Judge encourages Squatters....

[Pyramid*]

Jesus wept. I think we can safely give up on Britain.


Squatters should be encouraged because they bring empty homes back into use, a judge said yesterday.
Fiona Henderson ruled they were not criminals and there was no evidence they carried out more anti-social behaviour than rent-paying tenants.
Her judgment is a blow to the thousands every year who see their homes invaded – and struggle through the courts to win them back.

She ordered a list of empty homes in North London to be made public to the Advisory Service for Squatters, an East London-based organisation known as the ‘estate agency for squatters’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2033944/Judge-orders-Camden-Council-publish-list-homes.html#ixzz1XAncmDek

[Niamh.]

I don't even know what to say.

[Tom]

If its a derilict building then squatting is fine. Its only a problem when someone wants to live in or develop a building.

[Pyramid*]

If its a derilict building then squatting is fine. Its only a problem when someone wants to live in or develop a building.

and who pays for (regardless of where they get the following things..), water for them to drink and wash themselves and their belongings with, refuse collection, sewerage, street lighting on the street that the building is in, general maintenance and upkeep of surrounding area...

Oh yes... honest Joe, who pay that little thing known as Council Tax and Water Rates.

[Zippy]

what a stupid bitch

Somebody REALLY should give the squatters her address next time she goes on holiday. She'll soon change her tune when she returns home and finds it taken over.

It's infuriating that judges like this can't just be sacked. They are a disgrace and do damage to our whole judicial system. Her whole thinking is immoral and encourages people to think they can just take things that are not their's for free.

[MTVN]

I don't see the problem with squatters, as long as it's a building which is unoccupied; it's better than them going homeless

[Pyramid*]

I don't see the problem with squatters, as long as it's a building which is unoccupied; it's better than them going homeless



and what about the following..... it's not about letting them have a roof over their head for nothing more than getting a night's sleep....

and who pays for (regardless of where they get the following things..), water for them to drink and wash themselves and their belongings with, refuse collection, sewerage, street lighting on the street that the building is in, general maintenance and upkeep of surrounding area...

Oh yes... honest Joe, who pay that little thing known as Council Tax and Water Rates.
__________________

[Niamh.]

I don't see the problem with squatters, as long as it's a building which is unoccupied; it's better than them going homeless

Yeah, lets all stop paying rent and mortgages and go live in someone elses house for free instead!

[Pyramid*]

Yeah, lets all stop paying rent and mortgages and go live in someone elses house for free instead!

And every other type of public utility and service that the rest of us have to actually pay for.

[MTVN]

and what about the following..... it's not about letting them have a roof over their head for nothing more than getting a night's sleep....
__________________

Yeah, lets all stop paying rent and mortgages and go live in someone elses house for free instead!

I'll reply to both of these just to elaborate on my position

Squatters are liable to pay council tax I believe, and if they weren't there would the property owner not have to pay it anyway?

The simple fact is that there are thousands of houses in this country that are just serving absolutely no purpose, completely empty. How can that be fair when we are in the middle of a housing crisis with half a million people with no home at all? Why exactly do you think that is a good thing? At least squatters sometimes contribute to the communities that they squat in, cant say the same for the millionaire owners of these houses that have too much space than they know what to do with

Squatting is not a new phenomenon, there is something of a tradition of it in the UK, back in the days after WWII homeless servicemen with no home to go back to would squat in buildings left empty. It isn't fair just to generalise squatters as people who can't be bothered to work to get their own home.

[Stu]

Bastards basking in the glow of the streetlamps we pay for!

[Zippy]

I don't give a sh!t about paying for streetlamps but I do care about the principal of not being able to just take somebody elses property just because they're not using it at the time. Call me old fashioned.

you could take that logic to all kinds of extremes that undermine any civilised society. There should be ways to force homeowners to use their properties without just giving any random squatters the right to break in and take over. Causing huge damage to the property and often dragging the area down into the bargain. It's insane.

And as for squatters paying council tax....hahahaha..good one.

[Pyramid*]

Squatters are liable to pay council tax I believe, ?

Given that by the very nature of the people that squatters tend to be: how do you propose they are made to pay their council tax? How do you propose that the council collect monies from them when the default notices are ignored and they move into their next squat?

there would the property owner not have to pay it anyway?

What part of that has got to do with anything. If I have 2 cars outside, paid for, taxed and insured but I chose to use only one; that means I should be happy for some parasitic human to come along and declare that it is now theirs to do what they want with, including damaging it...., and tough luck to me. Aye, very good.... !

At least squatters sometimes contribute to the communities that they squat in, cant say the same for the millionaire owners of these houses that have too much space than they know what to do with .

What wonderful contribution do these squatters 'sometimes' (sorry, sometimes, sometimes just aint good enough), give back to the communities that they squat in?

The millionaires of these houses/properties etc: pay staggering amounts in taxes that are churned back into the economy: even on the basis of the interest alone from their savings, never mind everything else.

[Benjamin]

Another example of why the once great Empire that was Britain has now completely been destroyed. This country has long been on the way down, and honestly not a lot can save it. You can all huff, puff and disagree all you want, but the fact is, the UK has lost pretty much all its power (even within our own country) due to stupidity, idiotic decisions, cowardliness and greed. It's a shame because everything our ancestors worked for we have all taken for granted and let it slide from our greedy hands.

[Pyramid*]

I don't give a sh!t about paying for streetlamps but I do care about the principal of not being able to just take somebody elses property just because they're not using it at the time. Call me old fashioned.

you could take that logic to all kinds of extremes that undermine any civilised society. There should be ways to force homeowners to use their properties without just giving any random squatters the right to break in and take over. Causing huge damage to the property and often dragging the area down into the bargain. It's insane.

And as for squatters paying council tax....hahahaha..good one.

Ever see the documentary about a town taking council matters into their own hands? one of the things they lost was street lighting. What resulted was typically - crime increase, vandalism,burglary,house break ins, people falling and injuring themselves as they can't see kerb edges etc.

I know it may initially appear something flippant but suburbia plunged into darkness doesn't make for pleasant living conditions.

[Pyramid*]

Another example of why the once great Empire that was Britain has now completely been destroyed. This country has long been on the way down, and honestly not a lot can save it. You can all huff, puff and disagree all you want, but the fact is, the UK has lost pretty much all its power (even within our own country) due to stupidity, idiotic decisions, cowardliness and greed. It's a shame because everything our ancestors worked for we have all taken for granted and let it slide from our greedy hands.


