In a tale that seems almost too bizarre to be true, an Australian homeowner has been slapped with a hefty fine that has left her flabbergasted.

This situation also sparked a heated debate about the boundaries of private property rights and local council regulations.

Imagine being fined for sleeping on your property.

It's a scenario that Gold Coast local Belinda recently faced while she slept in her driveway.

Belinda's ordeal began when she was woken up by a council worker patrolling the area.

Belinda Lee Rose showed the fine in a video posted online. Image Credit: TikTok/Belinda Lee Rose

'Did you know it was illegal to sleep in your vehicle? Well, it is!' she prefaced.

'I got woken up at 1:30 am. A council worker must have been patrolling the area, and the little weasel must have called the police officer.'

'The two of them were at my door at 1:30 am, and they issued me with this notice,' Belinda shared in a video, showing the fine she received.

The notice for 'unlawful camping in a public place' slapped her with a $806 fine.

According to the Gold Coast City Council, the fine was for illegal camping.

The council defined illegal camping as sleeping or attempting to sleep overnight in a tent or motor vehicle.

The council's spokesperson stated that this includes public spaces like parks, roads, and driveways on public land between a private property boundary and the kerb.

They also mentioned that first-time offenders are usually given a warning and educated on appropriate places to sleep before being asked to move on.

However, the kicker was Belinda was parked on her property, in her own driveway.

'My house is currently in the process of being built, there's only a few things left to do, and yet I'm not allowed to stay in my van,' she explained.

Belinda's story sparked outrage and confusion among Australians.

Several comments expressed their disbelief and frustration over the rule.

'Don't drive tired, but also don't sleep or rest in your car,' one person sarcastically remarked.

'So they tell us to pull up and rest while travelling long distances… How hypocritical,' another agreed.

'So, if I set up a tent in the backyard and camp out with my kids, will I get a fine, too? How is this any different?' a third asked in disbelief.

'What we do on our property is no one's business.'

'Don't pay, take it to court, show you are the owner of the property, make them apologise, and ask them to pay costs for court and your wasted time,' one suggested.

'That's appalling. They shouldn't even have been stepping on your private property,' a commenter agreed.

Watch Belinda Lee Rose's story here:

Source: @belindaleerose/TikTok​

Homeowners need to be aware of their local council's rules to avoid fines.

However, it's equally essential for councils to exercise discretion and consider the context before issuing fines.

Belinda's case should be a cautionary tale for all of us.

It's a reminder to stay informed about our rights and to challenge decisions that seem unfair or unreasonable.

Key Takeaways

• A Queensland homeowner was fined $806 for sleeping in her van parked in her driveway.
• The woman argued that she was not unlawfully camping in a public place as she was on her property.
• Several comments expressed their confusion and frustration over the regulations that led to her fine.
• The Gold Coast City Council clarified their stance, stating that regular patrols are conducted for illegal camping and sleeping in vehicles on public land, which includes driveways on public land between a private property boundary and the kerb.

We would love to hear your thoughts on this matter. Have you ever faced an unexpected fine on your property? How did you handle it? Share your experiences in the comments below.

 

[Liag]

If you read it again you will find she was on public property like nature strip which means she can be fined...funny how she has garnered sympathy from strangers who don't know the full story.

The story actually says that she was on her property, in her own driveway.

 

[mylittletibbies]

I just read it again, and all I could was see was that she was in her driveway. What am I missing?

Nothing.

 

[mylittletibbies]

As I wrote [previously QUOTE
Natalie & Matt, I noticed your report at about 09.40am 2-4-2025 about a woman fined for allegedly sleeping in her own caravan even so she claims to have been reading. The real issues is if any council can fine a person using their own property! As a constitutionalist I do not accept this to be so and in September 2023 Banyule City council started a campaign against me, even claiming I cannot park my own car in my own driveway behind closed gates as it claimed I only can park in my garage. I made clear it is nonsense and on 25 October 2023 they then involved lawyers. Despite their reign of terror since, including harming my (now late) wife Olga Hlavka-Schorel I never gave up, and so far they achieved nothing against me. The issue is that municipal/shire councils have no legislative powers (See Municipal of sydney versus Commonwealth HCA 1904 and also

