Squatters rights!
24-05-2007, 12:39 PM
#5
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bizarre. Only in America! 
........ oh shit... it happened in London. what is wrong with our courts?? Why these bizarre rulings?
Never did understand 'squatters rights' - can't see how it could ever be in the general public interest - someone illegally stays in your property for long enough and then you have to fight to get them removed and they can enter a plea for ownership of the property? why?!
The original owner of that land/gardens should be charging the guy for 21 years of back rent, not having his own property taken away.
ste
........ oh shit... it happened in London. what is wrong with our courts?? Why these bizarre rulings?Never did understand 'squatters rights' - can't see how it could ever be in the general public interest - someone illegally stays in your property for long enough and then you have to fight to get them removed and they can enter a plea for ownership of the property? why?!
The original owner of that land/gardens should be charging the guy for 21 years of back rent, not having his own property taken away.
ste
24-05-2007, 12:57 PM
#7
Originally Posted by SteveT
bizarre. Only in America! ........ oh shit... it happened in London. what is wrong with our courts?? Why these bizarre rulings?
Never did understand 'squatters rights' - can't see how it could ever be in the general public interest - someone illegally stays in your property for long enough and then you have to fight to get them removed and they can enter a plea for ownership of the property? why?!
The original owner of that land/gardens should be charging the guy for 21 years of back rent, not having his own property taken away.
ste
........ oh shit... it happened in London. what is wrong with our courts?? Why these bizarre rulings?Never did understand 'squatters rights' - can't see how it could ever be in the general public interest - someone illegally stays in your property for long enough and then you have to fight to get them removed and they can enter a plea for ownership of the property? why?!
The original owner of that land/gardens should be charging the guy for 21 years of back rent, not having his own property taken away.
ste
Because all land in this country actually belongs to the queen technically, thats what happened when her lot came over here and warred with us originally, they won the whole country as a prize, if you as guardian of some of that land dont continue to show an interest in it for 21 years and someone else does, its deemed to be their home not yours.
Trending Topics
24-05-2007, 01:00 PM
#8
Advanced PassionFord User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bexhill, East Sussex
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It sounds to me like the property developers didn't own the land either. So basically it was a quarrel over who had rights to the land, and as the homeless bloke had lived their longer (unquestioned as well), he won the case.
I personally don't agree with people squatting in properties when someone doesn't want them there, but if the owners don't give a shit and don't do anything about it then it's actually quite fair.
Cheers,
Andy
I personally don't agree with people squatting in properties when someone doesn't want them there, but if the owners don't give a shit and don't do anything about it then it's actually quite fair.
Cheers,
Andy
24-05-2007, 05:04 PM
#10
PassionFord Post Whore!!
We are a little at cross purposes here.
There is the law of adverse possesion, which says if you occupy a piece of land / building UNOPPOSED and thats the crucial bit here, for a period of twelve years then its yours, unless the legal owner files an order to try and recover it, but its dogdy ground.
Then there is something called a Prescriptive Right, which means if you have done something, say crossed a piece of land for 20 years UNOPPOSED then you have the right to continue to do so.
It at any point in the 12 or 20 year periods someone says 'Stop' thats it, the clock stops and you've got no hope.
But if some developers have left a tramp on a piece of land for more than 12 years then they are naive fools and deserve all they get..... rich BMW Driving, Fake Tan, nasty pinstriped expensive suit wearing wankers !
GO THE TRAMP !!!!
There is the law of adverse possesion, which says if you occupy a piece of land / building UNOPPOSED and thats the crucial bit here, for a period of twelve years then its yours, unless the legal owner files an order to try and recover it, but its dogdy ground.
Then there is something called a Prescriptive Right, which means if you have done something, say crossed a piece of land for 20 years UNOPPOSED then you have the right to continue to do so.
It at any point in the 12 or 20 year periods someone says 'Stop' thats it, the clock stops and you've got no hope.
But if some developers have left a tramp on a piece of land for more than 12 years then they are naive fools and deserve all they get..... rich BMW Driving, Fake Tan, nasty pinstriped expensive suit wearing wankers !
GO THE TRAMP !!!!
25-05-2007, 11:03 AM
#18
Wahay!! I've lost my Virginity!!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i dont get it.
A pensioner, almost certainly homeless due to government mismanagment, found himself a tiny little bit of PARKLAND made himself a wee shack and has lived there for 20 years, with only his pittance of a pension, and whatever he could scrape together. Some money grabbing CUNTS, move in, try to buy out the land from under him and turf hm out to god knows what end.
Turns out that under british law, a BRITISH man whos lived there for 20 years UNNOPOSED might just be enttled to stay, and you cunts are calling him a twat?!
fuck off.
its not like hes some pikey cunt who pitched up on farmland with a load of caravans and wrecked the fucking place is it. he lived there for years never harmed a soul, by all accounts is well known to the locals, who dont seem to have any objections, and lets face it, its an expensive area, if theyd wanted him out in the past 20 years hed have been long gone
fair play to the man, he deserves it i think, if hed come in as an imigrant he wouldnt be lving in a fuckng shack for 20 years would he.
A pensioner, almost certainly homeless due to government mismanagment, found himself a tiny little bit of PARKLAND made himself a wee shack and has lived there for 20 years, with only his pittance of a pension, and whatever he could scrape together. Some money grabbing CUNTS, move in, try to buy out the land from under him and turf hm out to god knows what end.
Turns out that under british law, a BRITISH man whos lived there for 20 years UNNOPOSED might just be enttled to stay, and you cunts are calling him a twat?!
fuck off.
its not like hes some pikey cunt who pitched up on farmland with a load of caravans and wrecked the fucking place is it. he lived there for years never harmed a soul, by all accounts is well known to the locals, who dont seem to have any objections, and lets face it, its an expensive area, if theyd wanted him out in the past 20 years hed have been long gone
fair play to the man, he deserves it i think, if hed come in as an imigrant he wouldnt be lving in a fuckng shack for 20 years would he.
25-05-2007, 11:11 AM
#20
SOMEBODY owned the land.
Fine, squat there but then when the owner (maybe all of us if it is common land) wants to use it, move in, etc and the squater f##kin ends up owning it
I'd be f##kin pi##ed if it was my land, whether i had been actively using the land property or not.
Fine, squat there but then when the owner (maybe all of us if it is common land) wants to use it, move in, etc and the squater f##kin ends up owning it
I'd be f##kin pi##ed if it was my land, whether i had been actively using the land property or not.
25-05-2007, 02:39 PM
#21
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turns out that under british law, a BRITISH man whos lived there...
But on reading more about him, I've softened. He's doing no harm. Let him stay on the condition that ownership passes to the previous owners on his death.
steve
25-05-2007, 03:05 PM
#23
.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: .
Posts: 6,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good on him...hardly as if he was being greedy and squatting in somebodys mansion...and 21 years without anybody saying for him not to go is a long time...longer than most people live in houses they've bought!
It's hardly as if he's brought 38 members of his family with him (all called wayne and waynette), caravans, transit vans, piss ridden mattress' horses, dogs.....and intends to steal everybodys cars..
It's hardly as if he's brought 38 members of his family with him (all called wayne and waynette), caravans, transit vans, piss ridden mattress' horses, dogs.....and intends to steal everybodys cars..
25-05-2007, 04:24 PM
#25
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hampstead
Posts: 5,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jammy86
The lands worth 2M?! I'll bet there is a contract out on him already.
JAmes
JAmes
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
rsguy
General Car Related Discussion.
44
29-09-2015 03:29 PM