For years, welfare recipients have been caught in a bureaucratic nightmare, waiting for Centrelink to rectify thousands of miscalculated debt notices.

The issue, which has been ongoing for nearly two decades, has left many Australians in financial uncertainty and distress.

Between 2003 and 2020, as many as 100,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services (DSS), according to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The departments' 'income apportionment' practices, which misinterpreted and unlawfully applied the Social Security Act, resulted in some Centrelink customers' employment income being assessed in the wrong fortnight.

Services Australia temporarily halted its examination of approximately 20,000 debts to seek legal counsel and pinpointed around 87,000 additional cases potentially impacted by the erroneous calculations related to ‘income apportionment’.

Almost 10,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services. Credit: Google Maps

The issue, unrelated to the controversial ‘Robodebt scheme’, resulted from agencies holding an incorrect understanding of relevant legislative provisions.

However, despite the severity of the issue, a report by the Ombudsman released on December 4 found that the two agencies were still unable to advise how many people were affected or how many payments went up or down because of unlawful calculations.

The Ombudsman's Report: A Call for Urgent Action

The Ombudsman's report highlighted the slow response of Services Australia and the Department of Social Services to the issue. The agencies were also finalising their legal stance on the lawful calculation of employment income before resuming the evaluation of cases.

'Services Australia and DSS did not act promptly to address this issue—in the three years the agencies have known about this issue, we expected more action to have been taken to address it,' the report said.

The Ombudsman emphasised that when ‘agencies make a mistake that impacts people, they should acknowledge it and develop a fair way to address the mistake’.

‘They should also clearly explain the mistake and what they intend to do to fix it. The public deserves no less,’ the report read.

The report made eight recommendations, all of which have been accepted by the two agencies.

These included developing a strategy to assess a sample of historic debts, underpayments, Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions and debts referred to the prosecutor that were potentially affected by unlawful income apportionment and a way to manage remedies for affected customers.

‘Given the scale of income apportionment and the length of time involved...(an option) might be an approach involving large-scale waiver of debts...rather than seeking to re-calculate over 100,000 individual debts,’ the Ombudsman also suggested.

In its response, Services Australia mentioned that as of October, the Commonwealth prosecutor's office began informing individuals who were prosecuted in the last five years about the discoveries made by the Ombudsman.

Last November 6, the agency initiated mailing letters to customers impacted by the suspension of debt collection efforts.

The Human Cost of Miscalculated Debts

The miscalculated debts have had a profound impact on the lives of welfare recipients. Greens spokeswoman Janet Rice said the report showed the need to scrap all debt recovery because of its unacceptable human cost.

'Services Australia has broken the law by chasing people, across two decades, for debts they do not owe, and has then failed to produce any remediation or communication plan in the three years they’ve been aware of the issue,' Senator Rice stated.

'It is a complete failure that has left income support recipients in a distressing limbo, unable to live their lives without the shadow of debt hanging over them,’ she added.

Key Takeaways

• Two federal agencies, Services Australia and the Department of Social Services, miscalculated as many as 100,000 welfare debts between 2003 and 2020.
  
• The errors resulted from misinterpreted and unlawfully applied Social Security Act income apportionment rules, which affected the calculation of some recipients' employment income.
  
• The Commonwealth Ombudsman found that the agencies could not advise how many people were affected or how many payments were incorrectly calculated and criticised their slow response to resolve the issue.
  
• The report made eight recommendations accepted by the agencies, including developing a strategy to assess historical debts potentially affected by unlawful calculations and dealing with remedies for affected customers.
  

Have you been affected by Centrelink's miscalculated debts, members? Share your experiences in the comments below.

 

[IAN3005]

They must just try me..... I will come out fighting like a banshee.....

 

[Veggiepatch]

It is time to run a fine tooth comb through the Child Support Agency as well - that organisation without a physical address. And yes, I do "owe" them money.

