I don't think my actions were virtuous at all. They were opportunistic. I observe that it was a crime against a corporate body, not an individual. It certainly cost them money, going to law to recover their empty houses wasn't free.

In no sense did I mean to say "I was virtuous" -Only that it was aimed at solving my problem (and others) at the expense of a body, not a person. You may differ, but many feel crimes against corporates are distinct from crimes against individuals, virtue aside. I don't think corporate personhood is an unalloyed "good"

What's the point of growing up? It seems boring (Peter Pan, probably)

This was almost 40 years ago. Are you the same edgy person you were 40 years ago? I am pretty sure I am not.

They also say the property was left empty for 'various reasons' amids a housing crisis.

You can argue that the right to have a home prevails over the right to let a property sit empty and rot away. This is the case in the Netherlands, where squatting rights are very limited these days, but where its still necessary to go to court for an eviction where the property owner needs to prove they have plans for the property and want to act on them soon.

There is also a law in Amsterdam that requires that all housing that sits empty for more than 6 months is reported to the city. The city then forces the property owner to make it liveable again and rent it out.

Both examples show that property rights are not absolute in certain parts of the world.