Squatters Rights – what’s not changed
Published 01/09/2012 In this blog I intend to dispel a few urban myths which appear to be forming, both amongst landlords and squatters themselves judging from some of the readers emails I have received. As of today a person occupying a residential property without the owners permission is committing a criminal offence which is punishable by up to six months in prison and a £5,000 fine and can no longer claim squatters rights.
Yesterday evening I appeared on BBC News 24 and completed a down the line interview with Catherine Brogan representing SQUASH (Squatters Action for Secure Homes) who also appeared on the same 6 minute interview.
Catherine does not match most peoples stereotype of a squatter. I couldn’t see her during the interview and had no prior knowledge of who she was. I watched a recording of the interview later at a friends house and decided to Google her. She is on Facebook, Twitter, You Tube and even has her own blog. Clearly she is also an aspiring poet and to be perfectly honest was quite impressed. Nonetheless, from the interview it was also clear that even for Catherine, some of the lines were still a bit blurred in terms of todays new laws criminalising squatters.
So, let’s dispel a few urban myths and answer a few questions for landlords and squatters:-
- If a person has been subject to a tenancy agreement and fails to pay rent on time or leave the property when a section 21 or section 8 notice is issued this does not make them a squatter and no crime has been committed. This remains a civil offence and a court order is still required for any eviction to be legal.
- The new law does not apply to commercial properties, therefore, the method of removing squatters is the same as it was before the new law.
- Don’t expect the Police to raid and arrest every squatter in a residential building today. It’s not going to happen. The reality is that they will only act once they receive a complaint from the owner. Given that several squatted properties have remained empty for years due to neglect by the owner it is highly unlikely that such owners will even be aware of the new law, let alone make a complaint.
I read a very interesting post written by David Lawrenson on the Inside Housing Blog which suggested that squatters are likely to use the following tactics to avoid prosecution. I thought long and hard about whether to re-publish his words here but I decided to do so on the basis that forewarned is forearmed and the matter should be discussed and ideas shared. David’s comments are in blue:-
“We think all that a squatter now has to do under the new law, is the following….
- Go to the Land Registry website and find out who is the owner of the property. This costs £4 currently per enquiry and takes about 3 minutes to do.
- Make up a plausible looking tenancy agreement with a false name for the tenant and the true name of the landlord. Blank up to date agreements can be found on line in a minute or so, and can be bought for a few pounds.
- Show the agreement to the policeman or bailiff or owner.
- If queried, the squatter will say they pay rent in cash to to the landlord. Naturally there is no trail for cash and they can say that the nasty landlord never issues a receipt.
What can landlords do to protect themselves against this strategy?
I once spent an evening with a landlord who was a previously a squatter in the late 1970′s and early 1980′s. We sat in a hotel bar following a networking meeting swapping stories until the early hours. I was fascinated by his stories of why he became a squatter. He too was a very intelligent man, articulate, well spoken, educated and very much into the psyche of people. He became a squatter to rebel and he beleives that several squatters are of this mindset. He knew he could go home to Mum and Dad at any time but it was the Punk Rock era and “Anarchy rules OK“.
The Short and the Longer Term Solution
A short term solution to the housing problem is for Councils to provide land with planning permission for temporary accommodation. The post war pre-fabs worked, these days pre-fabs are far better. People pay a small fortune to stay in a Winterised Caravan for a coastal holiday these days. I know a park operator who would invest up to £200 million in a Joint Venture with councils to provide such short term accommodation. All he needs is a field with planning permission on a 99 year peppercorn lease from the council and a promise that they will rent the units back from him for 5 years at the same rate as single persons Local Housing allowance rates. He will fund the entire infrastructure, install the units and even contract to cut the council into 25% of the rent after the initial five year term. It seems like a no brainier to me but so far he’s drawn a blank. Crazy really as he knows at least 50 other European park operators who are likely to want to do exactly the same deal.
And the government say they want to solve the housing crisis and work with the private sector – PAH!!!
Anyhow, I’ve gone on for long enough. This blog started out as a professional sharing of information and is turning into a political rent so I’ll stop there and hand over to you.
