By Steve Roulstone
It is possibly one of the most depressing and sickening things that can happen to a property owner, to find that squatters have broken in to your property and that the law does not support this effective breaking and entering in any way and the responsibility to deal with the intrusion is thrown squarely on the shoulders of the rightful owner. These words, whilst repeated as I remember them, were used during a presentation to the Lettings Industry during a speech on the use of empty housing some ten years ago.
At last!
Now, after so many years the Government has reacted and made it an illegal offense to squat in premises without a legal right or reason to be present. What should have happened then is the unfortunate property owners who were suffering at present be given their voice and an outcry of at last should have been heard. What was heard was a cry of ‘unfair’ as housing groups and charities warned of rising homelessness.
Responsibility.
Now I must make myself clear here, I am not uncaring of the position people are in that sees them squat in the first place or the problems they now face if removed from property. My problem is that the house owner should have always been in the position of being able to rely upon the assistance of the law and it is unfair to somehow shift the responsibility back on the shoulders of the owners. This is clearly a failing of the social system in providing housing for all in the first place. This is said with full knowledge that there are some who will always remain outside of the system and be non-conformist!
Ignoring the Law.
I have always found it somewhat ironic that the Houses of Multiple Occupation laws were introduced to tackle safety in high rise City Centre properties and for ignoring them Landlords could be banned from owning property. Squatters, by the very nature of what they do, cause far more danger and would never consider such legislation in how they live, yet they are protected because their activity has always fallen under civil offense legislation and not an illegal act. To make it so at last corrects this ridiculous state of affairs.
Financial requirement.
What is so often forgotten is the financial requirement that the owner needs to fulfil and the difficulties they find themselves left in when a property is a target for squatters. In my small way, I feel I need to make a stand for the owners, and no matter how many stories there are of squatters who have maintained a property well, there are just as many of properties left in an appalling condition.
Enforcement.
Now we must hope that this blight (although mainly a City centre problem) is dealt with in short order. It is a fairly simple statement for me to make, because no matter what your feelings, we should live by the letter of the law and I believe ownership rights should be amongst those at the top of the list of laws to abide by. My hope is that the charities and groups working with those made homeless by this change of law do not fund any legal challenge through the courts. Owners, who are not all £multimillion Companies who can afford losses, deserve the law to be enforced in full.
Recent Comments