Should Squatters have rights? Poll Results/Discussion 19 November 2007 at 4:55PM in Money Saving Polls 84 replies 8.5K views

Former_MSE_Lawrence

Poll Started 19 Nov. Should squatters have rights?

Roughly speaking, if a squatter enters an unoccupied building without breaking and entering, and then secures the building like a home, they’ve a legal right to stay and it's tough to evict. Some say that as properties are in short supply as they are right now, squatting ensures empty buildings are made use of, helping all of us; others say property ownership is a right and squatting is just legal theft.

Which of the following is closest to your view?

A. Squatters right. It means unused properties are used 5% (289 votes)
B. Only in long-term unused buildings. If properties’ve been empty for years, fair enough. 14% (789 votes)
C. Temporary squatting only. Squatting's fine, if they can easily be kicked out once the building's needed again. 22% (1248 votes)
D. Diddly squat. Squatting’s ridiculous, we need to change the law to prevent it. 59% (3335 votes)

This vote has now ended, but you can still click reply to discuss below

Read More About Squatters Rights:

Squatter.org
Shelter's Squatting Info

Helonearth

I personally wouldn't have a problem with squatters, provided there was the guarantee that my property could be returned to me when I needed it, without it having been damaged.

royalsteve

Helonearth wrote: »

I personally wouldn't have a problem with squatters, provided there was the guarantee that my property could be returned to me when I needed it, without it having been damaged.

What planet are you living on? :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

captainjoe1979

I think its only truly acceptable if the building or land has been unused for several years say 5.
Land owners who hoard properties and watch their properties increase in value as part of a portfolio should not be encouraged to leave the properties unoccupied especially when you consider the current property shortages.
Society owes you nothing but I see no harm in using something that some one else has forgotten about.:D
The UK property market is controlled by a parasitic Ellette that leaches off the other 75% of the population securing large land banks and trickle feeding it onto the open market at extortionately high and artificially inflated prices.
Anything that takes that power away is a good thing.:D
Power to the people....

emmaroids

no chance, they should go out and get a job.

lazy,smelly, druggie gits.

guppy

The poll is very misleading...squatters have very few rights against the true owner of the property. In most cases a court order isn't even needed to get rid of them.

See:

http://england.shelter.org.uk/advice/advice-110.cfm

Iom-rf

Depends to be honest, if its an a house thats sat empty for years and there homeless than yes, they should be able to stay.

However if they just go around "renting" properties but not actually paying this is wrong and they should be given the boot.

chunkymunky_3

Helonearth wrote: »

I personally wouldn't have a problem with squatters, provided there was the guarantee that my property could be returned to me when I needed it, without it having been damaged.

clearly someone who has had no experience of squatters, they have no respect for the property they are "stealing". i hope you never have the problem they destroy furniture to burn, friends of mine even got there property back to find that floor boards had been taken up to burn, the toilet had been smashed so the squatters had taken to doing it in bottles and boxes, it took almost a year to get them out.

If it where up to me, it would be a case of police going in in riot gear and dragging them out!

no doubt this view will be unpopular with some people

TurkishDelight

chunkymunky wrote: »

clearly someone who has had no experience of squatters, they have no respect for the property they are "stealing". i hope you never have the problem they destroy furniture to burn, friends of mine even got there property back to find that floor boards had been taken up to burn, the toilet had been smashed so the squatters had taken to doing it in bottles and boxes, it took almost a year to get them out.

If it where up to me, it would be a case of police going in in riot gear and dragging them out!

no doubt this view will be unpopular with some people

Yes, and mainly because it is skewed. I and my parents lived in a abandoned house for a year. We done it up, kept the garden, and left peacefully. The owners btw, (the forestry commision, a largely government dependent organisation ) refused our offer to buy or rent the house and it is empty and decaying to this day. With the housing crisis how can that possibly be right?

chunkymunky_3

TurkishDelight wrote: »

Yes, and mainly because it is skewed. I and my parents lived in a abandoned house for a year. We done it up, kept the garden, and left peacefully. The owners btw, (the forestry commision, a largely government dependent organisation ) refused our offer to buy or rent the house and it is empty and decaying to this day. With the housing crisis how can that possibly be right?

oh look theres a car, nobodies driving it and the owner wont sell it to me so i must have the right to just take it

TurkishDelight

Like I said, we offered to buy or rent, and we left. Frankly, we had nowhere else to be. People who have spare houses just lying around when other people are facing homelessness are a huge problem in our very small country.