They will get their grubby hands onto any liquid assets you have - ATO refunds, Centrelink payments, income of any kind BEFORE you even see it! It's not a case of you paying them as it is taken away before you notice it. Avenues for appeal? Just forget it. Been there, done that.

 

[Isis]

For years, welfare recipients have been caught in a bureaucratic nightmare, waiting for Centrelink to rectify thousands of miscalculated debt notices.

The issue, which has been ongoing for nearly two decades, has left many Australians in financial uncertainty and distress.

Between 2003 and 2020, as many as 100,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services (DSS), according to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The departments' 'income apportionment' practices, which misinterpreted and unlawfully applied the Social Security Act, resulted in some Centrelink customers' employment income being assessed in the wrong fortnight.

Services Australia temporarily halted its examination of approximately 20,000 debts to seek legal counsel and pinpointed around 87,000 additional cases potentially impacted by the erroneous calculations related to ‘income apportionment’.

View attachment 36647

Almost 10,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services. Credit: Google Maps

The issue, unrelated to the controversial ‘Robodebt scheme’, resulted from agencies holding an incorrect understanding of relevant legislative provisions.

However, despite the severity of the issue, a report by the Ombudsman released on December 4 found that the two agencies were still unable to advise how many people were affected or how many payments went up or down because of unlawful calculations.

The Ombudsman's Report: A Call for Urgent Action

The Ombudsman's report highlighted the slow response of Services Australia and the Department of Social Services to the issue. The agencies were also finalising their legal stance on the lawful calculation of employment income before resuming the evaluation of cases.

'Services Australia and DSS did not act promptly to address this issue—in the three years the agencies have known about this issue, we expected more action to have been taken to address it,' the report said.

The Ombudsman emphasised that when ‘agencies make a mistake that impacts people, they should acknowledge it and develop a fair way to address the mistake’.

‘They should also clearly explain the mistake and what they intend to do to fix it. The public deserves no less,’ the report read.

The report made eight recommendations, all of which have been accepted by the two agencies.

These included developing a strategy to assess a sample of historic debts, underpayments, Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions and debts referred to the prosecutor that were potentially affected by unlawful income apportionment and a way to manage remedies for affected customers.

‘Given the scale of income apportionment and the length of time involved...(an option) might be an approach involving large-scale waiver of debts...rather than seeking to re-calculate over 100,000 individual debts,’ the Ombudsman also suggested.

In its response, Services Australia mentioned that as of October, the Commonwealth prosecutor's office began informing individuals who were prosecuted in the last five years about the discoveries made by the Ombudsman.

Last November 6, the agency initiated mailing letters to customers impacted by the suspension of debt collection efforts.

The Human Cost of Miscalculated Debts

The miscalculated debts have had a profound impact on the lives of welfare recipients. Greens spokeswoman Janet Rice said the report showed the need to scrap all debt recovery because of its unacceptable human cost.

'Services Australia has broken the law by chasing people, across two decades, for debts they do not owe, and has then failed to produce any remediation or communication plan in the three years they’ve been aware of the issue,' Senator Rice stated.

'It is a complete failure that has left income support recipients in a distressing limbo, unable to live their lives without the shadow of debt hanging over them,’ she added.

Key Takeaways

• Two federal agencies, Services Australia and the Department of Social Services, miscalculated as many as 100,000 welfare debts between 2003 and 2020.
• The errors resulted from misinterpreted and unlawfully applied Social Security Act income apportionment rules, which affected the calculation of some recipients' employment income.
• The Commonwealth Ombudsman found that the agencies could not advise how many people were affected or how many payments were incorrectly calculated and criticised their slow response to resolve the issue.
• The report made eight recommendations accepted by the agencies, including developing a strategy to assess historical debts potentially affected by unlawful calculations and dealing with remedies for affected customers.

Have you been affected by Centrelink's miscalculated debts, members? Share your experiences in the comments below.

