[quote]A court has heard how a squatter tried to sell a cottage in the Scottish Borders for £70,000 without the knowledge of the owner.
Ewan Turner, 36, moved into two-bedroomed Kirnie Cottage in Walkerburn when he noticed it was vacant.
He then tried to cash in by pretending to be the owner and convincing an estate agent to put it on the market.
Selkirk Sheriff Court was told the attempt was "doomed to failure". Sentence was deferred until December.
The offence happened after the property's owner died last year and left the cottage to a beneficiary.
At that point Turner, who was already a squatter in the building, hatched his plan to sell it.
His lawyer Greg McDonnel said the scheme was bound to fail.
He told the court: "The moment he contacted any solicitor in respect of an offer, it would be discovered the property would not be in his name.
"When an offer was made he took the property off the market and tried to let it out instead."
Turner admitted a charge of pretending to be the owner of the cottage between March and May 2011 and attempting to induce someone to sell it on his behalf and get the proceeds by fraud.
Procurator fiscal Graham Fraser told the court Turner had been squatting in the property for nine months when he decided to try and sell it.
He was able to convince an estate agent to put it on the market by providing a council tax bill, an energy bill and correspondence from Scottish Water with his name on it.
Turner, of Abbotsford Road, Galashiels, claimed the place was lying derelict when he first spotted it and had spent £8,000 on it making it liveable putting in new flooring, electrics and doors.
He was also paying the energy bills for the cottage.
But his plan to sell the property fell apart when the will beneficiary saw a "For Sale" sign in the garden and contacted police.
Sheriff Kevin Drummond, who noted Turner had a previous conviction for fraud, described the plan to sell the house as "fantasy".
He deferred sentence until 17 December for background reports.[/quote]
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-20296958[/url]
How stupid do you have to be to try and sell a house you are squatting in?
Nice try I guess
He got as far as the estate agents putting a sign up in the garden... bravo.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38427051]How stupid do you have to be to try and sell a house you are squatting in?[/QUOTE]
Some places have laws that say if you occupy an abandoned home for a certain amount of time, then you own it. Obviously this squatter was not acquainted with the channels that one regularly goes through to get legal ownership and believed that the building was abandoned, leading to his conclusion that he owned it.
[QUOTE=prooboo;38427364]Some places have laws that say if you occupy an abandoned home for a certain amount of time, then you own it. Obviously this squatter was not acquainted with the channels that one regularly goes through to get legal ownership and believed that the building was abandoned, leading to his conclusion that he owned it.[/QUOTE]
In many European countries if a property is abandoned for over a certain amount of time and a squatter moves in then yes it legally becomes theirs, however those laws are different in the UK, and I believe different again for Scotland.
He should have tried renting it out instead.
[QUOTE=prooboo;38427364]Some places have laws that say if you occupy an abandoned home for a certain amount of time, then you own it. Obviously this squatter was not acquainted with the channels that one regularly goes through to get legal ownership and believed that the building was abandoned, leading to his conclusion that he owned it.[/QUOTE]
that's a damn good law.
damn squatters man.
[QUOTE=Lazor;38428229]that's a damn good law.[/QUOTE]
I can't tell if you're sarcastic...
there was a story here a while ago, I cant remember when, about this homeless black family squatting a house in a rich upscale neighborhood in texas where the neighbors were petitioning the get them kicked out because they [img]http://don'tlikeblackpeople.com/[/img] thought it was unfair that they had to buy their houses and he was just going to claim his.
[QUOTE=prooboo;38427364]Some places have laws that say if you occupy an abandoned home for a certain amount of time, then you own it. Obviously this squatter was not acquainted with the channels that one regularly goes through to get legal ownership and believed that the building was abandoned, leading to his conclusion that he owned it.[/QUOTE]
From my knowledge, it's 12 years in the UK iirc.
[editline]13th November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lazor;38428229]that's a damn good law.[/QUOTE]
Why are people rating this dumb? It encourages land to be used and be used for productive purposes instead of sitting doing nothing.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38433242]Why are people rating this dumb? It encourages land to be used and be used for productive purposes instead of sitting doing nothing.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't matter how good the reason might be - you don't just take something someone else owns because you think you can put it to better use.
