Charlotte works for a fast food company whilst studying at TAFE. She has been working there for four years. In November Centrelink raised a $6,000 debt against her claiming she had not told them when she changed employers and they had no record of her income.  A debt of this size can lead to prosecution. SSRV wrote to Centrelink on Charlotte’s behalf noting that she had been lodging applications for her low income health care card during this period (about eight times over four years). Centrelink accepted that they had made a mistake and Charlotte’s debt was removed.

Jim and Florence emigrated from Fiji eight years ago.  They have a young daughter, Madison, who was born in Australia.  Jim and Florence are not permanent residents. Jim worked as a courier and when he went to a tax agent to get his tax done, told the agent they were not permanent residents.  Despite Jim querying it, the agent told Jim that he was eligible for Family Tax Benefit (FTB). Jim received a tax deduction equivalent to the entitlement that Florence would have been paid for FTB.  A year later, they did the same thing, but this time, Centrelink realised they were not permanent residents and did not pay. Instead, Centrelink raised an overpayment against Jim for the money he had received a year earlier.  Jim did not earn a lot of money and the family were unwell, so the debt was going to cause the family hardship.  SSRV assisted Jim to appeal to the Social Security Appeals Tribunal on the basis that Jim had always told the truth and it was the tax agent who had applied for the refund, not Jim specifically.  The Tribunal agreed and overturned the debt.

Ralph came to Australia from Iran on a Temporary Protection Visa (TPV). He was entitled to Special Benefit payment if he looked for work. He was referred to a Job Network provider who recommended that Ralph undertake an English course and organised his enrolment.  Ralph was not aware that the course was offered by a University and that he had become a full-time student.  Ralph was also unaware that as a TPV Special Benefit recipient, he was supposed to be provided with ‘job matching’ services only by his Job Network provider. Ralph started his study and continued to work delivering pamphlets three days a week.  Some time later, Centrelink raised an overpayment of $7,000 against Ralph for the entire time he was doing the English course because as a full time student, Ralph did not qualify for Special Benefit.  With SSRV’s help, Ralph appealed on the basis that Ralph had only done what he was told to do by his Job Network provider, who he had to see to get paid.  The Centrelink Authorised Review Officer recognised that this was an example of administrative error and overturned the debt.

Carol is on Disability Support Pension. She has a number of mental health issues, which make it difficult for her to understand Centrelink documentation. Her partner Simon works.  Simon has learning difficulties.  Centrelink raised a debt against Carol as a result of Simon’s pay increases and started trying to get Simon to pay Carol’s debt.  Carol’s aunt contacted SSRV and SSRV staff mounted a ‘special circumstances’ case to the Centrelink Authorised Review Officer (ARO) on Carol’s behalf. The ARO decided to stop collection of the debt meaning that Carol only lost the money she had already repaid.

Michael moved to Bendigo to attempt to rebuild his life after a number of years suffering from significant health issues.  He enrolled in TAFE and undertook a basic engineering degree.  Unfortunately, his health declined and he had to drop out.  Centrelink raised a debt against Michael who contacted SSRV. With documentation from his doctor and identifying his special circumstances SSRV was able to get Michael’s debt reduced to zero.

Carla from Frankston had a malicious ex-husband who went to great lengths to convince Centrelink that Carla was working when she was not. This included the generation of a number of false documents and the writing of false letters to Centrelink, ‘signed’ by Carla. Centrelink believed this information and cancelled Carla’s entitlement. With assistance from SSRV, Carla was able to convince the Social Security Appeals Tribunal of her innocence and Centrelink returned the money they had withheld.

Mike undertook a New Enterprise Initiative Scheme (NEIS) program to start his own business. Mike tried to start a business installing swimming pools in regional areas. Unfortunately the drought hit and the business was not successful. Stuck without income from his business, Mike applied to Centrelink for income and was told that because he was on NEIS they could not help. Mike then went to the Department that oversees NEIS, which told him they could not help him. Mike returned to Centrelink and got a similar story. After some months of no income Mike finally got paid by Centrelink, but they would not back-pay him. SSRV assisted Mike to lodge a Compensation for Detriment Due to Defective Administration application which, despite a setback, was ultimately successful. 

Kylie’s life had included some very serious set-backs. After a number of years living in inappropriate accommodation she moved to Mitcham into public housing. Kylie had been in private rental prior to this and had received Rent Assistance. Rent for her new housing was paid directly to the Office of Housing by Centrelink. Despite this, Centrelink did not stop paying her Rent Assistance. With assistance from SSRV Kylie went to the Social Security Appeals Tribunal which ruled that the debt was due to Centrelink error.