Beauty Point Tourist Park says residency in court illegal, as park denies issuing eviction notice

Lawyers for the owners of a northern Tasmanian caravan park have told a court it must dismiss a man’s fight against eviction or the park could be operating illegally.

A long-time ‘guest’ at Beauty Point Tourist Park has sued the park’s owners in the Launceston Supreme Court after receiving an eviction notice earlier this year.

On Thursday, lawyers for the park’s owners told the court that under planning laws the park is not permitted to accommodate more than one dwelling.

The local council previously said the park was approved for short-term visitor accommodation.

Defense counsel for the park operators, Bruce McTaggart SC, argued that John Lowe, who has lived in the park for around two years, should not be considered a resident.

“Residential occupation is illegal,” said park manager Mr McTaggart.

“We know that this use has been illegal since 2013.

Mr McTaggart said the owners bought the business in 2016.

The park claimed it was operating in accordance with planning laws, saying its position was that guests were in a removable van and annex – not permanent structures.

In February, park management sent a letter to occupiers saying the local council, West Tamar, was investigating compliance issues.

The council said it was investigating claims that permanent residents were living in the park.

Lowe challenges eviction notice in court

John Lowe has lived in the park for about two years, having bought his house from a previous occupant.

It contains a caravan but has substantial modifications including additional rooms and is recessed into the ground.

After problems arose at the park following the announcement that West Tamar Council would look into compliance issues, Mr Lowe formed a residents’ association and began advocating for the occupiers’ rights in the media, with politicians and on social networks.

In July this year, the park introduced a new set of terms and conditions stating that occupants could be evicted with or without cause.

The new rules also stated that houses would have to be removed from the park at the end of a person’s stay.

Shortly after the rules came into effect, park management issued Mr Lowe and two others with eviction notices.

In a letter to other park occupants, general manager Joshua Manticas claimed those evicted had “been actively engaged in a personal smear campaign against our directors.”

Mr Lowe sought a temporary injunction against his eviction and the removal of his home from the park in the Launceston Supreme Court, which was granted.

Yesterday’s hearing before Acting Judge Shane Marshall was a rehearing by the park owners of that decision.

Lowe claims his contract with Park allowed him to stay until 2073

Mr Lowe argued the park breached his contract because he signed an agreement with a different set of rules when he started living there.

His lawyer, Ashleigh Best, said the new rules were a “fundamental” change to the agreement.

Documents presented to the court show the park had listed Mr Lowe’s departure date as 2073.

The park operators’ defense argued that the contract might not be enforceable given the illegality of the residences.

Dr Best said it was not certain whether Mr Lowe’s house was built illegally as it was not clear when it was built.

She argued the park operators had breached consumer law if the defense was correct that the park was not approved for residential use.

Mr. Lowe is seeking a civil trial to obtain a permanent injunction against his eviction.

Acting Judge Marshall said he would later decide whether the temporary injunction could be upheld and whether the case could go to trial.

Editor’s note 11/29/24: The original version of this article incorrectly stated that the owners of the caravan park had told the court they were operating illegally. The park’s defense attorney actually said the park would be operating illegally if John Lowe’s argument that he was a resident and not a guest was accepted. The ABC regrets the error.