The plight of a grey nomad couple who have stopped travelling has once again shone a spotlight on the regulations governing long-term camping in backyards.
In an in-depth article, the ABC reported on the struggles of Mal and Maggie Butcher, who had previously spent four years travelling around Australia, but who are currently stopped in Bendigo in Victoria.
“We’re not travelling so much now because of Mal’s health, so we haven’t really been away for two years,” Ms Butcher told the ABC. “My husband’s now 78 and we don’t want to be towing the big wheeler around.”
The couple had been staying at Huntly Lions Park in Bendigo before the council changed the status of the park to prevent camping, and thereby compelling multiple long-term homeless people to leave.
Places where people can free camp without immediately being moved on , like this spot in Coffs Harbour, are in greater demand than ever. PIC: Cizza
The Butchers have since been living in the backyard of Bendigo resident, Kate Stanton. However, she is now facing council compliance action and the couple may have to leave.
The ABC reports that their camper trailer is connected to an outdoor tap for water, a power lead for electricity and its own sewerage system … and, following a complaint, the City of Greater Bendigo council, got involved.
“We had someone put a complaint into the council that I had people living in caravans on my property,” Ms Stanton told the ABC. “So that’s when the compliance issue came into play, which I didn’t even think of.”
The ABC reports that Ms Stanton wrote a letter to the council disputing that she was running a caravan park and the council asked her to remove the Butchers and other campers from her property.
The ABC reports that another person is living in a caravan on the property, as well as a second couple who are visiting for a few days in their own caravan. The notice said the reasonable time to relocate would be no sooner than January 31 next year.
Ms Stanton told the ABC that councils need to adopt a longer-term strategy that addresses the housing and homeless crisis, but also sets out conditions for sanitation and conditions for caravans, campers and tiny homes in backyards.
The City of Greater Bendigo said it is aware of the current housing pressures and that its follow-up processes allow individuals a sufficient and reasonable time to move on.
“Depending on individual circumstances, we do allow flexibility with timeframes and have demonstrated this in the past,” the director of healthy communities and environments, Stacy Williams, told the ABC.
Meanwhile, the Butchers say they are happy to live in their camper, but just need land and to know they can stay permanently.
“The amount of people looking for houses far outweighs the number of houses to move into and we wouldn’t want to see a family go without when we’ve got our accommodation,” Mr Butcher told the ABC.
Are you a Grey Nomad member yet? Click here to find out about the discounts, competitions and other benefits on offer.
None except noise and litter, otherwise council can keep their greedy hands out of poor peoples pockets. Federal and state governments are doing enough damage already without local councils adding to it more.
Here here!!
Totally agree. Big Brother Again.
Agree
Much of these problems have been forced on the elderly by the inaction of Insurance Companies.
There are many elderly living (nay existing), in Caravans and other temporary accommodation because their permanent homes have been destroyed or made unlivable, by Fires, Floods and other events.
Most of these people have insurance policies, but the Insurers are delaying payouts or rebuilding allegedly because of COVID, Trades Shortages, Building Material shortages, etc – however there is no mention of Corporate Greed.
That’s what happens when you hit the road too late. They started at 74 years of age, what did they expect. We turn 74 next year, our 14th year of retirement travelling.
I don’t think it matters at what age one starts to travel. These people would appear to be in a situation where they do not have the means to live somewhere permanently be it a home or on their own land. Even owning a piece of land and living on it is not permitted. It’s time councils and governments are proactive and assist those without bricks and mortar.
Agree.
What has the time they have been travelling come into the discussion?
Its my back yard, if I let a friend stay in their van in my yard, emptying waste into my sewerage system, how is that different to some one staying in the spare room. Councils should stick to cleaning the streets and collecting rubbish.
Totally agree. No different to a family having 6 older children living at home because they can’t afford to leave the nest.
Well said…..
Pretty sure that having three caravans in ones back garden might be reasonably considered as operating a caravan park.
We are both over 75 and still on the road after 20 years. If we choose to slow down, there are several official free camps in our area that allow stays of up to 30 days, some of which have toilets and water and are in beautiful surroundings
Victoria has the most draconian laws regarding caravans. Friends within this same region have had to remove perfectly good fully plumbed on-site caravans and move into their cars! Telling people that they cannot have well behaved people in a van within their own property boundaries is ludicrous. It allows people to have family members close but independent, or in the true Aussie way – help out a mate! In the current housing crisis these rules and conditions are beyond comprehension.
