# Squatting in the UK **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 19, 2012, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016 "2012-01-19T15:13:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Bongmaster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Bongmaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bongmaster)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/1 "2012-01-19T15:13:15Z")
I confess to being a regular reader of the UK news service called the Daily Mail. Its basically of a gossip paper but often discusses local issues such as the squatting problem which exists in the UK. I’m really perplexed by why the issue exists there. Check this article and read about how squatters have created a really messy situation for this person trying to sell her house: > **[Moldovan squatters and a week that showed how good citizens suffer while...](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2088631/Moldovan-squatters-week-showed-good-citizens-suffer-parasites-flourish.html)** > > MAX HASTINGS: Nothing does more to breed anger and disaffection among law-abiding British people than a belief that good citizens are exploited, while the bad ones flourish. I would really like to try and understand the problem…it is illegal to break into and enter a private property in the UK, right? If so why were the squatters not arrested for that? That is a criminal offence just about anywhere. And what exactly is stopping the rightful owners from breaking right back into their own house and removing the trespassers or making it so difficult to live there that they leave on their own? I’m not trying to be provocative, I really want to understand why this situation exists. If someone were to break into my home (I live in the US) the police would show up in about 5-10 minutes and arrest every one of them. Failing that I’d do it myself, by force if necessary, and would probably not face any legal trouble unless I went too far. Its seems very strange that in a modern first world country like the UK that there would be no laws preventing vagrants from breaking into homes and occupying them. ---
**Author:** ![BSweet69](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e9bcb4/32.png) [@BSweet69](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BSweet69)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/2 "2012-01-19T16:08:47Z")
First of all, squatting should be cut-and-dried. You squat, you get caught, you either leave peaceably or go to jail. Period. But this statement in the article had me wondering what the first two have to do with the third? “Whenever a householder is arrested by police for rough handling of a burglar, gypsy encampments defy eviction orders or an illegal immigrant is granted asylum;” Bums and junkies squat. Victims leave countries and seek safe haven in other countries. If I’m wrong, please point it out. ---
**Author:** ![Wallenstein](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5a626/32.png) [@Wallenstein](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wallenstein)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/3 "2012-01-19T16:13:48Z")
It’s a combination of tabloid scaremongering (many of these stories involve eastern-europeans) and the police misunderstanding their powers under the law. Squatting often gets conflated with trespass which (unless it’s “aggravated” and/or involves damage or violence) does remain a civil matter. There is also a difference between squatting in a residential property (even unoccupied) and a commercial building. This [letter](http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/sep/25/squatting-law-media-politicians) was published in the Guardian after the last tranche of similar stories (bolding mine): > [@](#): > > We are legal academics, solicitors and barristers who practise in housing law acting for landlords, tenants, owners and occupiers. **We are concerned that a significant number of recent media reports have stated that squatters who refuse to leave someone’s home are not committing a criminal offence** and that a change in the law – such as that proposed by the government – is needed to rectify this situation. **This is legally incorrect** , as the guidance published by the Department for Communities and Local Government in March this year makes clear. We are concerned that such repeated inaccurate reporting of this issue has created fear for homeowners, confusion for the police and ill informed debate among both the public and politicians on reforming the law. > > Further, various MPs and ministers have given statements to the press that are misleading. For example, Housing minister Grant Shapps told the World Tonight, on the issue of people’s homes being squatted, that “the police don’t act because the law does not support the police acting”. Similarly, Conservative MP Mike Weatherley, who has campaigned in support of the proposed change in the law, was quoted in the Daily Mail as saying that for someone finding squatters in their “home” the situation is that: “If those squatters claim that they did not break into your property – though they almost certainly will have done – you have no powers to throw them out”. Where the property is someone’s home, these statements are quite simply wrong. > > By making misleading statements and failing to challenge inaccurate reporting, ministers have furthered the myths being peddled around squatting. > > **We want it to be clear that it is already a criminal offence for a squatter to occupy someone’s home, or a home that a person intends to occupy, under the Criminal Law Act 1977**. A homeowner will be a displaced residential occupier, or if they are intending to move into the property, a protected intended occupier. In either case, it is a criminal offence for a squatter to remain in the property as soon as they have been told of the displaced occupier or a protected occupier. **The police can arrest any trespasser who does not leave. The displaced or protected occupier can use force to enter the property and reasonable force to remove the trespassers.