My Lords, I am grateful for the support expressed on all Benches for the Bill, and perhaps I may respond to some of the points that have been made. The expert input of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Scott, has been answered at least in part by the Minister. I think he would agree that even if an amendment to the rules of court might have been a better route, at this stage in the proceedings it is probably best to do it in the way being proposed.
I take the point that if a squatter entered empty premises and then issued something that appeared to be a proper tenancy agreement to others, those others would not be covered by this legislation. I suppose that such cases are relatively rare, and perhaps the Bill cannot do everything that it might. I fear that under Clause 1(8), it is likely that they would be ruled out when the case went to court and the two months’ period was asked for.
Mortgage Repossessions (Protection of Tenants Etc.) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Best
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 30 March 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Mortgage Repossessions (Protection of Tenants Etc.) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
718 c1335-6 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:01:37 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_635649
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_635649
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_635649