*Stands back and applauds*

Absolutely agree with every word, every sentiment you've put over here.

[Stu]

Another example of why the once great Empire that was Britain has now completely been destroyed. This country has long been on the way down, and honestly not a lot can save it. You can all huff, puff and disagree all you want, but the fact is, the UK has lost pretty much all its power (even within our own country) due to stupidity, idiotic decisions, cowardliness and greed. It's a shame because everything our ancestors worked for we have all taken for granted and let it slide from our greedy hands.
The idea of an empire in this day and age is hillarious. Whatever about domestic issues but good riddance to the British Empire. Most empires get reduced to the source.

Not that I'm doubting it's importance. Countries invading eachother is how mankind as a species actually managed to progress because ideas, concepts and inventions were spread across the globe. Sure a ton of people got brutally killed but that's just how the world used to be. And to be fair to the British Empire, half the time they eventually would just buy out the country they were invading.

But that was the past. Empires and monarchys are miserable, draconian ideas that belong in the ground. And in terms of domestic problems Britain has always had domestic problems. Different generations pose differtent problems and you could sit around comparing them till the cows come home.

That's why these bold declerations of 'the flag is dead! our nation is going under!' always annoy me. People ten years ago said that, people twenty years ago said that, people fifty years ago said that. People always have said it and they always were wrong. Relatively speaking Britain isin't that bad a place to call your home, is it. It's got issues but it's not dying anytime soon. It just needs to sort a few things out.

[MTVN]

Given that by the very nature of the people that squatters tend to be: how do you propose they are made to pay their council tax? How do you propose that the council collect monies from them when the default notices are ignored and they move into their next squat?



What part of that has got to do with anything. If I have 2 cars outside, paid for, taxed and insured but I chose to use only one; that means I should be happy for some parasitic human to come along and declare that it is now theirs to do what they want with, including damaging it...., and tough luck to me. Aye, very good.... !



What wonderful contribution do these squatters 'sometimes' (sorry, sometimes, sometimes just aint good enough), give back to the communities that they squat in?

The millionaires of these houses/properties etc: pay staggering amounts in taxes that are churned back into the economy: even on the basis of the interest alone from their savings, never mind everything else.

I don't know how they collect it, I'm no council tax expert but this is what I found online http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/your_money/tax_index_ew/council_tax.htm:

The hierarchy of liability is:
- a resident owner-occupier who owns either the leasehold or freehold of all or part of the property
- a resident tenant
- a resident who lives in the property and who is a licensee. This means that they are not a tenant, but have permission to stay there
- any resident living in the property, for example, a squatter
- an owner of the property where no one is resident

So as you can see squatters do have to pay council tax, and even if for some reason they are not the homeowner is paying it whether there are people squatting or not so what's the big deal?

And you want some examples of squatters contributing to the community, here's a couple:

There's the famous St Agnes Place, a street which became one of Britain's most famous squats; over 30 years it grew into a large community offering social centres for the homeless as well as hostels and the place was visited by several artists and musicians including Bob Marley

Also in Dalston squatters kept the properties in good condition, did repair work to the roof as well as general weatherproofing and internal maintenence to buildings that would otherwise have fallen into disrepair.

But nah ****** them, better for them to be homeless and for streets to be filled with empty and derelict houses right

[Tom4784]

I'm with Stu, I struggle to take doomsayers seriously.

[Zippy]

It just needs to sort a few things out.

starting with bitchslapping judges like this out of power. They're totally out of touch with public opinion.

sometimes you have to wonder which side of the law they're on.

[MTVN]

Another example of why the once great Empire that was Britain has now completely been destroyed. This country has long been on the way down, and honestly not a lot can save it. You can all huff, puff and disagree all you want, but the fact is, the UK has lost pretty much all its power (even within our own country) due to stupidity, idiotic decisions, cowardliness and greed. It's a shame because everything our ancestors worked for we have all taken for granted and let it slide from our greedy hands.

Surely having the largest Empire in the world was also pretty greedy? I don't understand how you can blame greed for losing power

[arista]

If its a derilict building then squatting is fine. Its only a problem when someone wants to live in or develop a building.


The Mother has baby due today and is going to return to her Camden home
A Squat Punk was on London ITV Local News last night
he said they are leaving today.



That Judge needs to Correct how she speaks.

[Pyramid*]

I don't know how they collect it, I'm no council tax expert but this is what I found online http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/your_money/tax_index_ew/council_tax.htm:

The hierarchy of liability is:
- a resident owner-occupier who owns either the leasehold or freehold of all or part of the property
- a resident tenant
- a resident who lives in the property and who is a licensee. This means that they are not a tenant, but have permission to stay there
- any resident living in the property, for example, a squatter
- an owner of the property where no one is resident

So as you can see squatters do have to pay council tax, and even if for some reason they are not the homeowner is paying it whether there are people squatting or not so what's the big deal?

And you want some examples of squatters contributing to the community, here's a couple:

There's the famous St Agnes Place, a street which became one of Britain's most famous squats; over 30 years it grew into a large community offering social centres for the homeless as well as hostels and the place was visited by several artists and musicians including Bob Marley

Also in Dalston squatters kept the properties in good condition, did repair work to the roof as well as general weatherproofing and internal maintenence to buildings that would otherwise have fallen into disrepair.

But nah ****** them, better for them to be homeless and for streets to be filled with empty and derelict houses right


You still haven't actually answered what I asked; how do you propose that the council actually get the money from squatters when they fail to pay (on the premise that they even advise the council that they are there squatting....as they tend to do, as far as I understand, the council then have a legal requirement to provide them with running water).

Neither did you consider the example I gave about one person paying for their own property - and others thinking they should be able to use that property simply because the owner is currently not.....

As for your examples:

let's not coat it in sugar icing and scented flowers .....

On 1 June 1969 house number 54 was the first to be squatted. The council had acquired the unit and planned to demolish it for the extension to Kennington Park (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennington_Park). The derelict buildings were completely rebuilt by the squatters. An attempt to evict it in 1977 was successfully resisted on the rooftops, although many buildings were demolished and most were badly damaged but were rebuilt again by the residents. The residents of St Agnes paid all utility bills and for several years were run by a housing cooperative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_cooperative). One resident of St.Agnes, on Lambeth's housing list for eighteen years, forced to squat with children was never offered housing by the council.[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] There were many families there and it was only in the last few years that the population consisted of a larger number of young homeless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness) people. In November 2005, Lambeth London Borough Council (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambeth_London_Borough_Council) finally obtained a High Court of Justice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Court_of_Justice) order to evict the residents of 21 properties. This mass eviction was completed on 30 November 2005.

The bit that is missing in all of this .... they didn't rebuild anything for the good of the community...they did it for themselves and no one else. the homeless people bit was only very latterly - it wasn't as though this was something that went on for decades.

So yes, as you put it: ****** 'em.

[Pyramid*]

starting with bitchslapping judges like this out of power. They're totally out of touch with public opinion.

sometimes you have to wonder which side of the law they're on.

Absolutely.

[Zippy]

Surely having the largest Empire in the world was also pretty greedy? I don't understand how you can blame greed for losing power

I think, he can correct me if wrong, he's referring to the get something for nothing way of thinking that now seems to be so prominant in our culture.

Morals are down the toilet. When you have judges like this dumb bitch making light of rape, burglaries and home stealing(which is what squatting is) then it just makes decent people want to pack up and leave. Taking their taxes with them.

[Pyramid*]

I'm with Stu, I struggle to take doomsayers seriously.

Odd thing to say. :conf: I can understand you being in complete disagreement with some of the downward spiralling of our country, given what our forebearers did for us (or more specifically, disagreeing with some views that some of us may hold) - completely understand that, I don't understand why you struggle to take people with that opinion seriously - because it's not an opinion shared.

[MTVN]

You still haven't actually answered what I asked; how do you propose that the council actually get the money from squatters when they fail to pay (on the premise that they even advise the council that they are there squatting....as they tend to do, as far as I understand, the council then have a legal requirement to provide them with running water).

Neither did you consider the example I gave about one person paying for their own property - and others thinking they should be able to use that property simply because the owner is currently not.....

As for your examples:

let's not coat it in sugar icing and scented flowers .....

On 1 June 1969 house number 54 was the first to be squatted. The council had acquired the unit and planned to demolish it for the extension to Kennington Park (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennington_Park). The derelict buildings were completely rebuilt by the squatters. An attempt to evict it in 1977 was successfully resisted on the rooftops, although many buildings were demolished and most were badly damaged but were rebuilt again by the residents. The residents of St Agnes paid all utility bills and for several years were run by a housing cooperative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_cooperative). One resident of St.Agnes, on Lambeth's housing list for eighteen years, forced to squat with children was never offered housing by the council.[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] There were many families there and it was only in the last few years that the population consisted of a larger number of young homeless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness) people. In November 2005, Lambeth London Borough Council (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambeth_London_Borough_Council) finally obtained a High Court of Justice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Court_of_Justice) order to evict the residents of 21 properties. This mass eviction was completed on 30 November 2005.

The bit that is missing in all of this .... they didn't rebuild anything for the good of the community...they did it for themselves and no one else. the homeless people bit was only very latterly - it wasn't as though this was something that went on for decades.

So yes, as you put it: ****** 'em.

As I conceded I don't know how they'd collect it so how can I answer? I'm no council tax expert, I merely searched online and found out that they are liable to pay council tax, you can't dismiss that just by being sceptical of how that will be collected

I didn't bother answering your example because it was stupid straw man; because owning a car and actually having a roof over your head are the same thing :rolleyes: I'm not going to defend someone taking your car because a car is not a necessity, if someone doesnt own one then its not that big a deal; being homeless is a very different matter

You havent exactly proved me wrong with that copy and paste from wiki, the article is on the whole very positive; "derelict buildings were completely rebuilt by the squatters...buildings were demolished and most were badly damaged but were rebuilt again by the residents. The residents of St Agnes paid all utility bills and for several years were run by a housing cooperative. One resident of St.Agnes, on Lambeth's housing list for eighteen years, forced to squat with children was never offered housing by the council".

And then it lists all the positive services that the squatting community offered, a hell of a lot more than the council offered or was offered by empty, derelict properties

I think, he can correct me if wrong, he's referring to the get something for nothing way of thinking that now seems to be so prominant in our culture.

Morals are down the toilet. When you have judges like this dumb bitch making light of rape, burglaries and home stealing(which is what squatting is) then it just makes decent people want to pack up and leave. Taking their taxes with them.

You're going to equate squatting with rape? Seriously?

[Pyramid*]

As I conceded I don't know how they'd collect it so how can I answer? I'm no council tax expert, I merely searched online and found out that they are liable to pay council tax, you can't dismiss that just by being sceptical of how that will be collected

I didn't bother answering your example because it was stupid straw man; because owning a car and actually having a roof over your head are the same thing :rolleyes: I'm not going to defend someone taking your car because a car is not a necessity, if someone doesnt own one then its not that big a deal; being homeless is a very different matter

You havent exactly proved me wrong with that copy and paste from wiki, the article is on the whole very positive; "derelict buildings were completely rebuilt by the squatters...buildings were demolished and most were badly damaged but were rebuilt again by the residents. The residents of St Agnes paid all utility bills and for several years were run by a housing cooperative. One resident of St.Agnes, on Lambeth's housing list for eighteen years, forced to squat with children was never offered housing by the council".

And then it lists all the positive services that the squatting community offered, a hell of a lot more than the council offered or was offered by empty, derelict properties



You're going to equate squatting with rape? Seriously?

the car comparison was a perfect example of one person owing property, and paying for it's upkeep - but not using it. It is EXACTLY the same principle.

I appreciate you said you weren't sure how the council would collect council tax/water rates from squatters .... what you may have missed during the posts back and forward, is the fact a very great many do not get paid - because the squatters move on - leaving the unpaid bills behind. The result of that - is every honest tax payer out there - having to cough up more and more every year to help recoope such abuse of services and financial losses of this nature. That then impacts strongly on the every day person out there, who go work hard, come home, pay their housing costs, council tax, water rates etc...... and really struggle hard to do so - because of ever increasing costs due to people like squatter not paying their way and taking a free ride on society.

Out of the thousands and thousands of squatters, with respect: if you think one sob story started way back in the late 60's - with people building / restoring a few buildings (21 I think without checking back) - not for the good of the community: but for their own good ....... no one elses - their own good. One story like that because they paid their utility bill but stole property (and the land it stood on....), sorry, it aint going to wash with me.

As for you highlighting the ONE resident who was never offered accomodation by Lambeth council.... have you looked into the reasons why? Am pretty sure they didn't take one look and say, "nah sorry doll.... brunettes aren't getting houses this decade". If she was that desperate, why didn't she apply to some other council....

[Zippy]

You're going to equate squatting with rape? Seriously?

er, I haven't equated them I've just listed them as examples of things judges have famously condoned to some degree or other. Ill equate them in the sense that they are all WRONG in my mind and should not be in anyway encouraged by dumbass judges. What a disgraceful message to send out. And by judges of all people.

[Vicky.]

My longtime school mate actually choses to squat. Its not like she was forced into it by neing homeless, oh no. She CHOSE to move to london and find other squatters to freeload with. I dont understand the mentality behind that at ALL. I know some people its a choice between living on the streets or squatting, but to leave a perfectly good home to chose to do it?

[Niamh.]

My longtime school mate actually choses to squat. Its not like she was forced into it by neing homeless, oh no. She CHOSE to move to london and find other squatters to freeload with. I dont understand the mentality behind that at ALL. I know some people its a choice between living on the streets or squatting, but to leave a perfectly good home to chose to do it?

well rent is expensive in London, so why bother paying to move there? :bored:

[Zippy]

My longtime school mate actually choses to squat. Its not like she was forced into it by neing homeless, oh no. She CHOSE to move to london and find other squatters to freeload with. I dont understand the mentality behind that at ALL. I know some people its a choice between living on the streets or squatting, but to leave a perfectly good home to chose to do it?

The idea that these squatters are just poor little homeless people who have no other options is utter crap. Most are just freeloaders, crackheads and criminals wanting the usual freeride in life. And arrogantly thinking they have a right to it.

And then judges like her come along and champion them on. Nevermind the fact that somebody has worked hard and paid taxes to acquire that property. No, just let a bunch of random people come and steal it from them when theyre not home. Nice.

[Vicky.]

well rent is expensive in London, so why bother paying to move there? :bored:

Because they pay no rent :p

She was paying no rent here either like. But that was because she was living with her mam.

Started talking to some squatters on the internet, decided 'free' life was for her, and left :bored:

They also get their food from supermarket bins and that, I believe its called being a freegan or something.

(And her 'sick' money, is spent on alcohol and gigs too. Since no food has to be bought or rent payed for)

[Niamh.]

Because they pay no rent :p

She was paying no rent here either like. But that was because she was living with her mam.

Started talking to some squatters on the internet, decided 'free' life was for her, and left :bored:

They also get their food from supermarket bins and that, I believe its called being a freegan or something.

(And her 'sick' money, is spent on alcohol and gigs too. Since no food has to be bought or rent payed for)

Freegan?? oh my god, I've heard it all now! :laugh:

[Vicky.]

Freegan?? oh my god, I've heard it all now! :laugh:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeganism

:laugh:

Oddly enough, part of being a freegan...includes squatting


'Working less is another component of freeganism. Freegans oppose the notion of working for the sole purpose of accumulating material items.'

This part makes me laugh, when it comes to my mate. I dont know if all of these freegans claim benefits..but surely if its actually all about abolishing materialism...since she has a 'free' life', nothing to actually pay for or anything, she would not be claiming dole would she :D


IMO its just a nicer way of saying scrounger.

[MTVN]

the car comparison was a perfect example of one person owing property, and paying for it's upkeep - but not using it. It is EXACTLY the same principle.

I appreciate you said you weren't sure how the council would collect council tax/water rates from squatters .... what you may have missed during the posts back and forward, is the fact a very great many do not get paid - because the squatters move on - leaving the unpaid bills behind. The result of that - is every honest tax payer out there - having to cough up more and more every year to help recoope such abuse of services and financial losses of this nature. That then impacts strongly on the every day person out there, who go work hard, come home, pay their housing costs, council tax, water rates etc...... and really struggle hard to do so - because of ever increasing costs due to people like squatter not paying their way and taking a free ride on society.

Out of the thousands and thousands of squatters, with respect: if you think one sob story started way back in the late 60's - with people building / restoring a few buildings (21 I think without checking back) - not for the good of the community: but for their own good ....... no one elses - their own good. One story like that because they paid their utility bill but stole property (and the land it stood on....), sorry, it aint going to wash with me.

As for you highlighting the ONE resident who was never offered accomodation by Lambeth council.... have you looked into the reasons why? Am pretty sure they didn't take one look and say, "nah sorry doll.... brunettes aren't getting houses this decade". If she was that desperate, why didn't she apply to some other council....

Except as I pointed out a car is not a necessity, sure in both cases the person would technically be using someone elses property. But the point I'm trying to make is that when people are gonna be out on the streets homeless and there are derelict buildings that are completely empty than sometimes it is more important to make sure those buildings are actually put to some use and that people actually have a roof over their heads

Why would the burden fall upon "every" taxpayer. If squatters don't pay council tax than the property owner would be paying it just as he would if there were never any squatters there at all, other taxpayers won't be footing the bill for it.

Hardly "one sob story"; you asked for examples and I gave you two of them. You say they built up houses for themselves but you're mad if you can't the benefit to the community from replacing empty, derelict houses in disrepair with occupied houses that are done up and with occupants who actually offer other services to society.

And as for that story, I don't know the background and how could I, it isnt even referenced in the article really so the stories truth at all is only a matter of speculation

er, I haven't equated them I've just listed them as examples of things judges have famously condoned to some degree or other. Ill equate them in the sense that they are all WRONG in my mind and should not be in anyway encouraged by dumbass judges. What a disgraceful message to send out. And by judges of all people.

Sorry I misunderstood, when you put (that's what squatting is) in the brackets besides home stealing I thought that was also referring to rape and burglary

[Pyramid*]

Because they pay no rent :p

She was paying no rent here either like. But that was because she was living with her mam.

Started talking to some squatters on the internet, decided 'free' life was for her, and left :bored:

They also get their food from supermarket bins and that, I believe its called being a freegan or something.

(And her 'sick' money, is spent on alcohol and gigs too. Since no food has to be bought or rent payed for)

And of course.... these types - end up needing dental care, medical care etc - and have contributed not a bloody penny towards it.

[Niamh.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeganism

:laugh:

Oddly enough, part of being a freegan...includes squatting


'Working less is another component of freeganism. Freegans oppose the notion of working for the sole purpose of accumulating material items.'

This part makes me laugh, when it comes to my mate. I dont know if all of these freegans claim benefits..but surely if its actually all about abolishing materialism...since she has a 'free' life', nothing to actually pay for or anything, she would not be claiming dole would she :D


IMO its just a nicer way of saying scrounger.

Well, I may just become a Freegan myself :hmph: We all should, see how long the Freegans would last then :idc: So, they're against working for stuff but for other people working for their stuff?

[Vicky.]

Well, I may just become a Freegan myself :hmph: We all should, see how long the Freegans would last then :idc: So, they're against working for stuff but for other people working for their stuff?

Well apparently they dont want stuff full stop. :laugh:

As I say, I can only go on my mate, there might be other 'freegans' out there who dont claim dole or anything.

[Zippy]

If you actually read all of what this judge says she doesn't even make sense. She's all over the place with her illogical thinking. She admits that it could encourage crime but then claims it's good for area's and is in public interest!!

Sounds like one of those twisted liberal thinkers who are so obsessed with being seen as some champion of the underclasses that they totally lose sight of the rights of decent, hardworking people who actually live within the rules of the law. She obviously doesn't care much about some poor family coming home and being faced with a bunch of strangers telling them they can't enter their own home anymore. Often in a very aggressive manner. Or the neighbours that have to live next to a scrapheap full of junkies.

Just bizarre, twisted and immoral thinking as far as Im concerned. People are sick of it.

[Pyramid*]

Except as I pointed out a car is not a necessity, sure in both cases the person would technically be using someone elses property. But the point I'm trying to make is that when people are gonna be out on the streets homeless and there are derelict buildings that are completely empty than sometimes it is more important to make sure those buildings are actually put to some use and that people actually have a roof over their heads

Why would the burden fall upon "every" taxpayer. If squatters don't pay council tax than the property owner would be paying it just as he would if there were never any squatters there at all, other taxpayers won't be footing the bill for it.

Hardly "one sob story"; you asked for examples and I gave you two of them. You say they built up houses for themselves but you're mad if you can't the benefit to the community from replacing empty, derelict houses in disrepair with occupied houses that are done up and with occupants who actually offer other services to society.

And as for that story, I don't know the background and how could I, it isnt even referenced in the article really so the stories truth at all is only a matter of speculation




A empty home could be regarded as not a necessity - but neither does tat give the right for someone to just help themselves to it - when someone else is working hard paying for it, and it's upkeep.

What about those people who work abroad for months at a tiime - should it be acceptable that the live wiht the fear that "Hey, it's an empty house, he's not going to need it for a few months, so it's our now".

I understand perfectly clear the point you are making about derelict houses used for homeless people - that is a completely different thing altogether from squatting. Totally different.

If you are quite serious in your question below:with respect: you are failing at every turn and at very basic level in understanding where taxes come from, what they are used for, and why some of our taxes are so high.

"Why would the burden fall upon "every" taxpayer. If squatters don't pay council tax than the property owner would be paying it just as he would if there were never any squatters there at all, other taxpayers won't be footing the bill for it"

In honestly: I'm open mouthed at your comment above and the least I say about it the better.

As for this part in your reply:

And as for that story, I don't know the background and how could I, it isnt even referenced in the article really so the stories truth at all is only a matter of speculation

Again, I'm astounded that you provide an example to back up your point - with something that you don't know the background on, and admit it could all just be speculation. It doesn't really aid your stance putting up 'stories' in every sense of the word - all things considered with regards to the 'speculative' nature of some of the content of the story.

[MTVN]

A empty home could be regarded as not a necessity - but neither does tat give the right for someone to just help themselves to it - when someone else is working hard paying for it, and it's upkeep.

What about those people who work abroad for months at a tiime - should it be acceptable that the live wiht the fear that "Hey, it's an empty house, he's not going to need it for a few months, so it's our now".

I understand perfectly clear the point you are making about derelict houses used for homeless people - that is a completely different thing altogether from squatting. Totally different.

If you are quite serious in your question below:with respect: you are failing at every turn and at very basic level in understanding where taxes come from, what they are used for, and why some of our taxes are so high.

"Why would the burden fall upon "every" taxpayer. If squatters don't pay council tax than the property owner would be paying it just as he would if there were never any squatters there at all, other taxpayers won't be footing the bill for it"

In honestly: I'm open mouthed at your comment above and the least I say about it the better.

If you don't have a home yourself I'd say it very much is a necessity, but in any case it is better that these houses are actually used than having them standing there empty considering the housing crisis we have in this country. Those who do live in their houses when they are in this country shouldnt have it occupied by squatter no, I'm not talking about those people though

And I understand taxes perfectly well, I did A-Level Economics I'll have ya know :hmph: But we were talking about who pays the tax on a property; as I pointed out the squatter is liable to pay if they are staying in the house and if they are not then it is "the owner of the property where noone is resident". Also your own information concerning squatters and council tax seems merely to have come from DS http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1285183

Your edit referred to a very small part of the story which I dont know the details on no. And I'm off out now so I'll answer in more detail later

[Pyramid*]

If you don't have a home yourself I'd say it very much is a necessity, but in any case it is better that these houses are actually used than having them standing there empty considering the housing crisis we have in this country. Those who do live in their houses when they are in this country shouldnt have it occupied by squatter no, I'm not talking about those people though

And I understand taxes perfectly well, I did A-Level Economics I'll have ya know :hmph: But we were talking about who pays the tax on a property; as I pointed out the squatter is liable to pay if they are staying in the house and if they are not then it is "the owner of the property where noone is resident". Also your own information concerning squatters and council tax seems merely to have come from DS http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1285183

How much a stalker are you... good god - talk about creepy - seeking out posts I made on DS 15months ago....!!! OMG. :shocked::shocked:

yes, I've had similar discussions on DS? Your point is? Oh...that I happened to learn something?

Again... how creepy.

Far more importantly.... haven't forum members been banned for going around stalking tibb members and posting things unrelated to tibbs on here..... is it acceptable for moderators to do the same.?

[Zippy]

The goverment and councils should do more about derelict buildings for sure. But to use that as an excuse to just give people free reign to break into properties and take legal residence is just insane. And as we all well know squatters are not selective about which properties they choose to occupy. They basically invade any house they find empty for a short time. Their blatant immorality proven when they then refuse to leave at the owners request.

[Zippy]

LOL @ MTVN stalking Pyramid!

lmao

[Pyramid*]

LOL @ MTVN stalking Pyramid!

lmao


Much as there is a humorous element, ... I think it's well beyond the realms of acceptability!!!

but it's nice to know that I actually learned something along the way... seems you can teach an old dog new tricks.

[Pyramid*]

The goverment and councils should do more about derelict buildings for sure. But to use that as an excuse to just give people free reign to break into properties and take legal residence is just insane. And as we all well know squatters are not selective about which properties they choose to occupy. They basically invade any house they find empty for a short time. Their blatant immorality proven when they then refuse to leave at the owners request.


And all the better if the houses they squat in are carpetted, have nice furnishing etc......

[Zippy]

I'm not saying he is stalking you but I find the idea of it hilarious!

[Pyramid*]

I'm not saying he is stalking you but I find the idea of it hilarious!

Clearly he is.... you dont' come across a random post from another site by accident or by googling my username - even throwing the prefix digital spy along with it..... it's not exactly the first thing that crops up on google. ;)

[Vicky.]

Clearly he is.... you dont' come across a random post from another site by googling my username - even throwing the prefix digital spy along with it..... it's not exactly the first thing that crops up on google. ;)

Erm...I just tried this out of boredom...and well...try searching 'Pyramid* squatters' in google :laugh3:

[Pyramid*]

Erm...I just tried this out of boredom...and well...try searching 'Pyramid* squatters' in google :laugh3:

So tibb is happy for their moderators to go about stalking members on their site.

I think its fair to say most regulars on here know I am Pyramid* from DS - but don't you seriously think it's out of order for a mod to be stalking another member in this way?

Perhaps more of you should try... there are some real nuggets on DS from me!! ;)

[Vicky.]

So tibb is happy for their moderators to go about stalking members on their site.

I think its fair to say most regulars on here know I am Pyramid* from DS - but don't you seriously think it's out of order for a mod to be stalking another member in this way?

Perhaps more of you should try... there are some real nuggets on DS from me!! ;)

This is absolutely nothing to do with me, and I wont be dragged into it.

I was simply trying out what you said, and was quite amused to see a tibb thread as the first search result, and the DS one as the 4th. Thats all.

[Marc]

I saw a programme on them last night and it just angered me. How dare they break into homes (they did on the programme last night) and just mess up the house. Buggers

[Zippy]

Clearly he is....

well call the police then!

http://atrl.net/forums/images/smilies/images/smilies/ahh.gif

[Tom4784]

Odd thing to say. :conf: I can understand you being in complete disagreement with some of the downward spiralling of our country, given what our forebearers did for us (or more specifically, disagreeing with some views that some of us may hold) - completely understand that, I don't understand why you struggle to take people with that opinion seriously - because it's not an opinion shared.

It's because, like he said, people have been saying it for years and we're still here. People who go 'Oh England's going down hill, we're all screwed' over the littlest things are a bit ridiculous to me. If England ever ceases to exist then it won't be down to a few opportunistic squaters.

[Pyramid*]

This is absolutely nothing to do with me, and I wont be dragged into it.

I was simply trying out what you said, and was quite amused to see a tibb thread as the first search result, and the DS one as the 4th. Thats all.

I wasn't intending on dragging you into it..... I understand you (and other mods) position - I'll raise it with admin - for no other reason that regular members have been banned for much the same behaviour.

I saw a programme on them last night and it just angered me. How dare they break into homes (they did on the programme last night) and just mess up the house. Buggers


Since the Shabby palava, it was an active discussion on DS - on many threads - and it was shocking the fact that some people think there is nothing wrong with it.

Even to the point, that if the squatters eventually leave 'in their own time', and don't cause damage: the home owner should be thankful.....!!! :shocked:


It's a joke. sorry...the laws in this country are a joke.

[Pyramid*]

well call the police then!

http://atrl.net/forums/images/smilies/images/smilies/ahh.gif

Nee naw nee naw...... do Admin have police cars I wonder to zoom about all the different threads etc?




It's because, like he said, people have been saying it for years and we're still here. People who go 'Oh England's going down hill, we're all screwed' over the littlest things are a bit ridiculous to me. If England ever ceases to exist then it won't be down to a few opportunistic squaters.

I think in fairness: it was coming more from the fact that our forefathers built much of what they did on hard graft, toil and sweat....for people like squatters to think that life owes them a living - that's the way I interpreted what he meant. Difference in perception.

[Tom4784]

There's a fair difference between what MTVN and Stacey did though. Referencing posts is a lot different to taking pictures mainly because your anonymity is still intact, as you said yourself, your standing on DS is well known and since there's no details there that can be used against you there's nothing to worry about. With pictures though you're taking somebody's identity and image and you could do far worse stuff with it then an anonymous post on a similar forum. That's why Stacey was banned because her having those photos could have an impact if she planned to do wrong with them.

[Pyramid*]

There's a fair difference between what MTVN and Stacey did though. Referencing posts is a lot different to taking pictures mainly because your anonymity is still intact, as you said yourself, your standing on DS is well known and since there's no details there that can be used against you there's nothing to worry about. With pictures though you're taking somebody's identity and image and you could do far worse stuff with it then an anonymous post on a similar forum. That's why Stacey was banned because her having those photos could have an impact if she planned to do wrong with them.

I believe more than just Stacey was banned for similar activity - and not just of the pictorial variety - those stalking others on facebook etc has all formed part of things.

I'm not worried - far from it - as I say: everyone regular around is well aware I came from DS - I find the fact that a moderator of this forum, has to rake around posts from a rival forum, to pick out posts on a similar subject in some pathetic attempt to ridicule a Tibb forum member - totally unacceptable. Whichever way it's caked over.

I do appreciate you taking time to explain, that I'll give you 100% credit for and thank you for.

anyway: let's get back on topic - it was interesting!!!

[Tom]

and who pays for (regardless of where they get the following things..), water for them to drink and wash themselves and their belongings with, refuse collection, sewerage, street lighting on the street that the building is in, general maintenance and upkeep of surrounding area...

Oh yes... honest Joe, who pay that little thing known as Council Tax and Water Rates.

Paying into the system is riddled with loopholes and if people wish to exploit that then thats their decision. They'll have a crap quality of living but its their own choice. Its part of living in a democratic society

I don't agree with it but we're not going to put a stop to it, just like homelessness and people who claim benefits- they all get things for free or don't have to answer to Inland Revenue

[Zippy]

I saw a programme on them last night and it just angered me. How dare they break into homes (they did on the programme last night) and just mess up the house. Buggers

and that's exactly what this stupid bitch judge is encouraging.

Infuriating how these judges can't be kicked out when they chat such irresponsible tripe.

The police and the council disagree with her but still she gets to yap and flap away with her insanity.

[Pyramid*]

Paying into the system is riddled with loopholes and if people wish to exploit that then thats their decision. They'll have a crap quality of living but its their own choice. Its part of living in a democratic society

I don't agree with it but we're not going to put a stop to it, just like homelessness and people who claim benefits- they all get things for free or don't have to answer to Inland Revenue


all of the above is of course very true: however it's not the point of the thread - in essence.

