Squatters Rights – what’s not changed

Police have no directive to act from Home Office , APCO or Ministry of Justice. How long is a piece of police tape?

Well done
Mark you understand the big picture as ever.

There are
many reasons why people squat, it isnt just anarchy and it isnt just financial.
Many squatters feel that empty properties are morally wrong in a climate where
people are homeless. I'm not saying you have to agree with that belief but
possibly accept the idea that squatting can also be done responsibly and with honourable
intentions.

I recall
back in the 1990s when London was planning to build the East London River
Crossing bridge Greenwich council compulosorily purchased a large tract of
Wickham Lane in Plumstead but then the bridge got scrapped and squatters moved
in to the 30 or 40 houses in the street that were laying empty.

I had
several friends living there, they all worked and kept the building in order.
They were homes for many years until the council took them back over. The
squatters stopped the area degrading..

I
understand that most concerns voiced on P118 is with the annoying and expensive
practice of evicted tenants breaking back in and in that landlords have my
sympathy. Many long term landlords will probably have had this happen to them or
at least know someone who it did happen to but I doubt any landlords, hand on
heart would say it was a perpetual problem warranting a law that will cost
society between £350million and £790 million to administrate, not to mention
the costs in dealing with the rise in homelessness.

For the
benefit of P118 readers I would also like to add to your list of what is
commonly considered squatting but actually isn’t.

If a
person was invited into the property by a lawful occupier they are not
squatting if the lawful occupier leaves.

This
covers people with a sole tenancy whose partner moves in and the relationship breaks
down and the tenant moves out. The remaining person might not have their name
on the tenancy agreement or a contract of any kind with the landlord but they
were let into the property with the permission of the tenant so are not
squatting.

My concerns
about squatting myths is when called, how will the police deal with it? At the
moment they cant tell the difference between a civil and criminal offence in
housing. If they hold the same erroneous beliefs held by many PRS landlords
about what constitutes squatting, will we also see a rise in police illegally evicting
people?

Tomorrow
I have a meeting with our legal department over the case of a woman moving in
with her partner, into his sole tenancy. He subsequently became violent and she
obtained an injunction to remove him from the property to protect herself and
her children. The agents argued that as she was not on the tenancy agreement
she was a squatter and she called the police. When she refused to leave they
handcuffed her in front of her chidlren and took her away. Agents changed the
locks. We are considering prosecuting the police for their involvement in what
was an illegal eviction because as usual neither the agent nor the police
understand the law.

With regard to David Lawrenson`s comments on tactics squatters might use...... If the squatters make up a false AST they will have to have forged the landlords signature. The police on checking the landlords true signature in advance on their passport / driving licence etc will see immediately ( in the vast majority of cases) the obvious differences and the squatters can be arrested forthwith for the squatting offence and also now the additional forgery and deception offences. There is no reason at all in my view why this should take a few weeks or months to check out after the event. It can be done in advance and then the matter dealt with in real time when they are on site.

But Johnathon you are missing the legal point that under the Law of Property Act 1925 you dont need a written tenancy agreement to create a lawful tenancy unless its for a fixed term of more than 3 years, and who has one of those?. Many of my clients dont have them at all.

If the landlord tells the cops the occupier is a squatter who will the cops believe?

Bear in mind that although landlords rejoice that squatting is now a double criminal offence, so is illegal eviction and the police repeatedly and regularly assist landlords to illegally evict tenants because they believe what the landlord tells them and if the landlord believes that a person is a squatter when they owe rent, or their NSP has expired, or they havent left after a possession order is granted, or the person was let in by someone else with permission, commonly held beliefs I have read on this forum, then you have a recipe for a lot of criminal action coming back at landlords.

So what's going to happen when a landlord misunderstands the rules, calls the Police to eveict a tenant and Police help. Tenancy Relations Officer gets called in (i.e. you) case gets to Court some months later, property is re-let in the meantime. Landlords defence; "but I called the Police your honour and they thought this was squatting as well". What is the judge likely to do? yes, the Police and landlord have both committed a crime but if people can't rely on the Police to know what they are doing what chance have landlords got? Is it likely, in your opinion, that the judge will only prosecute the Police and force them to pay damages or do you think the landlord will have to pay up too? It will be very interesting to see what the legal profession make of the first case that get's to Court won't it? If a landlord is prosecuted in such circumstances, will a good brief have a case to claim damages off the police too I wonder?

That is absolutely what will happen Mark. In criminal cases
ignorance of the law is no defence to either landlord or the police.

The police have been prosecuted in the past for participating
in illegal evictions, See Naughton v Whittle and greater Manchester Police from
2010.

Squatter’s rights groups will be pushing just this sort of
action as will many TROs who like me are thoroughly hacked off with the police
and their ignorance of this area of law constantly making things 10 times worse.
I am literally talking 99% of cases where they have become involved in
landlord/tenant disputes. I groan whenever one of my clients tells me they
called the police because I know exactly how the story is going to from then
on.

As I say, at the moment in standard illegal eviction cases
police help landlords evict based on what the landlrods tell them and if the
landlord is wrong the police are wrong too. The problem for landlords is, when
faced with an officer in uniform or a mouthy cockney council worker like me,
who are you going to believe?

