Illegal real estate occupations continue to generate controversy in Europe and Portugal, where cases have also emerged in recent months, as in the municipality of Almada. This episode, in France, involved a 95 -year -old man who received a water bill over 17,000 euros after seeing his home.
According to the Spanish noticias work portal, the case gained prominence when the owner was notified by the local chamber that the residence was occupied. Determined to recover the property, he advanced with a lawsuit, asking for the eviction of the intruders.
Six months later, the court rejected the request, alleging lack of entry evidence with violence or intimidation, even after one of the occupants admitted to forced the garage door.
House left in ruins
With the pressure of the lawyer, the occupants eventually left. However, they left a destroyed house behind them: Passed, Sanitted Plasters and Open Taps for months, accumulating a water bill of 17,364 euros.
When he tried to contest the value, the elderly heard from the City Council that the responsibility was his own, as he did not take action to avoid occupation.
French law holds owner
According to the same source, the French legislation provides that the water counter is always in the name of the owner of the house, making it responsible for any consumption, even in illegal occupations.
Although the supply company had assumed similar expenses in the past, in this case it refused to cover the costs, pushing the elderly again to the courts.
Legislative measures in France and other countries
Given the increase in illegal occupations, the French Parliament recently approved harder penalties: up to three years in prison and fines that can reach 45,000 euros. However, practical application continues to reveal flaws, as proved by this process.
Spain has also pondered new measures to protect owners in a demonstration that the problem is common to several European countries.
A warning signal
According to this, this episode is a warning to the need for greater protection of property rights, without forgetting the human rights and guarantees of occupants.
While no more effective solutions have been advised, owners have been advised to reinforce uninhabited houses to minimize occupancy risks and unexpected costs.
Also read:
