The law is frequently used to persecute squatters and evict them from their homes. For them to become squatters they must find an abandoned property which isn’t being used and legally gain access. As they bring properties back into use and frequently also removes themselves from the expensive ranks of the unemployed why does the law act against them, and also therefore against the public good?
They don’t legally gain access. They’re trespassing on somebody else’s property, and that’s against the law. It’s not their home, it’s somebody else’s home, they have no legal right to be there, and the owners have every legal right to have them evicted.
Can you give me an example of how a squatter is able to ascertain that a property is abandoned, and if so, how they are able to legally gain access (when surely there is no one to provide legal access)? Is there some council department that manages these queries that I am unaware of?
Ditto what Ethilrist said. I would add that property which appears to be abandoned may appear to be ownerless, but that is an illusion. In all probability, it does have an owner. Just because the squatter is unable or unwilling to find out who owns it, that doesn’t mean that no one does.
blindboyard, we just had a similar thread on the same subject (although from the opposite point of view) that was active a few days ago. If you have additional questions about property law, please post them to that thread. If you wish to debate the issue, please open a new thread in Great Debates. This is closed.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator