ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums

ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/index.php)
-   Serious Debates & News (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=61)
-   -   Judge encourages Squatters.... (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=183756)

Pyramid* 06-09-2011 12:04 PM

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

Quote:

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’



Niamh. 06-09-2011 12:24 PM

I don't even know what to say.

Tom 06-09-2011 12:36 PM

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

Pyramid* 06-09-2011 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom (Post 4534136)
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 06-09-2011 02:10 PM

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 06-09-2011 02:11 PM

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* 06-09-2011 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN (Post 4534219)
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....
Quote:

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. 06-09-2011 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN (Post 4534219)
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* 06-09-2011 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 4534225)
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 06-09-2011 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyramid* (Post 4534221)
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....
__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 4534225)
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 06-09-2011 02:27 PM

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

Zippy 06-09-2011 02:35 PM

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* 06-09-2011 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN (Post 4534237)
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?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN (Post 4534237)
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.... !

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN (Post 4534237)
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 06-09-2011 02:41 PM

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* 06-09-2011 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zippy (Post 4534259)
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* 06-09-2011 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benjamin. (Post 4534278)
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 06-09-2011 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benjamin. (Post 4534278)
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 06-09-2011 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyramid* (Post 4534269)
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/...uncil_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 06-09-2011 02:56 PM

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

Zippy 06-09-2011 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu (Post 4534296)
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 06-09-2011 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benjamin. (Post 4534278)
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 06-09-2011 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom (Post 4534136)
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* 06-09-2011 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN (Post 4534304)
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/...uncil_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. 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. 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] 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 people. In November 2005, Lambeth London Borough Council finally obtained a 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* 06-09-2011 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zippy (Post 4534316)
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 06-09-2011 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN (Post 4534320)
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* 06-09-2011 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 4534311)
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 06-09-2011 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyramid* (Post 4534382)
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. 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. 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] 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 people. In November 2005, Lambeth London Borough Council finally obtained a 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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zippy (Post 4534390)
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* 06-09-2011 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN (Post 4534411)
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 06-09-2011 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN (Post 4534411)



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. 06-09-2011 04:11 PM

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. 06-09-2011 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicky. (Post 4534463)
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 06-09-2011 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicky. (Post 4534463)
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. 06-09-2011 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 4534470)
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. 06-09-2011 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicky. (Post 4534475)
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. 06-09-2011 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 4534482)
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 06-09-2011 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyramid* (Post 4534429)
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zippy (Post 4534457)
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* 06-09-2011 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicky. (Post 4534475)
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. 06-09-2011 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicky. (Post 4534486)
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. 06-09-2011 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 4534499)
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 06-09-2011 04:32 PM

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.


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:14 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.