Learning the difference between a squatter and someone who
has some form of legal rights in a property is not that complicated but I feel
many landlords comments are driven by emotive responses that blinds them to the
law, as is also the case when views are expressed on rent arrears being theft.
Simply not liking a situation or being angered about it doesn’t make something ‘Not’
a criminal offence.

When police start evicting and arresting squatters there
will be a lot of advisers, squatters rights groups and lawyers out there
looking to make cases, so landlords really need to start understanding the
difference between squatters and persons with rights, however much landlords
might hate those rights.

You are absolutely correct about the morality of empty property.
It is a national disgrace that we have approx 734000 empty properties.
I think there should be a wartime style reponse to these empty properties.
That is we the govt via councils will take compulsory ownership of these properties and make them fit to be lived in.
If you want the property back then you can providing you repay what we have invested in the property.
Any surplus rental income could go towards paying the debts incurred to bring the property into use or the owner could receive that rent on which tax would be paid.
No offsetting the tax against the capital the govt has spent which will one way or the other have to be repaid by the owner.
The housing crisis is such that we need a strategic response, invarably delivered by councils.
It should be a simple threat; bring ther property back into use or we will do it.
If you cannot source the finance to bring the property into use, we will provide cheap loans; but you will have to agree to house council tenaqnts for the 1st 5 years.
If somebody in Hackney is offered a refurbished house in some god forsaken Welsh mining town then they have to go there or come of the council housing list.
People should be housed and if it cannot be in their supposed areas, tough.
the obligation is to provide decent accommodation for all, not where the tenant would like to be .
Obviously the council would try to facilitate locality but if it can't be done then tough, you go where the decent accomodation is or there is no further obligation to house.
Perhaps doing this would breakup the ghettoisation of our communities.
It cannot, however be allowed that vital housing infrastructure is left to rot.
I can see the squatters point.
I think the bad squatteres have spoiled it for the good squatters.
Most of that has been caused by East European migrants.
We need to stop EU migration now; otherwise all that will happen is the migrants will be given the properties as they will be deemed to be in greater housing NEED.
We need to remove this NEED criteria.
Council property should go to who has been on the list the longest.
If that means asylum seekers and immigrants cannot source the council and HA property theso be it
Let's provide our scarce resouces for our citizens first before housing the world and his mother who manages to get into Britain.
British houses for British people whatever their race, colour or creed.
Govt must get to grips with the national wasting asset we have of empty housing stock.
The banks are a big obstacle here as they will not lend.
They need to be bypassed and subject to certain requirements councils can lend cheaply to bring these properties into use.
It makes far more sense paying standard LHA rather than expensive TA costs.
Will any of this be done .....................NO.
You can see why good squatters get annoyed; I'm annoyed along with them!!

Ben I share your concerns I am often told "the Police said just throw them out if they haven't paid you" !!! The landlord thinks that this is legal advice and often argues with me - until the tenant or local authority takes action against him.
I am working with West Midlands Police in several areas to work out a protacol that landlords can depend on when they involve the Police in their tenant problems and illegal eviction will be part of this.
NLA are partnering the local Police at a series of West Midlands landlords meetings and we will be discussion what the Police can and cannot do to help landlords. My new talk for landlords events is "If you want to know the time ask a Policeman - but don't ask him for legal advice"
We are back EDUCATION EDUCATION EDUCATION where you and I always agree that it is ingnorance of the law that causes more problems in the PRS tha intentional illegal activies.

"If you want to know the time ask a Policeman - but don't ask him for legal advice"

Hahaha Thanks for my first laugh of the day Mary.

I am double posting on this topic between here and Landlord Law Blog at the moment and have said that our problem is we have offered our local officer free training and assistance but they said they arent interested, so we have to make them interested by putting in a complaint with the PCC every single time they help in an illegal eviction or reject a serious complaint as a civil matter just because they hear the words 'Landlord and tenant'. Hopefully it wont take them too long to get the message

Ben I have a different approach. The areas where I am working with the local Police are high crime areas, often where bad landlords thrive and tenants are vulnerable. They need landlords to work with them to clean up these areas so.......... when they need me I have my opening. I hate the word "training" it makes me think of dogs - no offence Ben but its the truth. I never "train" anyone I offer opportunities for discussion and the Police need to have the discussion with landords in their areas and landlords need to have the discussion with the Police. We need them to help us with anti social behaviour - by helping us they are also helping the community that they serve. We are going to put some information sharing protacol in place that will enable landlords to avoid placing the "wrong" tenants in their properties and this will help everyone. Here is a story that the Police in an area of Birmingham told me recently and I think that this illustrates the point.
There are two naughty gangs in this area and the Second in Command of one of these gangs is a black man. Two doors down from this man a landlord placed a tenant. The tenant was on medication and had been behaving himself when the landlord checked him out. The tenant came off his medication and became violent and racist........ Do I need to say more?
The Police cannot divulge information to landlords but what they can do is answer a simple yes or no to the following question.
"I am planning to put this tenant into xyx property. This my criteria for a good tenant xyz. Have you any reason to believe that this tenants does not reach my criteria?"
Thank them for their reply and leave it at that.
"Data Protection" are the dirtiest words in the English language for landlords and the way to avoid it preventing information sharing is NEVER ASK FOR INFORMATION. Make a statement followed by a simple closed ended question the answer to which will tell you what you need to know without breaking Data Protection.