By Cam Lucadou-Wells
Greater Dandenong Council has successfully applied to enforce a clean-up order of a Dandenong North hoarder’s home.
After months of council inspections and mediation, Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal approved the order against the “prohibited” outdoor “store” on 9 May.
The home in Hill Court was full of hoarded goods, which spilled out into “all outdoor areas” except for the decommissioned pool, VCAT senior member Geoffrey Code stated.
Neighbours complained to the council of “unsightliness, fire risk and vermin”.
The “eclectic” collection oudoors piled above head-height, according to council inspectors.
“At times there was no prospect of being able to enter the house at its front door from the street,” Mr Code stated.
The resident reportedly developed a hoarding “affliction” after a career-ending workplace injury and close relative’s death.
“Hoarding is a mental affliction, often with distressing effects on families”, Mr Code noted.
In opposing the order, the resident’s family argued clean-up progress was slow because “the hoarder must ‘accept’ and ‘let go’ and this takes time.
However, Mr Code said Greater Dandenong had been “generous” in allowing “nearly two years” to remove the goods.
He also rejected “speculative” arguments that an order would counter-productively aggravate the resident’s “mental condition and propensity to hoard”.
A family member said the order showed an “appalling lack of empathy” to a person with mental illness.
Mr Code required the resident to cut down from two unregistered cage-trailers. “A maximum of one trailer is normal and reasonable in the circumstances”.
However, he found the council’s proposal to restrict outdoor items to a “minimal” number too restrictive.
“Minimal should be replaced with ‘usual’ so that the test of what to keep is not one of solely of quantity but includes the nature of the items”.
He also ordered the goods’ removal within 14 days, rather than the council’s request for “immediate” action.
If the enforcement order isn’t complied with, Greater Dandenong can carry out the removal at the resident’s cost.
The council foreshadowed it will also apply for legal costs against the resident.
