this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2024
210 points (96.5% liked)

World News

39102 readers
2673 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 11 points 7 months ago (2 children)

According to government guidance, squatters can apply to become the registered owners of a property if they have occupied it continuously for 10 years, acted as owners for the whole of that time and had not previously been given permission to live there by the owner.

Interesting loophole. Can you prove the squatters were not given verbal permission by the owner?

Also, the fact that a group of people can help themselves to a property that is vacant for good reason and have legal protection is kinda bullshit.

[–] GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip 38 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'd say its a lot less bullshit than having empty spaces while people are homeless.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It's a restaurant, not exactly set up for accommodation.

[–] GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You're right of course, but the general point stands. Why can they squat in there if its used at all and not just collecting dust?

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Largely because squatters usually trash and destroy any property they squat in, or at best leave it full of litter.

Very few actually take any care of the property whatsoever.

[–] twistypencil@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

Citation needed. As someone who has lived in pretty well kept squats in the Netherlands, I wonder wtf bubble you are in

[–] Kbobabob@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Interesting. The title says hotel

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago

The British are weird with names.

[–] sandman@lemmy.ca 27 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Also, the fact that a group of people can help themselves to a property that is vacant for good reason and have legal protection is kinda bullshit.

If you have someone living on your property for 10 years without you knowing, that's your fault. Clearly their presence isn't that big of a deal.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 18 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They have legal protection well before ten years though, this website outlines it.

https://www.complete-ltd.com/landlord-library-squatters-rights/

If the squatter has been in the property for more than 28 days or is in a commercial property, the landlord will need to file a claim for possession in court. This is a more complex process and can take several months to complete.

It sounds like an absolute nightmare if you're renovating or between tenancies with a commercial property.

[–] sandman@lemmy.ca -1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

That honestly aligns more with what I've heard in the past.

I thought the US had a similar set up, but I may be wrong.

I'm curious what the rationale is given for these laws. Is it just a remnant of squatter's rights, when people could just up and stay in truly abandoned locations until they practically owned it?

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago

Not practically, they actually can own it in the UK.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 7 months ago

A lot of civil law in England is law created by judges in various law suits. Someone at some point convinced a judge that squatters deserve rights.

I would imagine somewhere in the legal history of English civil law would have the answer.