Not long after my husband died I was receiving a pension. Retired aged 68 I received a letter saying I owed $21,000 as they had paid me to much. How in a short time I accumulated that I couldn’t understand, but what could I do? They were kind and I paid it off bit by bit. After many years and 83 years old $6000 to go, apart from the cruelty so soon after his death my pension shrunk.

 

[Maurice_McGahey]

For years, welfare recipients have been caught in a bureaucratic nightmare, waiting for Centrelink to rectify thousands of miscalculated debt notices.

The issue, which has been ongoing for nearly two decades, has left many Australians in financial uncertainty and distress.

Between 2003 and 2020, as many as 100,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services (DSS), according to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The departments' 'income apportionment' practices, which misinterpreted and unlawfully applied the Social Security Act, resulted in some Centrelink customers' employment income being assessed in the wrong fortnight.

Services Australia temporarily halted its examination of approximately 20,000 debts to seek legal counsel and pinpointed around 87,000 additional cases potentially impacted by the erroneous calculations related to ‘income apportionment’.

View attachment 36647

Almost 10,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services. Credit: Google Maps

The issue, unrelated to the controversial ‘Robodebt scheme’, resulted from agencies holding an incorrect understanding of relevant legislative provisions.

However, despite the severity of the issue, a report by the Ombudsman released on December 4 found that the two agencies were still unable to advise how many people were affected or how many payments went up or down because of unlawful calculations.

The Ombudsman's Report: A Call for Urgent Action

The Ombudsman's report highlighted the slow response of Services Australia and the Department of Social Services to the issue. The agencies were also finalising their legal stance on the lawful calculation of employment income before resuming the evaluation of cases.

'Services Australia and DSS did not act promptly to address this issue—in the three years the agencies have known about this issue, we expected more action to have been taken to address it,' the report said.

The Ombudsman emphasised that when ‘agencies make a mistake that impacts people, they should acknowledge it and develop a fair way to address the mistake’.

‘They should also clearly explain the mistake and what they intend to do to fix it. The public deserves no less,’ the report read.

The report made eight recommendations, all of which have been accepted by the two agencies.

These included developing a strategy to assess a sample of historic debts, underpayments, Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions and debts referred to the prosecutor that were potentially affected by unlawful income apportionment and a way to manage remedies for affected customers.

‘Given the scale of income apportionment and the length of time involved...(an option) might be an approach involving large-scale waiver of debts...rather than seeking to re-calculate over 100,000 individual debts,’ the Ombudsman also suggested.

In its response, Services Australia mentioned that as of October, the Commonwealth prosecutor's office began informing individuals who were prosecuted in the last five years about the discoveries made by the Ombudsman.

Last November 6, the agency initiated mailing letters to customers impacted by the suspension of debt collection efforts.

The Human Cost of Miscalculated Debts

The miscalculated debts have had a profound impact on the lives of welfare recipients. Greens spokeswoman Janet Rice said the report showed the need to scrap all debt recovery because of its unacceptable human cost.

'Services Australia has broken the law by chasing people, across two decades, for debts they do not owe, and has then failed to produce any remediation or communication plan in the three years they’ve been aware of the issue,' Senator Rice stated.

'It is a complete failure that has left income support recipients in a distressing limbo, unable to live their lives without the shadow of debt hanging over them,’ she added.

Key Takeaways

• Two federal agencies, Services Australia and the Department of Social Services, miscalculated as many as 100,000 welfare debts between 2003 and 2020.
• The errors resulted from misinterpreted and unlawfully applied Social Security Act income apportionment rules, which affected the calculation of some recipients' employment income.
• The Commonwealth Ombudsman found that the agencies could not advise how many people were affected or how many payments were incorrectly calculated and criticised their slow response to resolve the issue.
• The report made eight recommendations accepted by the agencies, including developing a strategy to assess historical debts potentially affected by unlawful calculations and dealing with remedies for affected customers.

Have you been affected by Centrelink's miscalculated debts, members? Share your experiences in the comments below.

