Is squatting wrong?

[Buzzetta]

If you're not using it, what have you got to lose by letting someone else use it?

If the house would stand empty otherwise, than your supermarket analogy isn't correct. I guess that's why squatting is being tolerated to some extend by both the low and the police (no, there're not one and the same thing )

Please, I am sure that you two can do better than, "they weren't using it so I should be able to."

That argument has never held up with anything anywhere at anytime. So if a car remains unsold on a dealerships lot does that give you the right to take it for your usage? If I have a summer house that I only use two months a year. That means you justify your free residency for the other ten months so long as you keep it clean?

Misguided youth always make me laugh.

 

[MunchyBrain]

Please, I am sure that you two can do better than, "they weren't using it so I should be able to."

That argument has never held up with anything anywhere at anytime. So if a car remains unsold on a dealerships lot does that give you the right to take it for your usage? If I have a summer house that I only use two months a year. That means you justify your free residency for the other ten months so long as you keep it clean?

Misguided youth always make me laugh.

Cars and accomodation are not the same thing, it's a rubbish example, like the Snickers bar.

As for the summer house, I think it's disgusting of anyone to own a house and only use it for 2 months a year when there's as many homeless people as there is.

The youth line is just pathetic, by the way.

 

[Buzzetta]

Cars and accomodation are not the same thing, it's a rubbish example, like the Snickers bar.

As for the summer house, I think it's disgusting of anyone to own a house and only use it for 2 months a year when there's as many homeless people as there is.

You can think its a waste you may think its unnecessary and you can call it disgusting but the fact remains that it is mine not yours and if you are there you are trespassing. That is the concept you fail to realize.

The youth line is just pathetic, by the way.

Pathetic responses are met with pathetic comments. Now you know why I wrote what I did.

 

[MunchyBrain]

You can think its a waste you may think its unnecessary and you can call it disgusting but the fact remains that it is mine not yours and if you are there you are trespassing. That is the concept you fail to realize.


Pathetic responses are met with pathetic comments. Now you know why I wrote what I did.

If you don't break in it is not trespassing, and nobody I know would break in to a property. If that's your issue it's not an issue with squatting.

 

[oye terence]

there is a simple answer.it is trespassing and theft.i do not care who owns the property.

 

[MunchyBrain]

there is a simple answer.it is trespassing and theft.i do not care who owns the property.

If nobody owns the property and the squatter doesn't break in, it's not tresspassing or theft.

 

[Not Right in the Head]

If you don't break in it is not trespassing, and nobody I know would break in to a property. If that's your issue it's not an issue with squatting.

Wait, you mean that if the property's door is unlocked and you open it, it's not trespassing? I suppose the property was "just asking for it"?

 

[dunya]

Squatting is not always resisted by the owners.
Many organised squats occupy a building that is empty, make it secure and pay the utilities. Some landlords, who perhaps are waiting to sell, are OK to have squatters occupying the building while they wait for legal matters about the sale to proceed. This means the property is not vulnerable to burglary and trashing by destructive partyers, and the expense of employing security is avoided. Also the neighbours prefer not to have an empty building next to them. They then make an agreement with the squatters to vacate at a particular time.

Other landlords are not as accommodating. Near me is a building specially built for people with disabilities, but because the owners want to redevelop the site, they have kept it mostly empty for years, despite great need for this type of housing in the area.

 

[MunchyBrain]

Wait, you mean that if the property's door is unlocked and you open it, it's not trespassing? I suppose the property was "just asking for it"?

Technically, no. Not against the law. It might be in America, I know there's different laws. But in England it's not.

 

[oye terence]

If nobody owns the property and the squatter doesn't break in, it's not tresspassing or theft.

property is always owned by someone,it could be a private owner,corporation,a bank or even taken over locally by the town,no such thing as any property not being owned by someone or something.

no,i take that back,perhaps for a day or two or while paperwork is being exchanged it may not be owned.

perhaps that is a part of the actual law in the U.K. , i do not know,but what defines breaking an entry? so if they do not lock the door you can walk right in and its okay?

i took my car off the road last year for almost a year so by that thinking it would be okay to come and use it while i didnt use it.and it the same thing,it is property,my property,no one elses.

 

[Buzzetta]

Technically, no. Not against the law. It might be in America, I know there's different laws. But in England it's not.

I will ask you again. Are you paying taxes for using the property? Are you aware that if you do sit on a property for ten - twelve years that you owe back taxes on the property? Uh huh yeeeeah I thought so...

Misguided youth is funny.

 

[5am]

Please, I am sure that you two can do better than, "they weren't using it so I should be able to."

That argument has never held up with anything anywhere at anytime. So if a car remains unsold on a dealerships lot does that give you the right to take it for your usage? If I have a summer house that I only use two months a year. That means you justify your free residency for the other ten months so long as you keep it clean?

Squatting is more complicated than your theft situations. It does make a difference when empty houses are owned by corporations, if only because these corporations are often partially governmental.

It's like a semi-governmental supermarket chain that keeps warehouses full with products that they are not going to sell, at the time that people are hungry. Without talking about whether it's right or wrong to still from them, it's quite clear there's something wrong here.

See, I can find analogies too! Sure, it's a bit over the top, but it happened/happens. Plus, the actual situation we're talking about is pretty dramatic as well.

Misguided youth always make me laugh.

No need to patronize. Just because I see things differently than you doesn't mean I'm unaware or uneducated. Or that I'm a teenager

 

[Buzzetta]

property is always owned by someone,it could be a private owner,corporation,a bank or even taken over locally by the town,no such thing as any property not being owned by someone or something.

no,i take that back,perhaps for a day or two or while paperwork is being exchanged it may not be owned.

perhaps that is a part of the actual law in the U.K. , i do not know,but what defines breaking an entry? so if they do not lock the door you can walk right in and its okay?

i took my car off the road last year for almost a year so by that thinking it would be okay to come and use it while i didnt use it.and it the same thing,it is property,my property,no one elses.

