4,600 homeowners to pocket refunds after $1 million council slip-up
- Replies 0
One of Perth’s wealthiest councils has admitted to a costly blunder that left thousands of homeowners unfairly out of pocket.
Residents in two of the city’s most prestigious suburbs were stunned to learn they had been overcharged nearly $1 million in council rates.
The mistake, traced back to a miscalculation, forced officials into an embarrassing backtrack and a public apology.
The Town of Cambridge confirmed it would reimburse $999,739 to ratepayers after a local resident questioned their bill for the 2025/26 financial year.
The error affected 4,633 properties in City Beach and Floreat, where homeowners had been charged between $8.75 and $2,437 more than they should have.
Both suburbs rank among Perth’s most expensive—median house prices sit at about $3 million in City Beach and $2.2 million in Floreat.
Town chief executive Lisa Clack apologised for the error, which was caused by staff misreading a provision of the Local Government Act 1995.
The mistake meant administrators applied a rate 0.000141 higher than correct.
‘I would like to sincerely apologise to the town’s ratepayers for this mistake,’ Ms Clack said in a statement posted on the council’s website.
‘We appreciate that council rates make up a large part of household budgets, and issuing Cambridge residents with the wrong amount is unacceptable.’
Mayor Gary Mack said refunds would begin immediately, with the average credit sitting around $215.
‘Once this was brought to our attention by a resident, we acted on it very, quickly,’ he told ABC Radio Perth.
‘It's a bit unfortunate this hiccup has occurred but you learn from these things.’
An internal review also revealed a separate procedural mistake in the budget adoption process, though this did not impact ratepayers’ bills.
The council confirmed it would not increase rates to cover the shortfall and services would remain unaffected.
To rectify the situation, the Town applied to the State Administrative Tribunal, where the previously imposed rates were quashed and reinstated correctly.
Ms Clack noted that the error was not detected in internal reviews and elected members would not have identified it during the budget process.
She said staff had since double-checked rates for other suburbs in the council’s jurisdiction to ensure no further mistakes were made.
The council voted on to reinstate the correct rates and also agreed to appoint an external reviewer to examine the process for calculating and modelling rates.
Any recommendations from the external review would be shared with the council.
Mistakes in council rates are more common than you might think, and the impact on households can be huge.
If you want to see another striking example of how a council error left residents out of pocket, there’s a recent case involving a far larger sum.
It’s worth taking a look to understand just how costly these mistakes can get—and what to watch for in your own rates.
Read more: Are you being overcharged? This council error cost residents over $10 million!
When trust in local leadership is shaken by such mistakes, how confident can ratepayers really feel about the systems meant to safeguard their money?
Residents in two of the city’s most prestigious suburbs were stunned to learn they had been overcharged nearly $1 million in council rates.
The mistake, traced back to a miscalculation, forced officials into an embarrassing backtrack and a public apology.
The Town of Cambridge confirmed it would reimburse $999,739 to ratepayers after a local resident questioned their bill for the 2025/26 financial year.
The error affected 4,633 properties in City Beach and Floreat, where homeowners had been charged between $8.75 and $2,437 more than they should have.
Both suburbs rank among Perth’s most expensive—median house prices sit at about $3 million in City Beach and $2.2 million in Floreat.
Town chief Lisa Clack confirms council refund plan. Image source: Town of Cambridge
Town chief executive Lisa Clack apologised for the error, which was caused by staff misreading a provision of the Local Government Act 1995.
The mistake meant administrators applied a rate 0.000141 higher than correct.
‘I would like to sincerely apologise to the town’s ratepayers for this mistake,’ Ms Clack said in a statement posted on the council’s website.
‘We appreciate that council rates make up a large part of household budgets, and issuing Cambridge residents with the wrong amount is unacceptable.’
Mayor Gary Mack said refunds would begin immediately, with the average credit sitting around $215.
‘Once this was brought to our attention by a resident, we acted on it very, quickly,’ he told ABC Radio Perth.
‘It's a bit unfortunate this hiccup has occurred but you learn from these things.’
An internal review also revealed a separate procedural mistake in the budget adoption process, though this did not impact ratepayers’ bills.
The council confirmed it would not increase rates to cover the shortfall and services would remain unaffected.
To rectify the situation, the Town applied to the State Administrative Tribunal, where the previously imposed rates were quashed and reinstated correctly.
Ms Clack noted that the error was not detected in internal reviews and elected members would not have identified it during the budget process.
She said staff had since double-checked rates for other suburbs in the council’s jurisdiction to ensure no further mistakes were made.
The council voted on to reinstate the correct rates and also agreed to appoint an external reviewer to examine the process for calculating and modelling rates.
Any recommendations from the external review would be shared with the council.
Mistakes in council rates are more common than you might think, and the impact on households can be huge.
If you want to see another striking example of how a council error left residents out of pocket, there’s a recent case involving a far larger sum.
It’s worth taking a look to understand just how costly these mistakes can get—and what to watch for in your own rates.
Read more: Are you being overcharged? This council error cost residents over $10 million!
When trust in local leadership is shaken by such mistakes, how confident can ratepayers really feel about the systems meant to safeguard their money?
