UKForge: Man Leaves For Vacation, Returns To Find 15 Weird Flatmates

Yeah, it's okay to squat in some circumstances. And right that "ownership" shouldn't be a defense in some.

Not sure about this case. The facts don't seem to be clear.

A really fat woman or man squatting on your face is about the only example That could possibly be "okay."

There is so much fishy here.

Why aren't they in student housing if they are in college?

If there is no water or electricity, how is it they are doing dishes in the bathroom, using the sauna, watching the DVDs? In fact, there IS electricity because on top of the dvd player sits an open laptop which is obviously on and you can see it's plugged into the wall, not on battery.

They had no money but had no problem affording changing the locks.

Where's the dust? How are they eating with no money and no electricity? They look incredibly clean and hair looks clean for having no water.

In fact, that poor man is being forced to pay their bills while they are squatting.

I don't get it. Adverse possession can't even happen until they have squatted 12 years so why is this being allowed to continue? It's easy to find out...contact the decorators and see if they had a job there that was cancelled. Contact locksmiths and find out when the locks were changed. Poll the whole neighborhood instead of taking their word a neighbor said it was empty for two years. Look at the DVD collection...are any of them less than 2 years old?

They are lying sacks. I also love the arrogant "if I get a job I'll pay rent like a normal person" Uhh...you were never offered a place to rent and no one should be forced to support a bunch of strangers in their house.

^ Suggesting it is being allowed to continue is disingenuous since it will be stopped by whatever judge hears the case.

The question is whether or not the eviction can occur more quickly which, in my view, can only happen if the offence is criminalised.

They aren't citizens of England...does that alter it any? Even non-citizens can merrily squat on the citizen's dime?

Our pathetic laws regarding "squatters rights" have attracted scumbags from all over Europe to take advantage and steal people's homes. These cocksuckers will force entry into another person's home and claim "squatter's rights" which will need to be resolved in court. Only in this country could such madness prevail. IMO the homeowner would be justified in sending in a bunch of heavies and beating these squatters out. No doubt the homeowner would be charged with a criminal offence if that were the case whereas the squatters, despite breaking and entering AND trespassing, have the law to defend them!

The solution to this is for all the displaced homeowners to squat at 10 Downing Street ad the Buckingham Palace. Bet squatters rights goes out the fucking window.

Actually, that was a conquest. You know, with one side fighting and the other side fighting back. There was no referee holding one side's arms while the other side wailed away.

Even if he was using it for storage (which the pictures don't really support), doesn't that mean he was still using it? I also find it somewhat amusing that while you say that this should be criminal, and don't want us to take this tabloid article worth a grain of salt, that you have still effectively taken the side of the squatters. When someone pointed out that the homeowner said he was in the process of renovating the place and only took a week off, you have instead chosen to believe the two years cited by the squatters in the same article. Any time someone has brought up the one week cited by the homeowner, or how his property, including important medication, is still in the house, or how he has to live with his sister through the litigation process, you delightfully deflect all that on the basis that it is from a tabloid. Yet you still hold firm to the idea that the house was vacant for two years even though it's from the same article in the same tabloid, and have even gone as far as to theorize the homeowner's property was still there for them to use and abuse as they see fit because he was only using the house for storage, since being able to afford an expensive house equates to being able to afford another expensive house automatically, apparently.

Yeah, like no one ever renovates their house as they can afford it and get time to do it, while living there. All we can see is that parts of the house were being worked on when the squatters moved in, we don't know how long ago the work was done to get it to that point. So once again you've made up a theory to support the claims of a bunch of squatters in the same article you've been whining is from a tabloid and we shouldn't take worth a grain of salt anyway. I can't help but think that some aspect of this appeals to you, even if it's completely made up, because you feel this somehow serves as some kind of social or karmatic justice, because this wealthy man has been displaced from his expensive home by a bunch of poor immigrants. Meanwhile, the rest of us are ignoring the amount of money each group has and are focusing on the idea that someone's home has been effectively stolen from them and the law isn't helping thie legitimate homeowner to get his property back, let alone to punish the thieves when all is said and done.

And how exactly did you come to this determination? I see those pictures and I just see that work was being done. There is no way to determine how long ago it was done and left that way, or even if some of that isn't damage caused by the squatters. Hell, there's not even any way to determine if all of this is fake or not and someone just snapped some pictures of their own house while they were in the process of working on it for a good story. Again, I like how certain people automatically just believe the squatters in the same article they claim is bullshit, and will even make shit up themselves in support of the squatter's story from that bullshit article.

To be honest, I don't really think El Chup is defending the squatters, he's just not as gung-ho on property rights as most of us he should be.

It would be cleared up in 10 minutes if they got the name of the decorators from the man and see if they indeed had a job there that these squatters cancelled on him.

If he did, then he clearly is telling the truth and they are lying through their teeth.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that is how they got entry. While the workers were working... which is a reason I could believe the door was open there... one of them showed up, cancelled the job and demanded "his" keys back and for them to get out. They leave the rats move in and change the locks.

I am intrigued by this and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Easy. Trespassing.

The property owner arrives and finds squatters. He calls me. He signs trespass warnings, I hand them out. If they don't leave the property immediately, they go to jail.

In other words, GTFO would suffice from the owner. But by actually serving them with trespass warnings, if they ever come onto the property again, they go to jail again.

Uh oh, a law that actually makes sense, from America no less. :flow2:

Hope our more civilized and cultured British friend's sensibilities aren't offended.

Elwood, would you be nice to the hippies, or would you tase them? Please say you would tase them.

Citizenship is irrelevant. If they were British citizens they would have no more right to squat.

Wrong. The law does not defend them. If it defended them then they would be allowed to remain after the court hears the case.

The problem lies solely in it being a civil offence and the delay that creates in getting them out. That's why it has to be criminalised.

Well, again, this is why I say it needs to be criminalised.

Since 2005 we have had criminal trespass, but, get this, it only applies to land owned by the crown. So its a criminal offence to trespass on royal or government property, but the private citizen still gets shafted.

This is blatantly false. People from third-world countries have much more of a right to squat than people from developped nations.

That's because they don't have nice toilets there like we do. Most of the time they have to squat.

You all need to revolt ASAP. That is some seriously fucked up bullshit.

In the US they'd all be charged with home invasion, damaging property, and anything else the cops could think of and then they'd be dragged off to jail in no time flat.

Clearly, England is not the England of Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher, but the England of Neville Chamberlain.

Clearly...

Ironic that this law existed throughout the Prmiership of all three.

Yes, but if Churchill or Thatcher came home to find a dozen dirty dagos in their domicile, they'll kick them out and kick their asses. If Chamberlain found them he'd be like .

Well Thatcher is in Hospital at the moment so shall I send some boys down to her drum and see what shit goes down?

Lots of chatter about squatting in the USA these days

TLDR - woman finds two men living in her house, they get asked to leave by police but then she gets arrested when she changes the locks so they can't get back in. Oh and now the squatter says the owner owes him money

Without knowing the whole story, it seems to me New York laws are a bit too lenient on squatters. Trust the bad guys to always exploit loopholes.

Fucking hell.

If there's a hell for you, it's of your own making.

And it's the one doing the fucking.