** > > Thus it seems that recent high-profile cases, such as those of Dr Oliver Cockerell and his wife, or of Julia High, could and should have been dealt with under existing criminal law. If they were not, **it is likely that this was due to a lack of understanding of the law on the part of the homeowners or the police, who apparently considered these to be civil law matters.** > > Unfortunately, government ministers like Mr Shapps and Crispin Blunt have not taken the opportunity to make people’s existing remedies clear when giving interviews or quotes for such prominent articles. For example, in a front-page article in the London Evening Standard, Grant Shapps was quoted as saying that the case of the Cockerells showed the need to speed up the timetable for the introduction of the new proposals into law. However, the new proposals would make very little or no practical difference to a case such as the Cockerells’, if the current law was actually used. Instead of clarifying the scope of the law, statements by ministers have at times obscured it. > > **Squatting of vacant property that is not a home is not a criminal offence.** The person with a right to the property who wants to recover possession should go to the civil courts for a possession order to protect their position. However, they can apply for an interim possession order, which typically takes a few days. Once the interim order is made and served, the squatters must leave within 24 hours or commit a criminal offence. The current law therefore provides a range of options for immediate or rapid possession for those with trespassers in their homes and those seeking to regain possession of vacant property. But newspaper articles have frequently misrepresented this, stating that homeowners face weeks of civil proceedings to regain their homes and that the trespassers have “squatter’s rights” in occupying a home. > > We are very concerned that a proper debate over the value and effect of the new proposals to further criminalise occupation of buildings is threatened by widespread distortions of the current law. As the proposals would have far reaching consequences for many vulnerable people, there is a need for informed factual discussion rather than a response based on sensationalist misrepresentation. We believe that ministers should make clear the extent of the current law and the actual nature of the proposed reforms and correct any statements they have made which are likely to have confused the public. We further believe that newspapers and other media have a duty to inform their readers, rather than create fear and confusion through misrepresentation. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/4 "2012-01-19T16:24:31Z")
First of all, it’s off-topic but you should be aware that the _Daily Mail_ is the Fox News of newspapers. The stories are often skewed towards the belief that middle-class families are under threat from commies, political correctness etc trying to take what theirs and give it to asylum seekers etc. Secondly squatting is far from a uniquely british thing. Squatting as you’re describing it here is common throughout europe, and about a billion people are squatting under typical (broad) definitions. WRT the british situation specifically it’s basically that the law is very reluctant to make someone homeless. If you break in somewhere and are caught immediately, you’re obviously arrested, end of. But if you’ve set up home somewhere, and have belongings there, throwing you out would make you homeless; which is taken into account even though you have no right to be there. Basically protracted legal proceedings ensue, but usually the squatters are evicted eventually. What _really_ doesn’t make sense to me is that if you squat for long enough, you can legally claim ownership… I think the required period is 12 years, and it doesn’t happen often as you need to prove continual occupation. But still, wtf? ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/5 "2012-01-19T17:05:55Z")
Amusingly to a juvenile American, the UK’s “Advisory Service for Squatters” [refers](http://www.squatter.org.uk/) to itself as “ASS” and apparently puts out a newsletter called “ASS Of The World.” ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/6 "2012-01-19T17:43:57Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > … you should be aware that the _Daily Mail_ is the Fox News of newspapers. Yet the author of the linked article, [Max Hastings](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Hastings), is an established author with what is generally considered a sound reputation: > [@](#): > > He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature … > He currently writes a column for the Daily Mail but often contributes articles to other publications such as The Guardian, The Sunday Times and The New York Review of Books. ---