PRESS INFORMATION
Mark Alexander can be contacted via:-
email: mark@property118.com
Twitter: @iAmAlandlord
Phone: 01603 428501
About Mark Alexander
Mark and his family have been investing in property since 1989, initially in the Norwich area but more recently across the length and breadth of England. Mark created Property118.com as a social network for landlords with a vision of becoming the UK's best respected online property community.
Mark is also a freelance internet marketing consultant to law firms
Email - mark@property118.com
-
farah damji says:
01/09/2012 at 17:14
-
Ben Reeve Lewis says:
02/09/2012 at 08:45
-
Jonathan Clarke says:
02/09/2012 at 09:48
-
Ben Reeve Lewis says:
02/09/2012 at 10:16
-
Mark Alexander says:
02/09/2012 at 11:54
-
Ben Reeve Lewis says:
02/09/2012 at 12:11
-
Paul Barrett says:
02/09/2012 at 12:38
-
Mary Latham says:
02/09/2012 at 13:06
-
Ben Reeve Lewis says:
02/09/2012 at 13:12
-
Mary Latham says:
02/09/2012 at 13:28
-
Ben Reeve Lewis says:
02/09/2012 at 14:07
-
Mary Latham says:
02/09/2012 at 14:34
-
Ben Reeve Lewis says:
02/09/2012 at 15:17
-
Mary Latham says:
02/09/2012 at 16:56
-
Ben Reeve Lewis says:
02/09/2012 at 18:40
-
Mary Latham says:
02/09/2012 at 18:45
-
Ben Reeve Lewis says:
02/09/2012 at 19:37
-
Rich G says:
02/09/2012 at 20:59
-
Mark Alexander says:
02/09/2012 at 22:04
-
Mark Alexander says:
02/09/2012 at 23:10
-
cosmo says:
03/09/2012 at 18:52
-
Richard Greenland says:
03/09/2012 at 21:29
-
Mark Alexander says:
04/09/2012 at 00:35
-
Glenn Ackroyd says:
04/09/2012 at 05:02
-
Richard Greenland says:
22/09/2012 at 03:30
-
Mark Alexander says:
22/09/2012 at 05:36
-
Guest says:
05/02/2013 at 22:57
Leave a commentPolice 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.
I suppose because I work for the council they arent so guarded with Data Protection. Councils have powers that cross over that stuff and because I am a prosecuting officer I am alllowed to demand information that other’s cant get.
Whenever I work jointly with the police its fine, its what the little tinkers get up to when my back is turned that causes me grief haha.
Data Protection certainly creates lots of un-resolvable issues doesnt it? I can understand it in many cases but it can really be damaging to the relationship between landlords and councils.
The case law of Minter v. Mole Valley DC is a case in point. Minter sued the council for placing a nightmare tenant with him, knowing about his previous record. The council defended saying Data Protection meant they couldnt say anything. Minter won his case.
Ben “better a volunteer than a conscript” I find that respecting the organisations needs to stay within Data Protection works well. I always begin by saying that I realise that they cannot give me information and that is why I am not going to ask for any.
Landlords suffer really badly when Housing Benefit departments use Data Protection to prevent the landlord tracking a claim and being able to help the tenant to provide the information that the council need. I tell landlords to tell the council that they know that they cannot confirm that the tenant is on benefits or that they are waiting for information from the tenant the to tell them. The full name of the tenant, the address of the property, the amount of the rent, the start date of the tenancy and ask them to send the landlord an Application Form for direct payment if the tenant is on benefits.
Landlords can’t spend time and money fighting in Court we need our rent.
I recognised back in the 1990s that landlord/tenant relationships would improve overnight if only HB would talk to landlords and yet I still havent seen it happen anywhere to any appreciable extent.
Our landlords have a code number where they can go online and see how much is about to go out to them and when but the problem it only gives a bulk figure, so if a landlord has 10 tenants they cant tell who might not be getting any money that month.
We are trying to encourage landlords in our borough to become accredited through LLAS (UKLAP Nationally) and one of the sweeteners we want is a dedicated open service from HB where they arent treated like paraiahs just for asking a question. Seems common sense but the twin problems are Data Protection and the fact that the needs of a housing directorate dont hold much sway over the concerns of the finance directorate.