It's the fact that this headcase of a woman - a judge of all people, comes away with crap like this. As said by Zippy - this muppet is encouraging this type of thing....... and worse.... it's the fecking tax payers who pay this muppet's overinflated salary to make decisions like this.

If that's the people laying down the law in the country: what hell chance does the UK have.

About zilch.

[Pyramid*]

Caring squatters.......



A gang of 'caring' squatters have pledged to finally move out of a heavily pregnant woman's home because they 'felt bad' that they had caused her so much stress.
The 11-strong group, who invaded the West Hampstead home, promised to move out an hour before Katun Cockerell's husband, consultant neurologist Oliver, was due to go to court to secure an eviction order.

They had invaded the home, before the pair had a chance to move in from their St John Wood's flat, and refused to leave - despite Mrs Cockerell's pleas that the stress may harm her unborn child.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2034237/Victory-doctor-heavily-pregnant-wife-squatters-leave-home.html#ixzz1XCNMVvGu

[Tom]

Caring squatters.......




That kind of squatting I'm fully against but where do you stand on squatters who squat in unused or derelict buildings?

[Pyramid*]

That kind of squatting I'm fully against but where do you stand on squatters who squat in unused or derelict buildings?



The worried couple have cut off the gas supply but they will be liable for electric and water bills that the occupiers run up

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2034237/Victory-doctor-heavily-pregnant-wife-squatters-leave-home.html#ixzz1XCPI4p3x


As well as having to replace all the locks etc.... yeah... Power to the squatters eh..

************************************************** **************

sorry Tom... the above was just an addenum to my last post!!

Far as that's concerned, for much of the same reasons as I've mentioned here - even if squatters take over derelict building or empty buildings: in the main, the premises will not just be empty shells, with no connection to utility services. All they have to do is state they are there, and some services have to be reconnnected. They will have access to water, to cook with, to wash, for toilet facilities - which then in turn enter the sewerage system. What do they do with their refuse? Burn it? What do they do with the items that do not burn down...leave it at their arses...or chuck it in bins that other people pay via their council taxes to have emptied etc.

The buidings and the land upon which the building stand: belong to someone. Everything in me tells me that is wrong to take ownership of something that does not belong to you - regardless of what that is.

Squatter are (in many cases) people who don't want to pay for a roof over their heads, don't want to pay for the safety and comfort that provides - but aren't willing to sleep on the streets and make themselves homeless - so they take what is not there's then very sneakily ensure that the place is secured, with one person on the premises at all times to prevent the building 'being taken back again'.

I actually have more respect for the homeless - seriously - but that's a whole different debate altogether.

[Zippy]

That kind of squatting I'm fully against but where do you stand on squatters who squat in unused or derelict buildings?

they still belong to somebody who paid for them.

and they should be forced to leave when asked. All this squatters rights crap is just insane. If you're not paying for something then you have no rights to it, period.

[Pyramid*]

Wee bit of interesting reading....

http://www.urban75.com/Action/squat.html

[Vicky.]

Wee bit of interesting reading....

http://www.urban75.com/Action/squat.html

What a load of bollocks :bored:

I'm sorry, but if I owned a property that I wanted to rent out or something, and then found out a few months down the line that there were a load of freeloaders living in it, I would certainly not be following the law. I dont care if this makes me as bad, or worse than them. Its my property, I paid/am paying for it, not them. I would use whatever force was necessary to get them out, and gladly admit it all when the police came to arrest me for it. I would rather do a bit community service or whatever than allow people to take the piss out of me, which is what these people are doing.

[Pyramid*]

What a load of bollocks :bored:

I'm sorry, but if I owned a property that I wanted to rent out or something, and then found out a few months down the line that there were a load of freeloaders living in it, I would certainly not be following the law. I dont care if this makes me as bad, or worse than them. Its my property, I paid/am paying for it, not them. I would use whatever force was necessary to get them out, and gladly admit it all when the police came to arrest me for it. I would rather do a bit community service or whatever than allow people to take the piss out of me, which is what these people are doing.

Oh I agree... Years ago, relatives of mine (Army) had their own house down south, they were posted abroad for a while. Long story short - 'actors' moved in - ie: squatters who told the neighbours they were actors working in the Stratford theatres and they were renting the house.

Only through a tip off - from one of the neighbours that something didn't seem right....... result was: 10 burly Army guys literally rammed the door, ******ed them out with the the very clear threat that if they went to the police..... they'd sealed their own fate!!

But not everyone has that in them to do that - or indeed, know people who would (if that makes sense?).

[Niamh.]

What a load of bollocks :bored:

I'm sorry, but if I owned a property that I wanted to rent out or something, and then found out a few months down the line that there were a load of freeloaders living in it, I would certainly not be following the law. I dont care if this makes me as bad, or worse than them. Its my property, I paid/am paying for it, not them. I would use whatever force was necessary to get them out, and gladly admit it all when the police came to arrest me for it. I would rather do a bit community service or whatever than allow people to take the piss out of me, which is what these people are doing.

and isn't that a ****ing joke, that if you got rid of them you'd probably end up in trouble for it, not them :bored:

[Pyramid*]

and isn't that a ****ing joke, that if you got rid of them you'd probably end up in trouble for it, not them :bored:


It's a bloody disgrace... but it's what this Judge is advocating. That's the message she is delivering.

[Vicky.]

Oh I agree... Years ago, relatives of mine (Army) had their own house down south, they were posted abroad for a while. Long story short - 'actors' moved in - ie: squatters who told the neighbours they were actors working in the Stratford theatres and they were renting the house.

Only through a tip off - from one of the neighbours that something didn't seem right....... result was: 10 burly Army guys literally rammed the door, ******ed them out with the the very clear threat that if they went to the police..... they'd sealed their own fate!!

But not everyone has that in them to do that - or indeed, know people who would (if that makes sense?).

And people will say that was wrong no doubt. Maybe even people yet to comment on this thread.

The whole thing is a joke tbh. The squatters seem to have more rights than anyone else :rolleyes:

and isn't that a ****ing joke, that if you got rid of them you'd probably end up in trouble for it, not them :bored:
Yup, but its what I have come to expect of our 'justice' system :p

[Niamh.]

It's a bloody disgrace... but it's what this Judge is advocating. That's the message she is delivering.

Yeah, absolutely.

[Pyramid*]

And people will say that was wrong no doubt. Maybe even people yet to comment on this thread.