**Author:** ![Teacake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Teacake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Teacake)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/7 "2012-01-19T18:02:35Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > What _really_ doesn’t make sense to me is that if you squat for long enough, you can legally claim ownership… I think the required period is 12 years, and it doesn’t happen often as you need to prove continual occupation. But still, wtf? Well, if you can prove that for twelve continuous years you lived in a place, and in all that time the owner did absolutely nothing to get you out or try to repossess it themselves, why _shouldn’t_ you have it? You obviously need it more than they do! ---
**Author:** ![blindboyard](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blindboyard/32/2833_2.png) [@blindboyard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blindboyard)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/8 "2012-01-19T18:13:14Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > What _really_ doesn’t make sense to me is that if you squat for long enough, you can legally claim ownership… I think the required period is 12 years, and it doesn’t happen often as you need to prove continual occupation. But still, wtf? Adverse Possession. Makes sense to me. If someone has abandoned a house for over a decade and made no effort to get it back then why should they retain legal title? If you owe someone a debt and they make no effort to obtain repayment it’s only six years until it becomes null and void. Anyway, adverse possession is extremely rare and restricted. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/9 "2012-01-19T18:45:21Z")
> [@Teacake](#): > > Well, if you can prove that for twelve continuous years you lived in a place, and in all that time the owner did absolutely nothing to get you out or try to repossess it themselves, why shouldn’t you have it? You obviously need it more than they do! > [@blindboyard](#): > > Adverse Possession. Makes sense to me. If someone has abandoned a house for over a decade and made no effort to get it back then why should they retain legal title? Because it belongs to them. If we go down the road of “someone needs that more than you” prepare to give up all your possessions now. > [@](#): > > If you owe someone a debt and they make no effort to obtain repayment it’s only six years until it becomes null and void. Well, debts might be considered a kind of possession, they’re certainly assets. But there’s good reason to treat debts differently to other forms of wealth. If debts continued into perpetuity you may be inclined to deliberately keep quiet to your debtors, or sow confusion. The plan being to accrue huge interest or wait until the debtor has no money and you can repossess assets, or whatever. That’s why debts are a special case. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/10 "2012-01-19T18:59:23Z")
The reason for adverse possession is that in many cases, it is due to misunderstandings - someone thinks they have a right there when they do not. (I.e., some neghbours thought for 50 years the property line was over there; the wrong people have gone and built a pool half over the line into the other person’s property. If the real owner does not assert their rights in time, they lose that property. Because someone under the impression they own something, may make irreversible decisions. I thought these were my fields, I farmed them for 20 years, nobody told me to stop. So I sold half of my other fields, because I didn’t need so big a farm… The law does not worry about whether the person was misled or tried to be sneaky. If in 10 years the real owner has not tried to enforce their rights, assert ownership, they forfeit. Note that simply asserting rights in time ends the squatting - “I own this field but I allow you to use it until the day I choose to take it back” should mean you have asserted your ownership. There’s the story of public walkways on private land in England where the owner closes the gate one day a year just to ensure it does not become public land… ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/11 "2012-01-19T19:04:41Z")
Max Hastings is a respected writer? Really? Successful, yeah, but respected? Adverse possession laws do make sense because there is a severe housing shortage in this country; leaving a property empty for 12 years and making no attempt to use it as a home (for you or any renters) is something that should be discouraged. ---
**Author:** ![Wallenstein](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5a626/32.png) [@Wallenstein](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wallenstein)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/12 "2012-01-19T20:00:24Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > There’s the story of public walkways on private land in England where the owner closes the gate one day a year just to ensure it does not become public land… The health centre in our village used to do this every xmas day… locked a gate which was otherwise always open to ensure they retained the option of keeping it private. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/13 "2012-01-19T20:05:03Z")
Squatting is becoming a big problem in the U.S. too. There’s so many empty foreclosed houses. People just move in and live for as long as possible. It can be a real headache getting them out. Usually its the neighbors that alert police that someone is squatting in the house. ---
**Author:** ![Bongmaster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Bongmaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bongmaster)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/14 "2012-01-19T20:14:29Z")
I could understand if a squatter took possession of a house or building that had been empty for years or condemned for destruction but in the case of the article I linked it was simply a house being prepared for sale, these people moved in illegally and the police refused to arrest them. I can appreciate how it could get complicated but in my mind (and apparently the letter of the law) the police should have locked up everyone who was trespassing in that house but did not. This is hardly the only case I’ve read about…in fact I see it so often I had to make this post to try and understand why the police are reluctant to clear up the situation. A few arrests like this and squatters will stop trying to do this. As it is they are setting a dangerous precedent by allowing immigrants to think this is an accepted and relatively risk free process. And FYI, I’m well aware that the daily mail is considered a “rag” but I can’t keep myself from reading it…call it a naughty gossip weakness. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Teacake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Teacake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Teacake)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2012, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/15 "2012-01-20T20:16:09Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > Because it belongs to them. > If we go down the road of “someone needs that more than you” prepare to give up all your possessions now. You know what, if I haven’t even cared enough about it to say “hey, just by the way, that’s actually mine” for the last twelve years, you’re very welcome to it. Twelve years is a bloody long time. If I haven’t needed it in over a decade, I never will. Have at it. ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2012, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/16 "2012-01-20T20:29:45Z")
> [@Bongmaster](#): > > I could understand if a squatter took possession of a house or building that had been empty for years or condemned for destruction but in the case of the article I linked it was simply a house being prepared for sale, these people moved in illegally and the police refused to arrest them. I can appreciate how it could get complicated but in my mind (and apparently the letter of the law) the police should have locked up everyone who was trespassing in that house but did not. This is hardly the only case I’ve read about…in fact I see it so often I had to make this post to try and understand why the police are reluctant to clear up the situation. A few arrests like this and squatters will stop trying to do this. As it is they are setting a dangerous precedent by allowing immigrants to think this is an accepted and relatively risk free process. > > And FYI, I’m well aware that the daily mail is considered a “rag” but I can’t keep myself from reading it…call it a naughty gossip weakness. 🙂 I simply wouldn’t believe anything the Mail says. Sometimes it writes things in a way that. when you read more closely, you’ll realise they were combining truth and fiction, or they leave out pertinent facts, or deliberately don’t research things so they can claim ignorance of facts which disprove their claims, and sometimes they just lie. The Mail would have you believe that going away on holiday puts you at risk of squatters moving in and you not being allowed to get your home back, and that’s not even close to being true. The [Daily Mail headline generator](http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/) is supposed to be a bit of fun, but I swear the Mail has actually started using it for ideas. Hell, even the News of the World was better than the Mail in terms of truth in reporting. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2012, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/17 "2012-01-21T02:43:44Z")
> [@Teacake](#): > > You know what, if I haven’t even cared enough about it to say “hey, just by the way, that’s actually mine” for the last twelve years, you’re very welcome to it. Twelve years is a bloody long time. If I haven’t needed it in over a decade, I never will. Have at it. And that’s your decision. Now, why should you get to tell me when _my_ possessions expire? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2012, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/18 "2012-01-21T02:56:59Z")
> [@blindboyard](#): > > Adverse Possession. Makes sense to me. If someone has abandoned a house for over a decade and made no effort to get it back then why should they retain legal title? Because they paid the taxes on it for a decade and it’s their property just as any other item is someone’s property. ---
**Author:** ![leahcim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/b4bc9f/32.png) [@leahcim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leahcim)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2012, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/19 "2012-01-21T03:19:37Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Because they paid the taxes on it for a decade and it’s their property just as any other item is someone’s property. Real estate has long been considered to be subject to a different kind of ownership than other things. Actually owning the land is called “allodial title” and is something that generally only governments do. Normal people own “estates in land” in “fee simple”, which is essentially a package of rights to use a parcel of land subject to some encumbrances, &c. The point is, real estate is not someone’s property in the same way that an XBox is, which is why you can have things happen with real estate that don’t happen with chattel property. ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2012, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016/20 "2012-01-21T03:43:15Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Because they paid the taxes on it for a decade and it’s their property just as any other item is someone’s property. They will have paid very little tax on vacant properties. [Properties vacant for six months are exempt from council tax,](http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/your_money/tax_index_ew/council_tax.htm#Propertiesexemptfromcounciltax) and we don’t have any other property taxes (at least, not just for living in a property). England is overcrowded. Way overcrowded in some regions. A person’s right to own a property is not more important than another person’s right to have an actual home, at least not when they don’t bother doing anything with it for twelve years - they don’t even have to move back in. Twelve years is a generous amount of time for someone to remember that they own property. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/squatting-in-the-uk/610016.md?page=2)