Squatters will be kicked out of homes under new bill

A bill in New Hampshire aims to ensure that individuals who are deemed illegal occupants of someone else’s property, or a squatter, can be removed from the home. But the legislation also plans to distinguish that scenario with situations where a landlord accuses a resident of a home of being a squatter when that individual has a prior history to the property, a legislator told Newsweek.

Lawmakers in the New Hampshire House of Representatives on Thursday will vote on HB1400 after legislators from the state’s senate met with colleagues from the house and moved forward the bill that will make clear who constitutes a squatter and who does not.

“It was really important that if someone is truly criminally trespassing, if someone goes on vacation and somebody breaks into their house, they come home from vacation and there is someone squatting in their home, that person is criminally trespassing and they should be removed by law enforcement immediately,” State Representative Rebecca McWilliams, who is also running for the state senate, told Newsweek.

But she added that lawmakers wanted to also draw a line between that situation with what she described as a gray area.

“Which is when someone has been a tenant, they have an oral or a text message chain that could be construed as [an agreement.] That eviction process should be through the courts and that should be a 48-hour emergency hearing,” McWilliams said.

The issue of squatting has gained national headlines and some legislators across the country are introducing legislation to combat it. But experts have pointed out that incidents of individuals taking over other people’s properties with little or no evidence of legal rights over those homes are rare. They have suggested that some landlords are using the issue of squatting to attempt to deny some residents their legal rights.

McWilliams told Newsweek that the bill in New Hampshire that will be under consideration aims to make clear what side of the issue authorities can look at.

“We don’t want people presenting evidence to Sheriffs, Sheriffs [making decisions],” she said. “We want to direct it straight to a judge to determine whether there was or was not [trespassing].”

McWilliams noted that it was rare for situations of individuals establishing residents in homes without any established links to the property but legislators wanted to ensure there was clarity between criminal and civil disputes.

“If you own the house you went away on vacation, you came back and someone is in your house, you immediately call the police and have the [person] removed for criminal trespassing,” she said. “But also I feel like it’s rare and not really a mainstream thing, so I suppose it’s good to have some language and be very clear.”