This issue ... NO, not "issue" ... GOVERNMENT APPROVED FRAUD, shows how important it is to elect a government that takes its duties of support and empathy to its governed people seriously. Much of this fraud was committed while a mean and vectatious Coalition government was in power. However, some of it was committed and left operating while a Right Faction dominated Labor government was in power. The people victimised by this fraud were those least able to protect themselves from it. They were people without the financial resources to combat the government fraud. Members of the Coalition AND the Labor parliamentary teams should be holding their heads in shame. But they won't. They don't have the capacity to comprehend the shame that they should feel.

 

[MaggieMay1948]

For years, welfare recipients have been caught in a bureaucratic nightmare, waiting for Centrelink to rectify thousands of miscalculated debt notices.

The issue, which has been ongoing for nearly two decades, has left many Australians in financial uncertainty and distress.

Between 2003 and 2020, as many as 100,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services (DSS), according to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The departments' 'income apportionment' practices, which misinterpreted and unlawfully applied the Social Security Act, resulted in some Centrelink customers' employment income being assessed in the wrong fortnight.

Services Australia temporarily halted its examination of approximately 20,000 debts to seek legal counsel and pinpointed around 87,000 additional cases potentially impacted by the erroneous calculations related to ‘income apportionment’.

View attachment 36647

Almost 10,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services. Credit: Google Maps

The issue, unrelated to the controversial ‘Robodebt scheme’, resulted from agencies holding an incorrect understanding of relevant legislative provisions.

However, despite the severity of the issue, a report by the Ombudsman released on December 4 found that the two agencies were still unable to advise how many people were affected or how many payments went up or down because of unlawful calculations.

The Ombudsman's Report: A Call for Urgent Action

The Ombudsman's report highlighted the slow response of Services Australia and the Department of Social Services to the issue. The agencies were also finalising their legal stance on the lawful calculation of employment income before resuming the evaluation of cases.

'Services Australia and DSS did not act promptly to address this issue—in the three years the agencies have known about this issue, we expected more action to have been taken to address it,' the report said.

The Ombudsman emphasised that when ‘agencies make a mistake that impacts people, they should acknowledge it and develop a fair way to address the mistake’.

‘They should also clearly explain the mistake and what they intend to do to fix it. The public deserves no less,’ the report read.

The report made eight recommendations, all of which have been accepted by the two agencies.

These included developing a strategy to assess a sample of historic debts, underpayments, Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions and debts referred to the prosecutor that were potentially affected by unlawful income apportionment and a way to manage remedies for affected customers.

‘Given the scale of income apportionment and the length of time involved...(an option) might be an approach involving large-scale waiver of debts...rather than seeking to re-calculate over 100,000 individual debts,’ the Ombudsman also suggested.

In its response, Services Australia mentioned that as of October, the Commonwealth prosecutor's office began informing individuals who were prosecuted in the last five years about the discoveries made by the Ombudsman.

Last November 6, the agency initiated mailing letters to customers impacted by the suspension of debt collection efforts.

The Human Cost of Miscalculated Debts

The miscalculated debts have had a profound impact on the lives of welfare recipients. Greens spokeswoman Janet Rice said the report showed the need to scrap all debt recovery because of its unacceptable human cost.

'Services Australia has broken the law by chasing people, across two decades, for debts they do not owe, and has then failed to produce any remediation or communication plan in the three years they’ve been aware of the issue,' Senator Rice stated.

'It is a complete failure that has left income support recipients in a distressing limbo, unable to live their lives without the shadow of debt hanging over them,’ she added.

Key Takeaways

• Two federal agencies, Services Australia and the Department of Social Services, miscalculated as many as 100,000 welfare debts between 2003 and 2020.
• The errors resulted from misinterpreted and unlawfully applied Social Security Act income apportionment rules, which affected the calculation of some recipients' employment income.
• The Commonwealth Ombudsman found that the agencies could not advise how many people were affected or how many payments were incorrectly calculated and criticised their slow response to resolve the issue.
• The report made eight recommendations accepted by the agencies, including developing a strategy to assess historical debts potentially affected by unlawful calculations and dealing with remedies for affected customers.

