Darth Vader Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 4. Is stealing from hard working people the answer? No, but I'm coming round to the idea, with more families becoming homeless and in unfit temporary accommodation, that if a property owner is not going to be using his property for a significant length of time, he should be lending it out, for families in emergency situations, providing they agree to leave it as it was found, and pay any possible damages incurred, after an assessment is made. These properties should be put to good use. After all, it would be no skin off his nose, and it would be better for the property to be occupied to deter vandals, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 No, but I'm coming round to the idea, with more families becoming homeless and in unfit temporary accommodation, that if a property owner is not going to be using his property for a significant length of time, he should be lending it out, for families in emergency situations, providing they agree to leave it as it was found, and pay any possible damages incurred, after an assessment is made. These properties should be put to good use. After all, it would be no skin off his nose, and it would be better for the property to be occupied to deter vandals, etc. tch wouldnt work AND as ive said SOME squatters make the property better, never mind "agree to leave it as it was found" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 tch wouldnt work AND as ive said SOME squatters make the property better, never mind "agree to leave it as it was found" I suppose, as soon as the authorities became involved to do assessments, the families would be expecting certain standards.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galanthusgal Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 What is the legal situation if a squatter hurts himself on the property (falling through a rotten floor for example)? Could they sue the owner for not ensuring the place was safe? Could the owner sue them for causing damage to his property? Should an owner be legally obliged to ensure that the property is 'sound', just in case of squatters or other trespassers?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 What is the legal situation if a squatter hurts himself on the property (falling through a rotten floor for example)? Could they sue the owner for not ensuring the place was safe? Could the owner sue them for causing damage to his property? Should an owner be legally obliged to ensure that the property is 'sound', just in case of squatters or other trespassers?! no idea, i doubt it, but then i dont think theres been anything like it that im aware of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galanthusgal Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 I understand that if a house is 'derelict', the council is legally obliged to fund repairs (there was outrage over in Cheshire 10 years ago that a local (rich) landowner could get council grants of tens of thousands of pounds to do up his home, which he promptly sold!!!!!). Should the council pay for repairs to do up an empty house? Should they compulsorily purchase it first? At the going rate or cheap? Should our council tax go up to pay for the extra compulsory purchases?! So the moral issue has just got bigger - should council tax payers pay for your derelict house to be improved?! Should an owner of a derelict house be forced to do it up? What happens if they don't have enough money - compulsorily sell it to the (low) bidder? Also, if it is immoral to be an owner of an empty house, surely it is immoral to charge rent to said homeless family (apart from a small amount to cover wear & tear) if they moved in?! So, as a community we should all pay a little bit & build a number of houses together.... it's called council housing:o lol! So the next question, is should our council taxes go up by, say, an extra 10% to cover the cost of extra council housing? And if so, where?! NIMBY... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lakey149 Posted October 30, 2010 Author Share Posted October 30, 2010 the people who squatted in these hospital and university buildings last year were a 'social centre' (sheffieldsocialcentre.org.uk) so their reasons for squatting weren't because they were homeless/vulnerable but because, i gather, they use squatting as a form of activism and they wanted to draw attention to their ideas. for those who are sympathetic to people who squat because they NEED to, are you also sympathetic to those who squat in order to publicise their views on society? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galanthusgal Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 no idea, i doubt it, but then i dont think theres been anything like it that im aware of? Perhaps not yet... but it will definitely happen in today's sue & counter-sue culture! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galanthusgal Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 To Lakey: Good point!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 I understand that if a house is 'derelict', the council is legally obliged to fund repairs (there was outrage over in Cheshire 10 years ago that a local (rich) landowner could get council grants of tens of thousands of pounds to do up his home, which he promptly sold!!!!!). Should the council pay for repairs to do up an empty house? Should they compulsorily purchase it first? At the going rate or cheap? Should our council tax go up to pay for the extra compulsory purchases?! So the moral issue has just got bigger - should council tax payers pay for your derelict house to be improved?! Should an owner of a derelict house be forced to do it up? What happens if they don't have enough money - compulsorily sell it to the (low) bidder? Also, if it is immoral to be an owner of an empty house, surely it is immoral to charge rent to said homeless family (apart from a small amount to cover wear & tear) if they moved in?! So, as a community we should all pay a little bit & build a number of houses together.... it's called council housing:o lol! So the next question, is should our council taxes go up by, say, an extra 10% to cover the cost of extra council housing? And if so, where?! NIMBY... eh? i think your deliberately complicating the issue on purpose now, youve gone from somebody squats an empty building...........and in a lot of cases does repairs themselves to council housing and tax payers paying rich landlords for repairs???? i aint sure where the connection is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.