The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

The anti-squatter amendment, a measure to be welcomed which still deserves some improvements

2020-09-23T16:52:54.962Z


THE MACRONOMETER - After the high profile cases this summer, an amendment to the ASAP law was urgently adopted. The iFRAP gives a score of 8/10 to this necessary evolution of the law.


Le Figaro

Property is an inviolable and sacred right, the Bill of Human Rights tells us.

We could doubt it lately with examples of squats that have hit the headlines, as in Théoule-sur-Mer or Saint Honoré-Les-Bains.

Do squatters, understood as "one or more persons having broken into and residing in a dwelling", do they have more rights than the owners themselves as regards the occupation of the property in question?

At first glance, the answer is obvious since some are occupants with authentic titles and not others… At first glance only.

Because the state of law until now had succeeded in strengthening the rights of "squatters" and in particular with regard to the second or occasional residences of the former.

To read also: Squat: "France upside down"

First, the forced eviction of the squatter by the owner himself was penalized much more than the offense of illegal occupation.

3 years in prison and 30,000 euros fine in the first case against 1 year of imprisonment and 15,000 euros fine in the second.

Then, the expulsion of the squatters today obeys an extremely finicky formalism.

To put it simply: if the squat is made up of the owners' main residence (the domicile), the so-called “anti-squat” law of June 25, 2015 stipulates that the owners have a state of flagrance that exceeds 48 hours in order to allow the use of the police when the crime of maintaining the premises is observed by the police.

This generally results in a complaint being lodged (on the basis of established evidence) which must then allow the police / gendarmerie to intervene, and in the event of refusal, to refer directly to the prefect so that the latter can issue a formal notice against them and proceeds after 24 hours by force to legal expulsion.

On the other hand, the situation is much more difficult when it comes to another property owned by the owner (second home or other).

The break-in condition is still required but the owner must then go very quickly to find the illegal maintenance in the premises, and act in less than 48 hours.

This is the condition for the expulsion to take place with the help of the police without having to resort to a court or administrative decision.

That one of the conditions is not met and things get complicated (action after 48 hours or inability to prove the break-in).

The procedure then becomes judicial and will last several months.

It is necessary to note the occupation and identify the occupants via the referral to the district court and the designation of a bailiff, then proceed to the summons of the squatters and await the hearing in court;

finally, wait 15 days to 1 month to proceed with the expulsion.

The 48-hour imperative destroyed

This is why the government decided to act urgently via an amendment (n ° 695) before the National Assembly during the discussion of the bill "of acceleration and simplification of public action" (ASAP). .

In particular, it specifies that the domicile corresponds "

to both main, secondary or occasional residences

".

This development is to be welcomed.

It ends up destroying the 48-hour requirement hitherto required in the event of illegal occupation of secondary or occasional residences by reducing them to the principal residence regime.

In addition, it accelerates the prefectural procedure in the event of the refusal of the police services to intervene following the lodging of a complaint and to justify the reasons thereof.

And in the event that it initiates the forced evacuation procedure, to proceed without delay.

The new device is welcome to deal with the emergency.

Read also: Squat: Moldovan families are encrusted with an entrepreneur in Aubervilliers

Is it sufficient?

This is a start, but it would also be important to align the penalties incurred by squatters and those concerning "vigilante" owners.

In addition, a reversal of the proof regarding the break-in should fall to the occupants and not to the owners, in order to prove the peaceful and legal occupation of the place.

Finally, the device does not include any acceleration of the legal procedure and does not create an injunction to withdraw the “squat manuals” which abound on the internet.

So many elements that justify a new anti-squatting law as soon as possible.

Le Figaro

The Macronometer, an observatory for government reforms, is a site of the iFRAP Foundation in partnership with

Le Figaro

. It is a tool dedicated to the evaluation of Emmanuel Macron's five-year term: econometric evaluation in relation to his electoral program and the announcements of his government. With The Macronometer, the government's action is rated out of 10 every Wednesday before the Council of Ministers and becomes readable at a glance. The Macronometer allows everyone to form an opinion on whether or not the President of the Republic's promises are kept and on the effectiveness of the government's reforms.

Source: lefigaro

All business articles on 2020-09-23

You may like

News/Politics 2024-02-08T20:13:17.942Z

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.