[QUOTE=David29;38433353]It doesn't matter how good the reason might be - you don't just take something someone else owns because you think you can put it to better use.[/QUOTE]
Except property left unattended by their owners for long periods of time must have little economic value if they aren't doing anything with it, so whats the problem if you let somebody else try using it for productive purposes?
It's downright theft though.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38433380]Except property left unattended by their owners for long periods of time must have little economic value if they aren't doing anything with it, so whats the problem if you let somebody else try using it for productive purposes?[/QUOTE]
Maybe that the owner paid out a lot of money for the property and thus can do whatever the hell they want with it.
[QUOTE=David29;38433433]Maybe that the owner paid out a lot of money for the property and thus can do whatever the hell they want with it.[/QUOTE]
Except in the law, if you haven't been doing anything with a property for 12 years, that's a pretty clear sign you aren't even bothered about it passing ownership.
You do know that this law is actually a pretty ancient one right? It encourages land to be used for productive purposes, and Medieval people were well aware of this fact.
Plus, the squatter needs to wait 12 years in England.
[editline]13th November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lizzrd;38433418]It's downright theft though.[/QUOTE]
Its theft in the way that a man says he will legally take your computer if you don't touch it for 12 years.
Hey sobotnik. Everything in your attic? It's mine now.
[QUOTE=scout1;38433482]Hey sobotnik. Everything in your attic? It's mine now.[/QUOTE]
I'm perfectly fine with that, but I hope you are willing to wait 12 years.
Who in their right minds owns a property and doesn't visit it for 12 years anyway? Even if it belongs to a deceased estate I doubt the lawyers executing their will would allow it to stagnate for that long without finding someone to unload it upon
I would assume most of it has been up there for 12 years. And everything you have in storage. Anything with a fine layer of dust on it I am now eyeing to take.
[QUOTE=scout1;38433598]I would assume most of it has been up there for 12 years. And everything you have in storage. Anything with a fine layer of dust on it I am now eyeing to take.[/QUOTE]
Indeed, but let's put down what the law would say:
1. You have to take it with full knowledge of the local legal authorities.
2. You have to hold onto it for 12 years.
3. The owner doesn't do anything about it (for 12 years).
4. You change the land from its natural state (like cutting trees, building, living there, etc. Walking around on it or hunting there doesn't count).
[editline]13th November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;38433593]Who in their right minds owns a property and doesn't visit it for 12 years anyway? Even if it belongs to a deceased estate I doubt the lawyers executing their will would allow it to stagnate for that long without finding someone to unload it upon[/QUOTE]
This is exactly why this law exists, in order to move around land that pretty much nobody owns or leaves abandoned.
There are a lot of people squatting because they do not have any other options. For instance in Paris there are tons of students who want to study to make a living, they can barely afford the studies and flats are really expensive there. Furthermore a lot of estate agencies buy property and do nothing and simply wait until the price of the rent increases. In conclusion, tons of people need a roof over their head but cannot afford it or use it because all the properties are empty or not for rent due to the agencies. Which is total bullshit. So a lot of students started squatting and having major issues and arguments with the agencies and police. They often get expelled and punished.
I kind of see that simply using a flat that is not yours is kind of a bad move, yet in some situations it can help to survive. But the guy in OP was an idiot, although nice try.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38433699]This is exactly why this law exists, in order to move around land that pretty much nobody owns or leaves abandoned.[/QUOTE]
then have the government seize it, and reimburse the owner, don't just give it away to some idiot
regardless, it's still stupid, when you buy something you should be entitled to do whatever the hell you want with it, if land shortage is such an issue then don't sell land, lease it (hint: it isn't)
additionally, it's completely plausible, albeit unlikely, that someone could be absent due to misadventure for 12 years, such as in prison, extradited to another country, held prisoner by some sick fuck.. the point being, if something was bad enough to keep you away for 12 years then you really don't need the additional kick in the teeth of losing your house to a fucking squatter
[editline]13th November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;38433593]Even if it belongs to a deceased estate I doubt the lawyers executing their will would allow it to stagnate for that long without finding someone to unload it upon[/QUOTE]
it can take years or decades for an heir or next-of-kin to show up when someone dies, if there's no way for the lawyers to track them down it's literally just waiting for someone to show up
"If I dump my old car in a field and go back 10 years later and find that somebody took it, I will be really mad!"