QUOTE 20250320 CORRESPONDENCE

For any farmer, etc, their FEE SIMPLE rights are also robbed as now (albeit unconstitutionally) they are forced to pay huge sums of moneys to Aboriginals for being permitted to put a post at a certain depth, clearly violating the Commonwealth v New South Wales [1923] HCA 34 (1923) 33 CLR 1 (9 August 1923) decision as to FEE SIMPLE right

https://constitutionwatch.com.au/fee-simple/ttps://constitutionwatch.com.au/fee-simple/

Commonwealth v New South Wales [1923] HCA 34 (1923) 33 CLR 1 (9 August 1923)

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KNOX C.J., ISAACS, HIGGINS, GAVAN DUFFY AND STARKE JJ.

THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA PLAINTIFF against

THE STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES AND ANOTHER DEFENDANTS

1920-1923: SYDNEY, Dec. 1-3, 1920; Mar. 21-29, 1922; Aug. 9, 1923 33 CLR 1

Extracts from Commonwealth Law Reports Volume 33 / 33 CLR 1:- (1920) 33 CLR 1 at 42

QUOTE

“It confers, and since the beginning of legal history it always has conferred, the lawful right to exercise over, upon, and in respect to, the land, every act of ownership which can enter into the imagination, including the right to commit unlimited waste; and, for all practical purposes of ownership, it differs from the absolute dominion of a chattel, in nothing except the physical indestructibility of its subject.”

“Besides these rights of ownership, a fee simple at the present day confers an absolute right, both of alienation inter vivos and of devise by will.”

END QUOTE

And

QUOTE

ISAACS J. In Challis's Real Property, 3rd ed., p. 218,

it is stated with perfect accuracy:—

“In the language of the English law, the word fee signifies an estate of inheritance as distinguished from a less estate; not, as in the language of the feudists, a subject of tenure as distinguished from an allodium.”

“Allodium being wholly unknown to English law, the latter distinction would in fact have no meaning.” “A fee simple is the most extensive in quantum, and the most absolute in respect to the rights which it confers, of all estates known to the law.”

END QUOTE



Again

“A fee simple is the most extensive in quantum, and the most absolute in respect to the rights which it confers, of all estates known to the law.”



END QUOTE 20250320 CORRESPONDENCE



What a person does using their FEE SIMPLE property is up to the property owner (so the tenant) albeit tenants can be restricted by the property owner as to usage.



I stopped paying the so called "council rates" about 2 years ago making clear it is an unconstitutional "State Land Taxation" as since 11-11-1910 States no longer can exercise any legislative powers regarding state land taxation. Purported "council rates" are deemed to be "State Land Taxation".

Likewise, I made clear that the State Mandates (regarding the covid scam) were and remain to be unconstitutional since 1908.

You can find extensive writings about this at my blog https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati and I make clear I do not charge for anyone downloading my writings!

Be free to contact me and I do neither charge for this! I am retired and a senior citizen!

END QUOTE 20250320 CORRESPONDENCE



I stopped paying the so called "council rates" about 2 years ago making clear it is an unconstitutional "State Land Taxation" as since 11-11-1910 States no longer can exercise any legislative powers regarding state land taxation. Purported "council rates" are deemed to be "State Land Taxation".

Likewise, I made clear that the State Mandates (regarding the covid scam) were and remain to be unconstitutional since 1908.

You can find extensive writings about this at my blog https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati and I make clear I do not charge for anyone downloading my writings!

Be free to contact me and I do neither charge for this! I am retired and a senior citizen!
END QUOTE

Not so long ago my stepdaughters husband was taken to court as he had not paid his rates for over 5 years. Under the same belief as you.
To cut a long story short he found out he was wrong. which his solicitor had already told him.
He was told he had to pay the rates plus five years interest and court costs or the council could auction the property to recoup the money owed.
The law states
"The imposition of council rates is lawful and legal. It accords with the legislative framework that provides the power as set out in the Local Government Act 1999
(The Act)