Hiding behind the anonymity of “The council” isn’t good enough.
Name those from “the council” involved in this decision!
Furthermore, refer to recent Supreme Court and Land Court rulings on these matters.
Perfectly legal.
Another case of petty minor local officials overstepping their power.
while I empathise with the couple getting moved on (as we have relatives in a similar situation) the story has more detail than the headline suggests. Perhaps ‘How many caravans in your backyard is too many?’ might be an appropriate headline. It reads like Ms Stanton had 3 caravans with people living in them in he property. If I was a neighbour, I might have complained as well.
Depends how large the property iis, perhaps it is a few acres?
I would too!
Interesting…particularly as the council’s actions are illegal in as much as they acting as a third tier of government. The council bears the burden of proof. They have made a claim { that the property is being used as a caravan park}. They then have to provide evidence of that ie. receipts from the owner to the renters for rent paid. No proof = no claim. They will try to throw their weight around, but with a bit of due diligence and some homework these mongrels can be muzzled fairly easily.
Considering the housing crisis, all properties in Australia should be allowed to have a minimum of one caravan stay, with a permit system in place for extra vans. No different from having a large family living on a property in regards to pressure on sewerage systems etc.
Totally agree
My sentiments exactly.
That would help so many people! Totally agree
Of course they should let people camp in backyards, show some compassion for people who just want to live their lives. Of course we don’t want sewerage flowing wild or anything. Surely there is some common sense somewhere, these campers should be considered. After all we all need a place to hat our hat.
If a home or landowner has the room for a caravan within their property boundaries then why not. The cost of renting something, if available, or owning a home is now impossible for a lot of people. If they can park up on someones property and help out either with the bills or yard work its a win win situation. As long as it doesn’t resemble a tip then Councils and Regulators should butt out. Its about helping people and sharing. Too many rules in this country and the regulatory bodies just want to increase revenue with ridiculous fines. ♂️
Absolutely agree, far safer in someone’s backyard than living in a car or on the streets. Nosey neighbours should be more compassionate and mind their own business. People trying to help other people get by and get crucified by council. Housing crisis was bad and now Federal Gov’t brings in another half a million people, with refugees getting priority housing, surely someone living in a caravan in a backyard is a better alternative for those who can’t afford to live anywhere. Council would most likely want a separate plumbed dwelling so they can charge extra rates….money, money, money is all council wants!
It is very annoying that councils can dictate what you can and cant do on your own property they should stick to their proper job not being radical dropping the word christmas easter and stopping australia day
At my previous home on acreage we were permitted to have two residences. It shouldn’t matter if one of them is a very small residence on wheels provided normal rules are followed like sewage connection. However, once you start getting multiple occupancies it gets very messy for regulators who have a responsibility to maintain reasonable standards.
I believe time should not be a factor, provided they meet hygiene requirements it’s not an issue
Maybe take the wheels off the caravan and call it a granny flat
This is no longer just a grey nomad issue, it is a wider societal issue which local government will always be behind the eight ball on. At least GNs have capacity to move on, relocate and move around, which is more than most of the 300,000+ homeless people throughout Australia have. Ultimately people will need to incur the cost of breaking the law, as doing so, while generating publicity, is the only way to force local government to change policies. In the meantime aging GNs at risk of not being able to reenter the housing market should start planning now for how they will cope.
Typical councils wanting to interfere in what is primarily a private matter as long as the noise and pollution factor is not coming into play.
1 caravan only with no time frame. But why can’t this couple stay in a caravan park, rent assistance is then available?
The council has to much power something the gov should look into they are out of hand these days
It’s interesting to note the many prejudicial comments about the local Council.
The planning laws are created by the relevant state government, with local councils obliged to administer them at their cost, which is ultimately borne by the local ratepayers.
As statutory bodies, councils cannot “turn a blind eye” to offences. In this case it appears neighbours lodged a complaint, forcing the Council’s hand.
I agree with the thrust of the comments about the laws being changed to permit very small scale operations to provide relief, with appropriate safeguards, but opposed to rapacious landowners conducting sardine city operations.