Footballers allow squatters to stay in their Manchester development

[sgtkate]

Old links, people were subsequently arrested and charged for the damage.

 

The building was clean and secure before they got in, local urbexers tried and failed.

 

Ah. What a shame then. A large number of squatters do not do damage. There's a square in central london that has a large number of squatters and they've actually increased the property values by doing them up. Most of the occupants are working in London! I would imagine these are the exception though. Typically I cannot find a link for this. I used to work with a guy who lived there for a bit. He was an IT Consultant, well paid but said he just loved the atmosphere of all the different people and that it was like a commune.

[TJC1]

Not been funny, but Manchester isn't London and doesnt have nearly the scale of housing problem.

 

Get a job. Get a council place (am assuming these people are classed 'homeless') if you can't afford private.

 

---------- Post added 20-10-2015 at 17:38 ----------

 

exactly that! and no its commercial property so they have no legal rights, actually the law changed recently to make it easier to get squatters out of residential also.

 

 

Good job. I'm sure the UTD boys can afford it, but it's beside the point.

[stimpy]

It still amazes me that 'squatters' arent charged for breaking and entering.

 

A good gesture i suppose but it Will be interesting to see how they go when they need to remove them.

Edited October 21, 2015 by stimpy

[alchresearch]

It still amazes me that 'squatters' arent charged for breaking and entering.

 

I think it varies from force to force. In my link earlier, the Liverpool ones were done for aggravated trespass but not B&E, despite the building being locked tight as a drum before they got in.

 

But I've known urbexers find an open building, get caught inside by police and be charged with B&E, as well as various other crimes.

[leviathan13]

So if the footballers kicked them out, they'd be seen as typical millionaires with no sense of the real world and only looking after their own interests with no thought of those less fortunate...

 

...but by allowing them to stay it's nothing but a PR stunt?

 

Can't really win, can they?

 

And for those worrying about it - what does it matter? It's not your money or building, so if the squatters do wreck it... so what? What impact does it have on your life?

[ukdobby]

Saw one being interviewed,he says everyone should have 4 walls and a roof round them,nothing about working for it.

[TJC1]

So if the footballers kicked them out, they'd be seen as typical millionaires with no sense of the real world and only looking after their own interests with no thought of those less fortunate...

 

...but by allowing them to stay it's nothing but a PR stunt?

 

Can't really win, can they?

 

And for those worrying about it - what does it matter? It's not your money or building, so if the squatters do wreck it... so what? What impact does it have on your life?

 

Its good PR for their upcoming new luxury hotel.

 

---------- Post added 21-10-2015 at 10:47 ----------

 

Saw one being interviewed,he says everyone should have 4 walls and a roof round them,nothing about working for it.

 

Everyone should. Its essential in maslows hierarchy of needs.

Thats why these fellows can class themselves as homeless and council has duty to rehouse them. This is a first world country after all, allegedly.

[onewheeldave]

Saw one being interviewed,he says everyone should have 4 walls and a roof round them,nothing about working for it.

 

He's right.

[slordy71]

He's right.

 

he is right but its not "a" right:roll: i see the entitlement culture is in full swing

 

---------- Post added 21-10-2015 at 11:35 ----------

 

So if the footballers kicked them out, they'd be seen as typical millionaires with no sense of the real world and only looking after their own interests with no thought of those less fortunate...

 

...but by allowing them to stay it's nothing but a PR stunt?

 

Can't really win, can they?

 

And for those worrying about it - what does it matter? It's not your money or building, so if the squatters do wreck it... so what? What impact does it have on your life?

 

it annoys me even though its not my property because it sends a message out to others that its OK!!! it might be one of mine next?

[onewheeldave]

he is right but its not "a" right:roll: i see the entitlement culture is in full swing

 

---------- Post added 21-10-2015 at 11:35 ----------

 

 

it annoys me even though its not my property because it sends a message out to others that its OK!!! it might be one of mine next?

 

It doesn't 'send a message'.

 

If you've got properties standing empty for years on end, whilst homeless people die on the streets, then, yes, it may be one of yours next. If it were up to me, every empty building left to go derelict, would be fair game for those who require a home.

 

If you're putting your properties to actual use, you won't have a problem.

 

At the end of the day, if someones homeless, it's generally cos they're autistic, or have mental health issues, or the many other causes- and, any substance abuse issues are also generally the result of those factors.