New UK legislation criminalising squatting; homeless people’s possessions protected by US constitution

New legislation has come into force in the UK which criminalises squatting. Section 144 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act criminalises squatting in residential premises and makes the offence punishable by a jail term of up to six months and a fine of up to £5,000. One squatter in the UK is taking a test case to challenge the new legislation. Her claim will allege that prosecution under the new legislation will breach her rights to personal and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights. A solicitor supporting the case has stated that, “there is existing criminal and civil law which enables property owners to swiftly evict squatters. Homeowners will derive no further protection from this new legislation. It will simply criminalise the homeless”.

Click here to read an article in the Guardian about the issue.

Another article in the Guardian (from the NearlyLegal housing law blog) sets out some of the problems with the legislation, including the fact that homeowners were already protected under older legislation, and furthermore argues that nothing in the new legislation addresses the problems in the previous legislation. 

Meanwhile, in the US a California Circuit Court has held that the constitution bars cities from randomly seizing and destroying personal property that homeless people temporarily leave unattended on city streets. The court ruled 2-1 that such possessions can only be taken if they are an immediate threat to public safety or health or constitute criminal evidence. In finding that such possessions are protected against unlawful seizure under the constitution, one of the judges stated that, “were it otherwise, the government could seize and destroy any illegally parked car or unlawfully unattended dog”. A dissenting judge stated that, “common sense and societal expectations suggest that when people leave their personal items unattended in a public place, they understand that they run the risk of their belongings being searched, seized, disturbed, stolen or thrown away”.

Click here to read an article in the Los Angeles Times on the case.

Share

Resources

Sustaining Partners