[WhenDidThis1]

On a similar note, I would like to know the same statue for those residing in IL. It seems that guests have more rights than the home owners. Who thought that was a good idea? It that is the case, then anyone should be able to "squat" in any of the foreclosed luxury homes in your area and have at it!

[excon]

Hello When:

Couple things... It's not a good idea to piggyback on someone's else's question. It stops them from getting any more answers, and it doesn't help you... Maybe someone will come along and move it..

Next thing is, please spell out in detail what problem you're having... If you've been reading, nobody here understands what the girl is saying. As you've been reading, there ARE NO squatters rights...

excon

PS> They moved it while I was typing...

[ScottGem]

First its not a good idea to piggyback your question on someone else's. This can lead to confusion. You should start a new thread. So I've moved your question to its own thread.

I don't know how you interpreted the answers in the previous thread as you did, but they are not accurate.

A guest does not have more rights than a homeowner. The problem only occurs when a "guest" becomes a resident. And that happens when the homeowner or renter allows the guest to establish residency.

And no, this has nothing to do with people occupying a home that was foreclosed. In that case, the people occupying the home did so illegally without the permission of the owner. That's trespassing and the police would remove them.