header-logo header-logo

Your place or mine?

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

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

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
back-to-top-scroll