong to. With respect if you can't see what message this sends out and why it angers so many hard-pressed ordinary tax-payers then so be it.

If the present administration showed the same political will on tax avoidance as they have in cutting public services, It would no longer be an issue.

Snowy

06-09-12, 09:38 PM

I'm not disagreeing with you Ken in terms of what the end result should be, I just don't think shouting about it will make any changes to the ways of the world - it needs a change in the law to make it happen.

redken1

06-09-12, 09:42 PM

That's democracy - if we make enough noise we just might bring about change. Who do the lawmakers represent? (Or should anyway)

I'd rather sit by my PC and enjoy an engaging chat with you than sit through the soaps on TV. 8-)

You aint been to the H&C for a while?

Snowy

06-09-12, 09:45 PM

That's democracy - if we make enough noise we just might bring about change. Who do the lawmakers represent? (Or should anyway)

Exactly, at the end of the day its the democratically elected who makes the law.

redken1

06-09-12, 09:47 PM

Modified that last post Graeme

Snowy

06-09-12, 09:54 PM

Modified that last post Graeme

Ha ha...just too quick for you ;D

Nope, not been to the H&C for a few weeks... too much work on the house still to do and not been 100% lately. Maybe next week :)

redken1

06-09-12, 09:58 PM

Sorry to hear that, whatever it is I hope you get back to 100 per cent soon.

Ps, don't take much to out pace my two finger typing. Lol ;D

Swanny

06-09-12, 11:03 PM

There was me thinking that it was the greedy rich people that make the laws :-/

Snowy

07-09-12, 11:12 AM

Mitch9128

07-09-12, 11:37 AM

There is a huge legal difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion.

Of course, however Cameron was calling it morally wrong of that 'comedian', yet his own family is guilty of it.

redken1

07-09-12, 09:50 PM

There was me thinking that it was the greedy rich people that make the laws :-/

Its the greedy rich people that, collectively as a nation, we vote into power that make the laws. I'm not saying its right, wrong, fair or unjust, but its our elected parliament that decides what's law and what is'nt and we put them there to be able to do it.

Most ordinary folk don’t have rich donors to pay their electoral deposits or for their campaigns. That’s why the electorate is faced with Hobson’s choice at the ballot box.

Wealthy right-wing blue Tories, wealthy right-wing red Tories or wealthy right-wing yellow (right colour) poodles (oops, I meant Lib-dems).

::) ::) ::) ;D