{"id":7353,"date":"2025-10-17T08:13:01","date_gmt":"2025-10-17T08:13:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/rfblegal.co.uk\/?post_type=insight&p=7353"},"modified":"2025-10-17T08:13:05","modified_gmt":"2025-10-17T08:13:05","slug":"kraken-doe-ik-krakers-in-commercieel-vastgoed","status":"publish","type":"insight","link":"https:\/\/rfblegal.co.uk\/nl\/inzichten\/kraken-doe-ik-krakers-in-commercieel-vastgoed\/","title":{"rendered":"Wat moet ik doen? - Krakers in commercieel vastgoed\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"

A nightmare scenario many landlords fear is squatters breaking into their commercial premises<\/a>, settling, and refusing to vacate without a court order.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Veel krakers weten vaak wat ze doen en kennen hun rechten. Huisbazen kunnen erachter komen dat de krakers een soort kennisgeving op de deur hebben geplakt waarop staat \u2018DIT IS EEN NIET-RESIDENTIEEL GEBOUW - Sectie 144 LAPSO is NIET van toepassing.<\/em>\u2019 – and they\u2019d be right<\/a>.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wat zijn de opties voor verhuurders?<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The first port of call for most landlords is, naturally, to call the police. However, most find that the police zal<\/a> not get involved unless what\u2019s known as an \u2018interim possession order\u2019 (\u201cIPO\u201d) has been obtained from the court. An IPO carries a penal notice that allows the police to remove the squatters if they have not vacated the eigendom<\/a> within 24 hours of the order having been made and served on the squatters. The Squatters could therefore be arrested and face criminal<\/a> punishment such as fines, or even imprisonment, if they do not vacate.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, a landlord<\/a> can either initiate possession proceedings against trespassers in the \u2018standard\u2019 fashion, or, if they meet the criteria, seek an IPO. If they seek an IPO, they must act fast as the application must be made within 28 days of knowledge<\/a> of the squatting. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

De wettelijke test<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

 Een IPO kan alleen worden toegekend als: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

(1)\u00a0the claimant is only seeking possession. A claimant cannot seek an IPO if there is a claim for another<\/a> remedy<\/a> (e.g. damages); and<\/em>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(2) de eiser een onmiddellijk recht op bezit heeft en dit recht gedurende de gehele periode van onrechtmatige bewoning heeft gehad; en\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(3)\u00a0the defendants<\/a> entered the premises as trespassers.\u00a0<\/em>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A common misconception is that the legal test for commercieel vastgoed<\/a> owners obtaining an IPO is the same as obtaining a standard<\/a> possession order against trespassers – after all, a squatter is a trespasser, and to obtain an IPO, the individuals in question have to have entered the property as trespassers (as above). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dit is echter niet het geval. Voor het verkrijgen van een standaardbezitsbevel tegen overtreders (dat niet dezelfde strafrechtelijke sancties voor niet-naleving met zich meebrengt) hoeft een verhuurder alleen een recht op bezit te hebben (geen onmiddellijk recht). Dit is niet het geval voor het verkrijgen van een IPO.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Onmiddellijk recht op bezit en mogelijke problemen<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

An immediate right to possession means one can claim a full right to possession and there are no superseding legal interests that stand<\/a> in their way. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hiaten in de registratie<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Een voorspelbaar probleem waarmee een verhuurder te maken kan krijgen, is dat hij een pand koopt en onmiddellijk verbouwings- en renovatiewerkzaamheden uitvoert voordat hij het opnieuw verhuurt. Leegstaande commerci\u00eble panden die worden ontmanteld, eruit zien als bouwterreinen en niet volledig zijn beveiligd, zijn uitstekende doelwitten voor krakers.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The issue a landlord might face is that it can take many, many months for HMLR to complete the application to register the landlords proprietorship. During this period, known as a registration gap, the landlord is the beneficial<\/a> owner of the property and do not hold an immediate right to possession, until the registration is completed (and the registration gap ends) at which point they become the legal registered owner.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In dit geval zal de rechtbank waarschijnlijk willen zien dat de registratie is voltooid, dus het is belangrijk voor eisers om snel een aanvraag voor registratie in te dienen en op zijn minst op de dag van de hoorzitting klaar te zijn om bijgewerkte kopie\u00ebn van het HMLR-kantoor te overleggen. Als dit niet gebeurt, lopen ze het risico dat de rechter van mening is dat de geregistreerde eigenaar de enige partij is met het recht op onmiddellijk bezit en kan de vordering mislukken.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Leases<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

What often precedes vacant possession is the surrender of a Lease<\/a>. Similarly with registration gaps, it can take HMLR many months to complete an application to remove the Lease from the register. In this instance, the court may consider the Landlord does not have the right to immediate possession and in fact it is the Lessee with this right. Again, it is vital the Landlord expedites any application to remove the Lease from the title or risk the judge taking this view. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusie<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

IPO\u2019s are brilliant tools for removing<\/a> squatters quickly, however Landlords need to act fast and ensure they hit the procedural<\/a> requirements<\/a>. The penal notice IPO\u2019s carry mean judges can often take an even more cautious approach to that of standard possession claims<\/a>, so Landlords need to make sure everything is in place, and they are satisfied of their immediate right to possession. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Further, the IPO is only (by name) an interim order, and the possession order is not made final until the return date. As part of the prescribed form of application and witness statement, Landlords will give a number<\/a> of undertakings \u2013 another distinct difference from the standard possession route \u2013 of which includes undertakings not to re-let or damage the property until the possession claim has been decided. Landlords therefore need to ensure they are not breaching any of the undertakings they have given in this interim period, and it is advisable they see the process through to a final order to avoid doubt, even in the event the squatters vacate following the IPO. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For any further information, or if you are a landlord who finds themselves in a situation where squatters have settled in your property, please reach out to the team<\/a>: Harry Medway at h.medway@rfblegal.co.uk<\/a>, Rudi Ramdarshan op r.ramdarshan@rfblegal.co.uk<\/a>, Ben Frost op b.frost@rfblegal.co.uk<\/a> of Victoria Huxley op v.huxley@rfblegal.co.uk<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Geschreven door Harry Medway. <\/p>","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":7354,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[62],"tags":[34,28],"class_list":["post-7353","insight","type-insight","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-commercial-litigation","tag-exeter-office","tag-solicitors-barristers-conveyencers"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t