Have you been affected by Centrelink's miscalculated debts, members? Share your experiences in the comments below.

If I knew for a fact I owed nobody anything,
I'd never pay any government department a so-called "debt" purely on their computers' say so. If they (and I mean a human "they") cannot produce solid written evidence, my first stop would be the lawyers.

I would let whoever was trying to scam me out of money take me to court and prove their case. I'm innocent until proven guilty. I don't have to prove anything. The burden of proof lies with Centrelink or the latest one, the ATO.

 

[MaggieMay1948]

Not long after my husband died I was receiving a pension. Retired aged 68 I received a letter saying I owed $21,000 as they had paid me to much. How in a short time I accumulated that I couldn’t understand, but what could I do? They were kind and I paid it off bit by bit. After many years and 83 years old $6000 to go, apart from the cruelty so soon after his death my pension shrunk.

I cannot believe you have had to endure this treatment. Was it an error on your part or theirs? Did they prove their case or did you take their word for it?

If you still have no idea how this hapoened, I would go to see a lawyer.

 

[Maurice_McGahey]

If I knew for a fact I owed nobody anything,
I'd never pay any government department a so-called "debt" purely on their computers' say so. If they (and I mean a human "they") cannot produce solid written evidence, my first stop would be the lawyers.

I would let whoever was trying to scam me out of money take me to court and prove their case. I'm innocent until proven guilty. I don't have to prove anything. The burden of proof lies with Centrelink or the latest one, the ATO.

Actually Scumo and his "brother in Christ" Roberts changed the law. They legislated that it was up to the accused to prove that they did not owe the money. And Services Australia could have you arrested and put in gaol if you did not pay the "debt" back fast enough. That is why neither the Liberal Party, nor their enablers, the National Party, should EVER be let back into government. They are mongrel bastards and if you vote for them ... well, lie down with dogs ...

 

[Veggiepatch]

@Maurice_McGahey did you just buy a soap box from Kmart this morning? Keep up the good work....I'm enjoying it but I need some popcorn. Pause that thought....I don't have any teeth! (Really as I'm waiting for dentures!)

 

[Isis]

I cannot believe you have had to endure this treatment. Was it an error on your part or theirs? Did they prove their case or did you take their word for it?

If you still have no idea how this hapoened, I would go to see a lawyer.

I spoke to the financial advisor and nobody could do anything. Like a lot of widows from that era finances not our purview so I just paid it.

 

[janoliveri]

For years, welfare recipients have been caught in a bureaucratic nightmare, waiting for Centrelink to rectify thousands of miscalculated debt notices.

The issue, which has been ongoing for nearly two decades, has left many Australians in financial uncertainty and distress.

Between 2003 and 2020, as many as 100,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services (DSS), according to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The departments' 'income apportionment' practices, which misinterpreted and unlawfully applied the Social Security Act, resulted in some Centrelink customers' employment income being assessed in the wrong fortnight.

Services Australia temporarily halted its examination of approximately 20,000 debts to seek legal counsel and pinpointed around 87,000 additional cases potentially impacted by the erroneous calculations related to ‘income apportionment’.

View attachment 36647

Almost 10,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services. Credit: Google Maps

The issue, unrelated to the controversial ‘Robodebt scheme’, resulted from agencies holding an incorrect understanding of relevant legislative provisions.

However, despite the severity of the issue, a report by the Ombudsman released on December 4 found that the two agencies were still unable to advise how many people were affected or how many payments went up or down because of unlawful calculations.

The Ombudsman's Report: A Call for Urgent Action

The Ombudsman's report highlighted the slow response of Services Australia and the Department of Social Services to the issue. The agencies were also finalising their legal stance on the lawful calculation of employment income before resuming the evaluation of cases.

'Services Australia and DSS did not act promptly to address this issue—in the three years the agencies have known about this issue, we expected more action to have been taken to address it,' the report said.

