Brixton Clifton Mansions former squats - background, 2011 evictions and latest news
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
editor
hiraethified
Sometimes it's because the area in which they're living has been gentrified and thus they can no longer afford the market rents. People who have become part of a long-established local community are understandably reluctant to go live somewhere else, so squatting is often the only choice available to them.
Of course, the irony is that it's often squatters who have helped make an area desirable in the first place, so I'm not surprised that some get pissed off when developers rock up and start pricing everyone out of town.
HandinHand
New Member
... and the squatters have left. So we are agreed that the squatter weren't a problem at any point. Whether the council should have sold the building off or not is a seperate issue which could fill another 13 pages of the board.
Aquamarine
Well-Known Member
provided of course it isnt already sold seems like the thread might be moving towards an argument to prevent the sale of this important social asset; something similar happened in LB Hackney.
quimcunx
imprimeo, lamino, distribuo
Can I just but in to say that some of the residents tried to pay rent to the council? The council wouldn't take it. Most of the residents seemed to be in creative industries which don't pay well unless you're one of the tiny, tiny fraction who make it big. The building's reputation as being full of junkies was ill-deserved. By and large the residents didn't seem to be junkies. On the contrary they were welcome customers in the local shops, and they'll be sorely missed. The building got its bad reputation from non-resident addicts who would go into the courtyard and stairwells to smoke crack or what have you. The police patrolled it a fair bit for that reason.
Don't know if this has been covered but allegedly the building was once owned by someone who died intestate. If that's true it's all the more unjust that it should have been taken away from people who were an asset to the community, for the benefit of private developers and a council with a long history of stealing and squandering public money.
Don't know if this has been covered but allegedly the building was once owned by someone who died intestate. If that's true it's all the more unjust that it should have been taken away from people who were an asset to the community, for the benefit of private developers and a council with a long history of stealing and squandering public money.
leanderman
Street Party: July 2
When is this thread going to switch into talking about food, as per normal?
But ... seriously: it has been interesting to hear a number of arguments in favour of squatting, even if I am not quite persuaded by them.
But ... seriously: it has been interesting to hear a number of arguments in favour of squatting, even if I am not quite persuaded by them.
TruXta
tired
There's good squatting and bad squatting. Seems to me this was an instance of the former. Otherwise don't you think local law-abiding folks would've had them chucked out ages ago? It's not like they were out of sight.
1,332 empty council homes in Lambeth is a disgusting figure. I presume that Lambeth won't be the only London borough with this figure either.
Now I'm sure they don't keep them empty out of spite. Would this be because the council are tied by the minimum quality levels for their homes? If they don't have funds to refurbish them they have to let them sit empty.
Couldn't the council employ it's own 'live in guardians' and in the process have some hand in seeing them handed out fairly? Perhaps support in cleaning them up and have that as a condition of the short term tenancy (made clear from the beginning of course).
The just evicted occupiers were providing this!! They were in constant contact with the council who said they were happy that about the situation for the time being (in that at least they "werent junkies etc"), it was the police putting on pressure to the council that caused the eviction.
Its also interesting the cake and barbers shop were not also evicted (both squatted too i believe) considering the outlined issue was "drug dealing"
Laughing Toad
Turn the volume down please.
So when the 'guardians' leave, do you think there will be a big party with people throwing stuff off the roof, or will they perhaps be taking greater care of the building?
Don't be a knob. You know perfectly well that residents weren't happy with the Facebook party invite and tried to cancel it. As far as I could tell, none of the residents who were still there the other night were participating with the party. They locked their doors and tried to discourage people from climbing on the roof.
Aquamarine
Well-Known Member
that s the standard response i think , which should be rephrased with this different emphasis:
Laughing Toad
Turn the volume down please.
Yes, it was all somebody else's fault. I understand. The squaters were blameless. It's all a massive conspiracy. How silly of me not to have known that. Now that you've called me a knob, I fully accept your argument.
What argument would you accept then? None I'd guess.
Because there have been plenty of well reasoned responses to your obvious attention seeking, yet you've chosen not to respond to them. Shame dat.
If you'd read the thread which you're trying to derail you'd know that it WAS somebody else's fault. You can go on ignore with the other timewasters.
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
Are you going to tell us what these costs are?
Laughing Toad
Turn the volume down please.
I'll accept any argument based on reason. You seem to have a romantic view of squaters as some sort of urban heroes, who can do no wrong. I think they are unsocial undesirables.
Clearly we have different standards of 'well reasoned'. All I've read is cloud-cuckoo-land wishful-thinking about people who don't pay rent. I have responded with excruciating precision to every tedious piece of ignorant nonsense. People claim that the squatters looked after the building, and yet in the very same thread are accounts of people throwing stuff off the roof. People claim that the squatters are nice people, yet there is an account of a man being attacked and robbed. There was even one poster who claimed that it was alright to squat because it isn't a criminal offence, just a civil offence. Well that's alright then!
Fortunately for the people of Brixton, the council and the police have taken my side, and not yours.
boohoo
No.
your argument isn't based on reason - if we based who you are on the response to this thread you might think it was unfair to be judged on some comments on a website. So don't based squatting on a couple of accounts of something that happened on one night in Clifton Mansions Squats.
I believe that very middle class crockery designer Emma Bridgewater lived in a squat in Brixton at sometime. Please send her a message that she is an unsocial undesirable.
Laughing Toad
Turn the volume down please.
Message sent. She should pay rent like decent people.
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
Who weren't squatters, or known to them.
Robbed by people who weren't squatters or known to them.
Do try a little harder, eh?
Laughing Toad
Turn the volume down please.
Well people like that haven't turned up to my home. Why do you think that would be?
TruXta
tired
Cuz you're an anally retentive cunt. Do keep up.
quimcunx
imprimeo, lamino, distribuo
Has anyone ever put an open invite to a party at yours on facebook? I've seen a few reports on the news about such things.
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
Now about these costs. What are they? You must know, you must have some reason for posting what you did. Don't you?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
yeh people should pay landlords' mortgages for them, or - where there is no mortgage - shovel money into their bank accounts. stands to reason, don't it, people should pay through the nose for somewhere to live.
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
This. In fact there have been various reports in the press in the last few years of well-to-do, middle-class families whose pretty houses have been vandalised by party guests.
So according to your brilliant logic, middle class homeowners = undesirable scum.
0.5/10. Must do better.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
i wonder how many working class homes - whether pretty or otherwise - have been vandalised by party guests over the last few years - or does this only happen to the posh?
Similar threads
