Squatters in Dublin to get millions!

stewie01

any else think its hilarious and pretty typical that this shower(known organised gangsters) are getting paid so much money from the tax payer and the bloke who bought up dartmouth square ''legally'' is been threatend with jail if he doesnt move 2 caravans of ''his own park''. at least he had the balls to pay a bit for his dodgey underhand business deal.

Mahatma coat

its not just a good thing it should be mandotary.

The cheek o the feckers in that article, they took 5 houses and actualy went along and introduced themselves to the rest of the street as the occupants.

well if they landed on my doorstep they'd have been run out on the first night, so they clean up the houses and stuff, whoa revolutionary idea, dont wallow in your own ****,

Artists and Musicians Eh, says it all

Ruen

kildarejoe wrote:

If they claim they want to be treated the same as everyone else then they should be treated like everyone else, no other citizen would get away with that.

"Other citizens" claim adverse possession on land and property and get away with it.

Volvoboy

Right coming into the thread half way but sure, i've been up into dunsink a few times and i dont have a bad word to say about them they ''seem'' to be running a legal scrappie, was even buying a car off alan, gave him a €50 deposit for the car came back two weeks later and he said it was gone and handed back my €50, these people arent scum, they are just trying to make a living, they pay their CAB, but as for the guardi coming in harrasing them you too would be pissed off if the guards came by to a land that you'd been squating in for 20 years and told get off the land.



-VB-



/runs moral police on way:D

PauloMN

magicbastarder wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4729310.stm

i'd prefer these guys living next door than a bunch of people who believe physical violence against travellers is A Good Thing.

Exception rather than the rule. Ask yourself why the neighbours daughter feels safer now... probably as the last 10 sets of squatters in there before the musicians moved in freaked her out.

As for physical violence against travellers, who mentioned that? You get banned around here for suggesting violence as a solution to anything.

magicbastarder

PauloMN wrote:

As for physical violence against travellers, who mentioned that? You get banned around here for suggesting violence as a solution to anything.

read page 1 of the thread. "petrol bombs, anyone?"

i know someone who squatted. she found herself homeless, through circumstances beyond her control. she found an empty house and moved in, and took care of the place, because she's not a filthpig. her need for shelter was greater than some faceless houseowner's need was to keep her out of a house they did not occupy and did not care about.

Sierra Oscar

Get the Gardai in a pull them out of there - totally unacceptable...they should not get a penny from the tax payer.

Mahatma coat

the unacceptability of the situation has been debated to death, basicly as it stands they're entitled to claim. Stupid law tho

SimpleSam06

Volvoboy wrote:

they are just trying to make a living, they pay their CAB

You do know what CAB stands for don't you? That would be the Criminal Assets Bureau, the people charged with removing ill gotten gains from criminals. If you sold a million in illegal drugs and bought a mansion by the sea, the CAB will take it off you.

The very fact that they owe money to the CAB means they are up to their eyeballs in illegal activities.

gurramok

I suppose *some* of the money that Fingal gives them will be given back to the Govt via CAB.
Still ridiculous situation that they get the moeny in the first place.

You'd think there be a law whereby a squatter who has a criminal conviction be prevented from claiming squatter rights and resulting compo?

Crazy Christ

the Irish Government has refused over the years to recognize Irish travellers as an ethnic minority, despite calls from the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination to do so. So in this country as of yet they aren't an ethnic minority. But of course that doesn't bear on their rights to the land, just some of the discrimination issues

Sangre

Mahatma coat wrote:

Define Legal occupation then please, co that post is confusung

I don't have any dicitionaries or texts to hand but think of legal occupation more in the sense of 'control' of the land. For example someone who owns land on which a factory lives probably doesn't live there but he still has control over the land due to fences, security and work on done it etc., Thus he still has possession despite never living there.

Mahatma coat

OK, So at what point would control of the land switch from the landowner to the Squatter?

Lets take an example of my house and land back home, by that definition I have Legal occupation of the land still, I put up some gates and fixed a few fences etc before I left, if a squatter moved in what would give him legal occupation over me?