Is what some of you seem to be saying here.
Owning real estate in the United States is rife with geopolitical risk. Between eminent domain and squatters with lawyers, I would rather limit my liability and be a renter.
[QUOTE=TonyP;38433994]"If I dump my old car in a field and go back 10 years later and find that somebody took it, I will be really mad!"
Is what some of you seem to be saying here.[/QUOTE]
No... Because we are talking about the ownership of a building [b]and[/b] the land it is located on. If I left a car on my drive for 10 years and came back to find it taken, that is theft. If I leave a car on someone elses/public land without permission, then it will be seized by the authorities. It would [b]not[/b] mean that any random person would be entitled to take it.
Maybe you should take this to the debate section, it'd make a pretty interesting thread
;_; my precious property rights
[QUOTE=David29;38434016]No... Because we are talking about the ownership of a building [b]and[/b] the land it is located on. If I left a car on my drive for 10 years and came back to find it taken, that is theft. If I leave a car on someone elses/public land without permission, then it will be seized by the authorities. It would [b]not[/b] mean that any random person would be entitled to take it.[/QUOTE]
Oh please enlighten us all about the difference between abandoning and throwing out an old unwanted car and an unwanted building other than the obvious fact you can't physically toss a building away. Calling a building "abandoned" implies the owners disposed of it and it's just not owned by anybody.
Would you get mad if somebody came and took the old dining room chairs you put on the sidewalk because you don't want them anymore?
"how dare you take my garbage that I threw out.. that was my garbage!"
[QUOTE=krail9;38433970]then have the government seize it, and reimburse the owner, don't just give it away to some idiot[/QUOTE]
Except in most cases the owner can't be reimbursed or found.
[QUOTE=krail9;38433970]regardless, it's still stupid, when you buy something you should be entitled to do whatever the hell you want with it[/QUOTE]
The point of property rights is to encourage people to invest into land, not to allow chunks of land to be held indefinitely to sit and do nothing.
[QUOTE=krail9;38433970]additionally, it's completely plausible, albeit unlikely, that someone could be absent due to misadventure for 12 years, such as in prison, extradited to another country, held prisoner by some sick fuck.. the point being, if something was bad enough to keep you away for 12 years then you really don't need the additional kick in the teeth of losing your house to a fucking squatter[/QUOTE]
In that case, their heir would inherit the land if the owner is presumed dead.
Do bear in mind that you have to fucking practically tell the local authorities "I'm going to live in this house for 12 years" and hope the owner (or relatives or friends) doesn't show up.
[QUOTE=krail9;38433970]it can take years or decades for an heir or next-of-kin to show up when someone dies, if there's no way for the lawyers to track them down it's literally just waiting for someone to show up[/QUOTE]
It's bad when there are homeless people in a country and there is a mansion which has been left to rot for 30 years whilst you try to search for the owner.
For fucks sake, your property rights don't matter when you aren't even going to use it when somebody else could use it for a better purpose.
[QUOTE=scout1;38433482]Hey sobotnik. Everything in your attic? It's mine now.[/QUOTE]
Except he didn't abandon the items in his attic. If he was to say "everything in my attic, I don't want anymore it's now garbage" you'd have a point.
[QUOTE=TonyP;38434488]Oh please enlighten us all about the difference between abandoning and throwing out an old unwanted car and an unwanted building other than the obvious fact you can't physically toss a building away. Calling a building "abandoned" implies the owners disposed of it and it's just not owned by anybody.
Would you get mad if somebody came and took the old dining room chairs you put on the sidewalk because you don't want them anymore?
"how dare you take my garbage that I threw out.. that was my garbage!"[/QUOTE]
That's not the same thing at all.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.