The Ombudsman emphasised that when ‘agencies make a mistake that impacts people, they should acknowledge it and develop a fair way to address the mistake’.

‘They should also clearly explain the mistake and what they intend to do to fix it. The public deserves no less,’ the report read.

The report made eight recommendations, all of which have been accepted by the two agencies.

These included developing a strategy to assess a sample of historic debts, underpayments, Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions and debts referred to the prosecutor that were potentially affected by unlawful income apportionment and a way to manage remedies for affected customers.

‘Given the scale of income apportionment and the length of time involved...(an option) might be an approach involving large-scale waiver of debts...rather than seeking to re-calculate over 100,000 individual debts,’ the Ombudsman also suggested.

In its response, Services Australia mentioned that as of October, the Commonwealth prosecutor's office began informing individuals who were prosecuted in the last five years about the discoveries made by the Ombudsman.

Last November 6, the agency initiated mailing letters to customers impacted by the suspension of debt collection efforts.

The Human Cost of Miscalculated Debts

The miscalculated debts have had a profound impact on the lives of welfare recipients. Greens spokeswoman Janet Rice said the report showed the need to scrap all debt recovery because of its unacceptable human cost.

'Services Australia has broken the law by chasing people, across two decades, for debts they do not owe, and has then failed to produce any remediation or communication plan in the three years they’ve been aware of the issue,' Senator Rice stated.

'It is a complete failure that has left income support recipients in a distressing limbo, unable to live their lives without the shadow of debt hanging over them,’ she added.

Key Takeaways

• Two federal agencies, Services Australia and the Department of Social Services, miscalculated as many as 100,000 welfare debts between 2003 and 2020.
• The errors resulted from misinterpreted and unlawfully applied Social Security Act income apportionment rules, which affected the calculation of some recipients' employment income.
• The Commonwealth Ombudsman found that the agencies could not advise how many people were affected or how many payments were incorrectly calculated and criticised their slow response to resolve the issue.
• The report made eight recommendations accepted by the agencies, including developing a strategy to assess historical debts potentially affected by unlawful calculations and dealing with remedies for affected customers.

Have you been affected by Centrelink's miscalculated debts, members? Share your experiences in the comments below.

My son was asked to estimate his future income. His estimate was completed but he actually earned more than he anticipated. Due to his work as a mental health counsellor it was difficult to predict as at times in this line of work his Clients may be on *suicide watch*. He was hit with a debt of $30,000 Covid caused an increase in his Clients requiring more counselling. He appealed the fine, it was determined by a panel he had to pay this fine? He is married and has 3 school age children and was struggling financially. Centrelink is corrupt! One Employee said he wouldn't have to pay the fine. Weeks later the panel decided he did? Now he wants nothing to do with Centrelink! As life is hard enough without these shysters attempting to rob young, struggling families. An estimate according to Centrelink has to be exact to the dollar otherwise hefty fines are issued. Unless you're on a fixed income who can predict exactly the amount they will earn? Not happy. Are fines such as these being reimbursed now?

 

[janoliveri]

For years, welfare recipients have been caught in a bureaucratic nightmare, waiting for Centrelink to rectify thousands of miscalculated debt notices.

The issue, which has been ongoing for nearly two decades, has left many Australians in financial uncertainty and distress.

Between 2003 and 2020, as many as 100,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services (DSS), according to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The departments' 'income apportionment' practices, which misinterpreted and unlawfully applied the Social Security Act, resulted in some Centrelink customers' employment income being assessed in the wrong fortnight.

Services Australia temporarily halted its examination of approximately 20,000 debts to seek legal counsel and pinpointed around 87,000 additional cases potentially impacted by the erroneous calculations related to ‘income apportionment’.

View attachment 36647

Almost 10,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services. Credit: Google Maps

The issue, unrelated to the controversial ‘Robodebt scheme’, resulted from agencies holding an incorrect understanding of relevant legislative provisions.

