Bundaberg Park Lodge Caravan Park.
Bundaberg Park Lodge Caravan Park. Emma Reid

Caravan park owner has tribunal application dismissed

A BUNDABERG caravan park owner has had an application against one of the park's longtime residents dismissed by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

The application was lodged in February 2018 by Lorraine Palmer, who owns Bundaberg Park Lodge on Childers Rd, against Penelope Grogan, who has lived at lot 103 since 2005.

The application sought the tribunal to order Ms Grogan to remedy all structures built outside her lot including a timber fence, carport and garden, remove an air-conditioning unit, remove trees and shrubs outside the allotted boundary and ensure they are kept at least one metre from the road.

The application was then amended in November for the same remedies or for the tribunal to terminate the agreement between the park and Ms Grogan.

The tribunal heard Ms Palmer was concerned the air-conditioning unit was installed without her consent and also blew hot air and made noises to affect the neighbouring lot.

However, a statement from the neighbour on lot 104 stated the unit did not affect them at all.

In regards to the carport, the tribunal heard although it had been erected for the past 11 years, at no time had Ms Grogan been given consent to park on another site.

However, in oral evidence given at the hearing, Ms Grogan said when she moved into the park in 2005, the then park manager told her there was a parking space associated with lot, which she had been using between 2005 and 2019.

A plan of the site from 2008 confirmed a car park was part of the site.

The hearing found from the evidence the site did include the allocated parking space for the sole benefit of Ms Grogan at no additional cost.

Ms Grogan has also been allowed to keep her garden shed after the tribunal was satisfied the structure was entirely within its boundaries.

In regards to the foliage, Ms Grogan admitted that while sometimes the plants could, from time to time, get closer to the road as they grew, she did maintain them and they were 900mm away from the road.

As a result of the evidence given, the tribunal dismissed the application and said if both parties could not agree on the parking space within 28 days, Ms Grogan could apply to the tribunal for an appropriate order consistent with the decision.

"The application is without merit and the applicant is not entitled to a remedy,” the tribunal said.

"The respondent (Ms Grogan) is entitled, without additional charge, to the use of a car park located conveniently to site 103.”

The tribunal handed down its decision on August 2.