header-logo header-logo

01 October 2012 / Mark Tempest
Issue: 7531 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Your place or mine?

Is the clock ticking for squatters? Mark Tempest reports

From 1 September 2012, there is a new offence of squatting in a residential building. Whether jail for up to 51 weeks and/or a fine will deter would-be squatters remains to be seen.

But those advising property owners or occupiers dispossessed by squatters will, by definition, be dealing with a situation where the existence of the offence was no deterrent. For advisers, the question is whether there is anything in the new law that may help get back possession of the premises.

The new offence

Section 144 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 creates an offence of squatting in a residential building.

The offence is committed by anyone who is in a residential building as a trespasser if: -

  • They entered it as a trespasser (even if before the section came into force)
  • They know or ought to know they are trespassing; and
  • They live in the building or intend to live there

“Building” is widely defined as any structure, including a temporary or moveable one.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll