Squatters rights - WA

Does anyone know where i can get some legal clarification about squatters rights in WA or can someone summarise some key points?

I went to see a development site with an abandoned property last night and whilst i was been shown through the owner discovered someone has previously smashed the window and entered the property and run an exension cord through both properties to steal power. This does not concern me except for the place was unsecure and later on that night it seems like a few guys (riff raffs) carrying some slabs of beer were about to enter the property until they saw myself and the agent standing at the door. The agent has mentioned that this could be a risk and she has heard of stories where it took more than 3.5years to remove the squatters (all whilst paying mortgage and getting no rent).

Is there anything i can add to the contact of purchase to protect myself? My builder uncle told me just to get a bob cat or 4wd and a chain and rip down the property after settlement until we are ready to build (he mentioned its might be illegal without a demolition permit but it happens quite a lot)
 
My friend had the same thing happen (except the stealing power bit) after she kicked some tenants/professional criminals/prostitute/drug addicts out. She had the window repaired, security screen repaired, alarm system repaired, and changed all locks. It probably helps to allow new tenants with big dogs and she didn't have any more problems.
 
I think they can kick in the door or smash and window to gain unlawful entry the I think they still have squatters rights. If its forceful entry or not it's still the same. Can anyone confirm or deny?
 
Maybe go to the local police station or call them and see if you can find out more or try googling. I had some people squatting on part of my property in WA. The police told me to dismantle the structure, which I did, and I had no more problems. It was weird, they would see me and just not care!
 
had this situation in Northbridge recently.

bring the police, inform them they are illegally occupying the premises and they are asked to move on.

you then board up and demolish.
 
I think they can kick in the door or smash and window to gain unlawful entry the I think they still have squatters rights. If its forceful entry or not it's still the same. Can anyone confirm or deny?

Uh you really don't have anything to worry about in terms of "squatters rights".

Its like some legal urban legend - it really doesn't exist in any practical form.
 
had this situation in Northbridge recently.

bring the police, inform them they are illegally occupying the premises and they are asked to move on.

you then board up and demolish.

I did some work for the EPRA looking after the old houses until they renovated them, moved many a squatter on.

Loved seeing some of those old derelict places restored
 
Uh you really don't have anything to worry about in terms of "squatters rights".

Its like some legal urban legend - it really doesn't exist in any practical form.
Are you sure about that in Australia ? In Europe squatters have very strong rights, once they register the place as their address with the authorities it's near impossible to get them out. Owners who try get into big trouble with the law.

There's a mansion near where I live in Zurich right on the Lake which must be worth at least 20 million. Owned by an absent Russian, it is occupied by squatters. Same in London, there are squatters in some of the best areas. Sometimes absent owners don't mind if the squatters look after the place & keep out the vandals.
 
We don't have any formal squatters laws like they have in UK where you basically own something after 10yrs.
Wish we did as I've been effectively squatting on land for 16yrs.
 
There's no shortage of stuff written about it - even in Australia

NSW: http://shac.squat.net/book8.html or http://www.legalanswers.sl.nsw.gov.au/guides/tenants_rights_manual/other_tenants/squatters.html

Vic: http://melbournecio.org/?page_id=15

Dazz said:
Many useful tips indeed - who writes this stuff ??

Maybe underemployed bourgeois law graduates who see the law as a force for their 'community activism'? (as opposed to the greedy 'corporate lawyer' types)

Note that the squatter guides come pretty close to advocating out and out deception or shady conduct (eg claiming they want the place for 'community housing') and you wouldn't want a respectable organisation's name to be associated with it. Like how professional bodies don't want to be too chummy with the property spruikers that go on about following up death notices etc.

If you move up the chain of web links and possible undeclared relationships or at least sympathies. Denying responsibility but attaching credence.

Eg the comprehensive Victorian squatters guide has a link from http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/ which in turn is sponsored by (presumably gets money from) the following reputable bodies listed at: http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/cb_pages/funding_sources.php

You may have had a similar structure in public health where there was seperation between the public servants and the on the ground people doing stuff like drug 'harm minimisation', 'handing out syringes' etc which was either politically controversial or could be seen as lending legitimacy to illegal activities (but arguably for a wider benefit of checking a contagion). Especially in the early days of AIDs when certain conduct was still illegal in some states.

So I wouldn't be suprised if some taxpayers money indirectly went into this sort of stuff, even if just welfare benefits of the writers or tacit support from some in the 'complaints industry'.

Not that this is particularly novel. Complex corporate structures are designed to protect assets (or minimise responsibility) depending on where you stand. Defence outsourcing to others to do stuff free of political scrutiny or too much worrying about international conventions.

Partisans of both sides are susceptible of being blind to whichever supports their prejudices.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top