Its like 2 chefs cooking the same meal where the saucierre makes the sauce regardless of what meat the other chef needs to serve, which reminds me of a joke from my childhood;
Man goers into a barbers and says “I want hair like Tony Curtis”. The barber nods and promptly shaves all his hair off. The astonsihed man says “Tony Curtis doesnt have his hair like this!!!!” to which the barber replies “He would if he came in ‘ere”
Hahahahahahaha
Sandwell Council have a dedicated Housing Benefit Help line for MLAS accredited landlords Ben. The landlords get straight through without waiting in line but they are still stonewalled by Data Protection.
Yeah. Know the problem but what if tenants signed a third party authorisation letter when signing up with a landlord? Authorising HB to talk to lanldords about their claim?
I do it with alll my mortgage repossession cases so the lender will discuss everytting with me. If banks can do it why not HB? It might encourage landlords to trust them more too
Ben my experience is that when you get through to a dreaded call centre their “Script” defaults to “data protection, can’t tell you”. Most landlords get the authorisation when the AST is signed but getting the HB department to acknowledge that is walking up wet mirrors and even if they do they tell the landlord that they can only disclose so much – they dont understand that it is no disclosure or full disclosure!! We have managed to get the scripts rewritten in many authorities but its a long slow process and each one is a law unto themselves. You would think that it was their own money and money do not hide the fact that they don’t like landlords.
Luckily most HB calls are taped “for training purposes” and we have hung several of them with their own rope – not what we want to be doing really.
There’s no magic bullet for us on the inside either Mary. Trying to get them to cooperate with a bigger picture than just processing numbers. I suppose its what happens to a person’s point of focus when all day you just fit personal circumstances into procedures and regulations.
Unless you are lucky enough to get someone high up in the department who is on message it will never go smoothly unless government introduces an amendment to the HB regs, which they do quite regularly. Fat chance given the current thinking backing LHA and universal credit, people being in charge of their own finances
Mark that is an excellent and well-balanced blog with some excellent responses from Ben and Mary. Very informative. What a refreshing change from the usual emotional knee-jerk reactions. It will be very interesting to see where the change in the law takes this difficult issue in future. Hm, I wonder who the ex-squatter landlord was
Hi Ben
I think this would make for an excellent blog, especially if written by you …
“The case law of
Minter v. Mole Valley DC is a case in point. Minter sued the council for
placing a nightmare tenant with him, knowing about his previous record. The
council defended saying Data Protection meant they couldn’t say anything. Minter
won his case.”
Hi Rich, I didn’t want to reveal his identity without his permission but thanks for the compliment and feedback.
think we have to firstly understand the true definition of ” homeless ”
a chap that has left home, ie; mum and dads house, is not in the true sense of the word ” homeless ” just because he has ‘nowhere else’ to go.
he has somewhere to go. back to mum and dad.
unless of course the individual is recently orphaned and the property was let to mum and dad in which case the lease naturally goes to the successor.
homelessness is, in all reality, a choice.
i was made ‘homeless’ as a result of an acrimonious divorce.
but I was not homeless. I just went back to mum and dad and started all over again. they had to put up with me for 3 months while I got my life together.
the other CHOICE was to sleep rough in the streets.
but it would have been a CHOICE from a number of options available.
if someone chooses to live rough on the streets, we should respect their choice. but we should not be forced to pay for their choice.
Cosmo there are those for whom there is no safe parental home to return to.
What is unclear is any legal definition of ‘squatter’. To my knowledge none exists.
Hi Rich, a legal definition of a squatter does exist, please see >>>
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/squatter
Excellent article. I also read that you could not evict a squatter if they had occupied the house innocently having being duped by a bogus agent. That being the case, they would not need to know the landlords name, or signature. A simple made up AST an untraceable cover story and away you go…
Cheers Mark, I’m on a bit of a catch-up mission and I missed this…
A. That is an American website and
B. It is expressing an opinion, that definition has no status in law.
Another bit of useful info I gathered yesterday from my good friend Ken Edmondson is that Trespass remains a civil matter whereas Trespass with the Intention to Occupy Residential Property has become illegal. This is very valuable to me as it means I can continue business as usual on properties advertised as ‘No Access to View’ without committing a criminal act
Good site by the way!
That’s an interesting point on trespass as I heard that the new squatters law had an impact on the right to protest. I’ll get it checked out.
In Spain, or in England?