Exactly - perhaps she will not overlook this point after two people have made it. Even if a property is classified as abandoned and the bank or state takes custodial ownership of that property the bank or the municipality is declared as having the ownership of that property.

This is why when my friends go to their summer home they bring a shotgun with them "just in case".

 

[Buzzetta]

Squatting is more complicated than your theft situations. It does make a difference when empty houses are owned by corporations, if only because these corporations are often partially governmental.

It's like a semi-governmental supermarket chain that keeps warehouses full with products that they are not going to sell, at the time that people are hungry. Without talking about whether it's right or wrong to still from them, it's quite clear there's something wrong here.

See, I can find analogies too! Sure, it's a bit over the top, but it happened/happens. Plus, the actual situation we're talking about is pretty dramatic as well.



No need to patronize. Just because I see things differently than you doesn't mean I'm unaware or uneducated. Or that I'm a teenager

it does not make a difference. Ownership of property or usage of property requires compensation and is taxed thereof. England taxes on inheritance, rental fees, incoming transatlantic parcels and what have you. Simply because it is owned by a corporation and is simply sitting there does not warrant any justifiable means to claim temporary residence. It is still owned by a corporation which in your own admission in some cases is partially subsidized by government agencies. Therefore a rate of compensation is due the owners and in the very least a tax for said usage.

You can try justifying it with petty cries for homelessness which is already discounted by "Munched up brains" declaration that she knows people who have regular jobs and still elect to sit illegally in someone else's home rather than pay a rent.

I checked English law by the way. Squatting is classified as a civil offense and not a criminal one. The reason being is because it denies compensation instead of being an overt act. In either case it is regarded as illegal and punishable. While authorities have been kind enough to allow squatters to gather their possessions they are not required to as nothing may be taken out of the residence without proof of ownership. Meaning hold on to you receipts.

uh-hmm


And... I patronize whom I wish. It's what makes me "me".

 

[MunchyBrain]

property is always owned by someone,it could be a private owner,corporation,a bank or even taken over locally by the town,no such thing as any property not being owned by someone or something.

no,i take that back,perhaps for a day or two or while paperwork is being exchanged it may not be owned.

perhaps that is a part of the actual law in the U.K. , i do not know,but what defines breaking an entry? so if they do not lock the door you can walk right in and its okay?

i took my car off the road last year for almost a year so by that thinking it would be okay to come and use it while i didnt use it.and it the same thing,it is property,my property,no one elses.

Breaking an entry is defined by damage to windows or doors. It's illegal for the owner of the house to force their way in if you are occupying it, say if you put locks on the doors, they are not allowed to break them. You're all like little kids about this is MY property. If you're not using it, why d'you have it? At the very least learn to share.

I will ask you again. Are you paying taxes for using the property? Are you aware that if you do sit on a property for ten - twelve years that you owe back taxes on the property? Uh huh yeeeeah I thought so...

Misguided youth is funny.

I am aware of that. Most of the squatters I know pay legitimately for water, electricity and gas.

Stop patronising me please.

 

[oye terence]

Breaking an entry is defined by damage to windows or doors. It's illegal for the owner of the house to force their way in if you are occupying it, say if you put locks on the doors, they are not allowed to break them. You're all like little kids about this is MY property. If you're not using it, why d'you have it? At the very least learn to share.



I am aware of that. Most of the squatters I know pay legitimately for water, electricity and gas.

Stop patronising me please.

learning to share and letting people use your property without permission is quite different,i am about to sign the papers on what was once my parents former summer house,thus it is mine no one elses.

by your thinking it is okay to use anything of someone else's if they are not using it,that is simply flawed absurd logic.

 

[Buzzetta]

Breaking an entry is defined by damage to windows or doors. It's illegal for the owner of the house to force their way in if you are occupying it, say if you put locks on the doors, they are not allowed to break them. You're all like little kids about this is MY property. If you're not using it, why d'you have it? At the very least learn to share.



I am aware of that. Most of the squatters I know pay legitimately for water, electricity and gas.

Stop patronising me please.

But are they paying tax for usage of the property? Do they have permission of the ownership of said property? Uh huh - go ahead and evade the question again so I can keep patronizing you. You are causing me to chuckle while I await a serious phone call.

The only reasons that you two have given in your feeble attempts to justify the theft of usage of property and compensation thereof is:

1. I think it's vile, considering the enormous shortage in living spaces- which I assume is a problem of most big cities. I'm glad some people get to live there.

2. If you're not using it, what have you got to lose by letting someone else use it?

3. I think it's disgusting of anyone to own a house and only use it for 2 months a year when there's as many homeless people as there is.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Wait let me contain myself...

oops too late....
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
woooooo, wait.... whoa

nope
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

 

[Buzzetta]

learning to share and letting people use your property without permission is quite different,i am about to sign the papers on what was once my parents former summer house,thus it is mine no one elses.

by your thinking it is okay to use anything of someone else's if they are not using it,that is simply flawed absurd logic.

Congratulations. Be sure to bring several shotgun wielding friends during the move in the event of squatters.

 

[oye terence]

Congratulations. Be sure to bring several shotgun wielding friends in the event of squatters.

thank you,I have been living here for a month or so,but that was always a fear,though you do not find many squatters of this kind on cape cod.

and I think this debate is futile,it is more based apon political views on their part,which is fine, but it has biased their views,laws are laws,property is property.

 

[5am]

And... I patronize whom I wish. It's what makes me "me".

You forgot to add "It's a free country"