Just over a month ago, Squatting in a residential premises became a criminal offence under Section 144 of the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) 2012. We have been subjected to a series of misleading media reports.

In the first three weeks weeks, the Squash Campaign – “Squatters Action for Secure Homes” – managed to find a grand total of 14 people who had been arrested under the new law, which equates to a couple of hundred or so per year.

This is a slight contrast to their report “Can We Afford to Criminalise Squatting” attempting to rebut the impact assessment brought forward by the government as part of the legislative process. The Government suggested that between 680 (low estimate) and 8400 (high estimate) people would be brought into the Criminal Justice System under this law, with costs being up to £25m over 5 years.

Squash suggest that the actual cost will be between 12 and 40 times higher than the ‘high’ estimate above, partly by suggesting that a lareg proportion of squatters will have to go through a full “street homeless” rehabilitation programme at a cost of £25k per person.

Our calculations for the most probable scenario (including costs to CJS, housing benefit, and rehabilitation services for rough sleepers) puts the true annual cost of
criminalisation as between £63.2m and £158.1m annually. Over five years, this amounts to a bill of between £316.16m for a low population of squatters, and
£790.39m for a high population.

£790 million is – inevitably – the as-exciting-as-possible figure which has been fed to, and duly reported without any real challenge by, the media, for example the Guardian here, here, and here, the BBC. Even Housing Professionals seem to be swallowing it as a basis for conversation.

Those 14 cases may not be the full number once authorities across the country begin enforcing the new law, but it is also at a time when media attention is devoted to these cases. A suggestion that this will increase by 40 or 50 times to the best part of 10,000 cases a year is, shall we say, a little unlikely.

For now we have high profile cases featuring in the media, such as the atypical family in Wales who have been squatting for 11 years, and paying Council Tax, where the property owner is attempting to use this new law having failed to follow a civil process through to conclusion. My reaction to that one is that the owner should have granted a rental tenancy 10 years ago.

I’d suggest that the Squash Campaign information is simply manufactured sound and fury signifying very little, which will be forgotten in a year or two, and that the main benefit of the new law will be to cement a culture change, as exists in Scotland where squatting is a criminal offence already. Before long we will ask why we waited so long before doing this.

This is an account from Glenn Ackroyd ofthe National Property Group, illustrating the more normal use of the new law.

In this case, the illegal occupier – who was likely to have been a ‘guest’ of the previous tenant who had stayed on, been evicted via a Court Order for Possession, then broken back into the secured property – came up with a series of ‘reasons’ why he could stay, as excuses to frustrate any action.

The new law broke the deadlock.

Squatters – One word that fills a home owner and landlord with dread. Well, after 20 years of dealing with possession claims, I can lay claim to the “Squatter From Hell” as my most recent challenge.