A controversial squatter’s rights activist has sparked fresh uproar after he published a DIY guide for his followers on how to detect whether a house is fit for squatting.
Jordan van den Lamb, 29, collects addresses for abandoned or empty homes and provides them to Australians in need of emergency housing.
In a recent TikTok video posted under his moniker Purplepingers, he shared what to look out for in identifying an empty home – from checking the fuse box and gas meter to researching online real estate listings.
While the video received mostly positive reactions, a number of viewers were furious at the idea of having to justify their right to homeownership.
In an interview with Daily Mail Australia, Mr van den Lamb claimed property owners had a responsibility to make productive use of their land.
Where it was clearly demonstrated they had failed to do so by leaving it empty or abandoned – usually for at least two years – he claimed it was justified for a squatter to move in. He said the idea is embedded in Australia’s cultural history.
‘It’s how we colonised the country. It was like: “this land was owned by no one”, which is obviously flawed right. And therefore, the land rights were granted to colonial squatters,’ he said.
‘The song Waltzing Matilda is literally about that… read the lyrics, it’s about a squatter evicting a swagman from their property.’
Jordan van den Lamb (pictured) also known online as ‘purplepingers’ went viral after publishing a DIY guide on how to detect whether a house is fit for squatting
In a recent TikTok video, he shared what to look out for in identifying an empty home – from checking the fuse box and gas meter to researching online real estate listings
Mr van den Lamb claimed squatter’s rights were used to justify colonisation in Australia (pictured is a painting showing Captain James Cook taking possession of New South Wales)
Each state and territory in Australia has its own version of adverse possession laws allowing squatters to claim ownership over land they’ve openly and continuously possessed for a defined period of time.
In most jurisdictions, possession must be held for 12 to 15 years. For his part, Mr van den Lamb believes this is excessively long.
‘Twelve to 15 years is a ridiculous amount of time for a house to be empty, especially noting these houses are empty for much longer periods prior to them being squatted [in],’ he told Daily Mail Australia.
‘If someone’s living in a house you’ve literally not bothered to check on for like two years…. You have a responsibility to use it productively’.
Mr van den Lamb draws justification for encouraging Aussies to take ownership of empty homes in part from the vacant residential land tax in Victoria, which requires homeowners to pay a tax on properties left unoccupied for one year.
He claimed many residents were committing fraud by failing to pay the tax, while others took advantage of the enforcement limitations.
‘The data used to enforce [residential land taxes] is predominantly water usage. We’ve seen people go around every couple of months and just turn the taps on for a day and then leave the house empty,’ he said.
The squatters right’s activist claimed homeowners are under an obligation to make productive use of their properties
A previous protest by Purplepingers at a series of residential properties that had been vacant for decades
Mr van den Lamb has consistently warned his followers against breaking into the properties he assigns them, claiming it was unnecessary.
‘I’ve been doing this for a while and, most of the time, they just have either an open back door or an open window,’ he said.
‘I’ve never encouraged anyone to break in to a property and I still would never encourage that. That’s not what this is about.
‘This is about the thousands of empty properties that we have around this country and the far fewer people who don’t have roofs over their head every night.’
Mr van den Lamb said it was his understanding that trespassing required forced entry to a property, for example, breaking a window or kicking down a door.
But legal experts told Daily Mail Australia otherwise.
Andre Ong, principal at Sharrock Pitman lawyers, said Mr van den Lamb had ‘misconstrued’ the criminal and tortious elements of trespassing.
‘In a civil society, you are supposed to respect other people’s property rights. What is relevant is that you were there without consent or other lawful entitlement to be there,’ he said.
Mr van den Lamb (pictured during an appearance on The Project) has attracted widespread attention for his advocacy on Australia’s housing crisis
Special counsel in commercial litigation at Attwood Marshall Lawyers Jade Carlson agreed, adding the legal question is whether Mr van den Lamb himself could be held liable for any trespasses he may help to facilitate.
Ms Carlson said only the registered owner could raise a trespassing claim, meaning if a home were truly abandoned the likelihood of legal action would be ‘remote’.
She added, however, the program raises ‘inherent risks’ that could raise ‘significant’ legal consequences.
Mr Ong said a court may look beyond the activist’s insistence against forcing entry to a property to any reasonably foreseeable misconduct arising from the trespass.
Asked by Daily Mail Australia whether he feared any legal repercussions, Mr van den Lamb said: ‘Not particularly, no. People are dying. Me having a fight with a cop isn’t gonna change much.
‘At the end of the day, I’m a young white man who’s tertiary educated in this country, so I’m going to be fine compared to someone who’s not from my demographic and is sleeping rough on the street.’
