Abandoned houses: Property Ownership and Morality

One thing I’ve noticed while documenting abandoned houses over the years, is just how many have remained empty for an incredibly long time. Some have been vacant for years, while others appear to have been sitting untouched for decades.

What surprises me even more is that this isn’t always because the owners have fallen on hard times. I’ve come across owners with multiple investment properties, sometimes four, six or even more. The highest I’ve personally seen is one owner with 24 properties, including at least one house that appears to have been abandoned for decades, with several others also suspected of being vacant. It makes me wonder how common this really is and whether we’re simply accepting it as normal.

Legally, property owners generally have the right to do what they like with their own property, provided they comply with planning, health and safety laws. But it raises an interesting moral question. Just because someone has the legal right to leave a house sitting empty, does that necessarily make it the right thing to do?

There are good arguments on both sides.

An abandoned house in Belmont, now demolished

Some people believe that once you own a property, it is entirely your choice whether you live in it, rent it out, renovate it or leave it vacant. Owners can also have genuine reasons for doing so, including financial hardship, unresolved family matters, illness, probate or plans for future redevelopment. From the outside, it’s often impossible to know the full story.

On the other hand, many people would argue that leaving a house empty for years is a waste, particularly when housing is in short supply. Vacant houses can deteriorate, attract vandalism, affect neighbouring properties and gradually become another forgotten building.

For me, there is another side to it that goes beyond housing.

Every old house tells a story. Some have been home to the same family for generations, with photographs, letters, furniture and personal belongings still inside. These aren’t just possessions. They are part of a family’s history and, in some cases, the history of an entire neighbourhood. But locking up a house doesn’t preserve that history. Time continues to take its toll. Roofs leak, moisture gets in, pests cause damage and irreplaceable memories can gradually disappear.

An abandoned house in Gosnells, now demolished

I don’t think the law should force people to preserve every old house or every family belonging. However, I do think there is a moral responsibility to make a decision. Whether that means restoring the house, selling it, passing it on to family, documenting its contents or finding another purpose for it. Almost any action is better than decades of inaction.

Once enough time passes, opportunities disappear. Buildings can become beyond repair and family memories, photographs, letters and personal belongings may be lost forever. In the case of historically significant homes, part of a community’s story can disappear as well.

As someone who spends countless hours researching local history, that’s what I find the hardest to see. I don’t just see an abandoned house as another piece of private property. I see a place where people’s lives unfolded, where generations laughed, celebrated, mourned and built their lives together. Every year a house is left to deteriorate, there’s less of that story to save.

I don’t pretend to have all the answers, and I know every situation is different. But when a house sits vacant for years with nothing happening, I can’t help but wonder whether we’re losing far more than just another old building.

Every room in this two-storey Nedlands house looked like this. It all went to the tip.

There is one final aspect to this discussion that often gets overlooked.

The law is quite clear. Trespassing is trespassing and there is no excuse for entering private property without permission. That is black letter law.

Morality, however, is much more personal. It asks different questions.

I’ve found that many people who are quick to focus on the legalities often begin to understand the “why” once they see the photographs or the process of documenting these forgotten homes. They realise it isn’t always about thrill-seeking or causing damage. Sometimes it’s about curiosity, history, architecture or preserving a record of places that may soon disappear forever.

That doesn’t make trespassing acceptable and it certainly doesn’t give anyone the right to enter someone else’s property. At the same time, not every family wants their history documented, particularly if that documentation has come about through an act of trespass. Those views deserve to be respected too.

Perhaps the bigger question isn’t whether people should be entering abandoned houses at all. Maybe it’s why so many houses are being left to quietly deteriorate in the first place. If more of them were occupied, restored, passed on to family or cared for, perhaps there would be far less abandoned homes for anyone to feel compelled to document.