The whole thing is a joke tbh. The squatters seem to have more rights than anyone else :rolleyes:


Yup, but its what I have come to expect of our 'justice' system :p


I do know that not one person in the locality disagreed with the action he took. (including the cops , who as far as I was told, 'knew what was about to happen and knew not to respond to any calls for any disturbance at that address' ;) )

Before my uncle got it checked out and 'resolved', the neighbours had a rota to keep an eye on the place -to make sure no furniture or any of their belongings were being taken out of the house (it was a gorgeous old house that they'd spent a fortune on). it was a shame though...after that, they never could settle in it and ended up moving up here.

[Niamh.]

I do know that not one person in the locality disagreed with the action he took. (including the cops , who as far as I was told, 'knew what was about to happen and knew not to respond to any calls for any disturbance at that address' ;) )

Before my uncle got it checked out and 'resolved', the neighbours had a rota to keep an eye on the place -to make sure no furniture or any of their belongings were being taken out of the house (it was a gorgeous old house that they'd spent a fortune on). it was a shame though...after that, they never could settle in it and ended up moving up here.

I can understand that, it's a violation really.

[MTVN]

Woah woah woah hang on a minute

I googled "squatters water rates" because it's what Pyramid mentioned. You try it; that thread on DS was the very top result, try it yourself

I'm not happy about being called a ******ing stalker

[Niamh.]

Woah woah woah hang on a minute

I googled "squatters water rates" because it's what Pyramid mentioned. You try it; that thread on DS was the very top result, try it yourself

I'm not happy about being called a ******ing stalker

Yup, it is actually :laugh:

[Grimnir]

squatting over judges faces whilst having a **** should be encouraged

[Zippy]

Woah woah woah hang on a minute

I'm not happy about being called a ******ing stalker

http://atrl.net/forums/images/smilies/images/smilies/ahh.gif

she thinks you want her

[Pyramid*]

Woah woah woah hang on a minute

I googled "squatters water rates" because it's what Pyramid mentioned. You try it; that thread on DS was the very top result, try it yourself

I'm not happy about being called a ******ing stalker


What did it have to do with this thread? Nothing.

BTW: Excellent example to be setting..... avoiding swear filter as well as sending abusive Pms to another member.

[Pyramid*]

http://atrl.net/forums/images/smilies/images/smilies/ahh.gif

she thinks you want her

I note he didn't cuss your for your comment about him stalking me... joke or otherwise. ;)

[Zippy]

I note he didn't cuss your for your comment about him stalking me... joke or otherwise. ;)

I didn't accuse him of being a stalker. Big difference. I actually find the accusation funny.

[Vicky.]

OK, we have now established that noone was stalking anyone.

Can we keep this thread on topic from now on please :)

[Pyramid*]

OK, we have now established that noone was stalking anyone.

Can we keep this thread on topic from now on please :)

Absolutely.

[Vicky.]

Deleted some off topic posts.

[arista]

My longtime school mate actually choses to squat. Its not like she was forced into it by neing homeless, oh no. She CHOSE to move to london and find other squatters to freeload with. I dont understand the mentality behind that at ALL. I know some people its a choice between living on the streets or squatting, but to leave a perfectly good home to chose to do it?


Does she Freeload the Food
thats clever
as stores chuck out good food due to legal dates on it.



But to leave a Perfect Home to Squat
that tells you she did not get along with (or like) others there.




Could you sit down in a cafe and chat to her now?

[Pyramid*]

Does she Freeload the Food
thats clever
as stores chuck out good food due to legal dates on it.



But to leave a Perfect Home to Squat
that tells you she did not get along with (or like) others there.




Could you sit down in a cafe and chat to her now?

Not necessarily, you don't know that to be the case. It could have been nothing more than the girl in question wanting to spread her wings & flee the nest for nothing more than being independent - not all offspring want to live with their parents when they reach adulthood and beyond.

London would have been a reasonable choice of destination given that squatters and freegans are in far higher numbers there - than probably any other main city in the UK.

[arista]

Good that this Camden House has the Squaters
gone now.


Ref: ITV1HD Daybreak


Those Punks changed the Locks

[Pyramid*]

Good that this Camden House has the Squaters
gone now.


Ref: ITV1HD Daybreak


Those Punks changed the Locks

Now how on earth can anyone in their right mind, say that this is right? Entering another person's home: going in, changing the locks, the owners having to spend thousands of pounds to get eviction orders, and then finding there actually has been damage caused - as well as their electricty and water being used - for which they will have to pay for - not the squatters.

Why the police didn't detain these squatters - and charge them with theft at least, is beyond me - as well as I'm sure, a dozen other charges that could have been made upon them, extortion being another....




The Harley Street neurologist, whose Somali-born 35-year-old wife is due to give birth today, said they had spent ‘thousands’ to evict the squatters. In a bid to get their home back, they even offered them £500 to move out. The gang demanded more.








Police had told the Cockerells they were powerless to act unless they could prove the house was broken into. Yesterday, chipped paintwork could be seen on the bottom of a ground floor sash window – suggesting it may have been forced open.

[Pyramid*]

Snippet from the Urban 75 website


Once you are inside you will find more useful information in the mail and any documents left around. Keep them all carefully. It is rarely worth contacting the owners first, because as long as they don't know you are there they can't evict you. It is often worth trying to come to a deal with them.


In the mail........ the mail that is not addressed to them. Opening any mail that is not addressed to you to, is a criminal offence.

yeah...try to come to a deal with the home owners ..... ie; try a bit of extortion and bribery - but that seems to be allowed too given the Camden Couple's situation.


http://squatspace.com/handbook/index.php this really takes the biscuit: the Squatters Handbook.

[Vicky.]

Does she Freeload the Food
thats clever
as stores chuck out good food due to legal dates on it.



But to leave a Perfect Home to Squat
that tells you she did not get along with (or like) others there.




Could you sit down in a cafe and chat to her now?

She gets on fine with her mum, she comes on visits quite regularly. She just wanted a different lifestyle.

And yeah, if I fancied going to london I could go and sit in a cafe and chat now, but I dont need to because she comes up here, probably every 3 months or so :p

[Benjamin]

The fact you have to prove the people squatting in your house have broken in horrifies me. What a ridiculous bloody notion.

[Pyramid*]

The fact you have to prove the people squatting in your house have broken in horrifies me. What a ridiculous bloody notion.

Even to the point that you have legal documentation to show it...... that you cannot possibly enter your owh home to get such docs....as they have (a) changed your lock and (b) have no legal right to allow you in (to your own house).

It's like a book of fables. And this is what his idiotic Judge condones.