However, despite the severity of the issue, a report by the Ombudsman released on December 4 found that the two agencies were still unable to advise how many people were affected or how many payments went up or down because of unlawful calculations.

The Ombudsman's Report: A Call for Urgent Action

The Ombudsman's report highlighted the slow response of Services Australia and the Department of Social Services to the issue. The agencies were also finalising their legal stance on the lawful calculation of employment income before resuming the evaluation of cases.

'Services Australia and DSS did not act promptly to address this issue—in the three years the agencies have known about this issue, we expected more action to have been taken to address it,' the report said.

The Ombudsman emphasised that when ‘agencies make a mistake that impacts people, they should acknowledge it and develop a fair way to address the mistake’.

‘They should also clearly explain the mistake and what they intend to do to fix it. The public deserves no less,’ the report read.

The report made eight recommendations, all of which have been accepted by the two agencies.

These included developing a strategy to assess a sample of historic debts, underpayments, Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions and debts referred to the prosecutor that were potentially affected by unlawful income apportionment and a way to manage remedies for affected customers.

‘Given the scale of income apportionment and the length of time involved...(an option) might be an approach involving large-scale waiver of debts...rather than seeking to re-calculate over 100,000 individual debts,’ the Ombudsman also suggested.

In its response, Services Australia mentioned that as of October, the Commonwealth prosecutor's office began informing individuals who were prosecuted in the last five years about the discoveries made by the Ombudsman.

Last November 6, the agency initiated mailing letters to customers impacted by the suspension of debt collection efforts.

The Human Cost of Miscalculated Debts

The miscalculated debts have had a profound impact on the lives of welfare recipients. Greens spokeswoman Janet Rice said the report showed the need to scrap all debt recovery because of its unacceptable human cost.

'Services Australia has broken the law by chasing people, across two decades, for debts they do not owe, and has then failed to produce any remediation or communication plan in the three years they’ve been aware of the issue,' Senator Rice stated.

'It is a complete failure that has left income support recipients in a distressing limbo, unable to live their lives without the shadow of debt hanging over them,’ she added.

Key Takeaways

• Two federal agencies, Services Australia and the Department of Social Services, miscalculated as many as 100,000 welfare debts between 2003 and 2020.
• The errors resulted from misinterpreted and unlawfully applied Social Security Act income apportionment rules, which affected the calculation of some recipients' employment income.
• The Commonwealth Ombudsman found that the agencies could not advise how many people were affected or how many payments were incorrectly calculated and criticised their slow response to resolve the issue.
• The report made eight recommendations accepted by the agencies, including developing a strategy to assess historical debts potentially affected by unlawful calculations and dealing with remedies for affected customers.

Have you been affected by Centrelink's miscalculated debts, members? Share your experiences in the comments below.

 

[Kelpie]

For years, welfare recipients have been caught in a bureaucratic nightmare, waiting for Centrelink to rectify thousands of miscalculated debt notices.

The issue, which has been ongoing for nearly two decades, has left many Australians in financial uncertainty and distress.

Between 2003 and 2020, as many as 100,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services (DSS), according to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The departments' 'income apportionment' practices, which misinterpreted and unlawfully applied the Social Security Act, resulted in some Centrelink customers' employment income being assessed in the wrong fortnight.

Services Australia temporarily halted its examination of approximately 20,000 debts to seek legal counsel and pinpointed around 87,000 additional cases potentially impacted by the erroneous calculations related to ‘income apportionment’.

View attachment 36647

Almost 10,000 welfare debts were miscalculated by Services Australia and the Department of Social Services. Credit: Google Maps

The issue, unrelated to the controversial ‘Robodebt scheme’, resulted from agencies holding an incorrect understanding of relevant legislative provisions.

However, despite the severity of the issue, a report by the Ombudsman released on December 4 found that the two agencies were still unable to advise how many people were affected or how many payments went up or down because of unlawful calculations.

The Ombudsman's Report: A Call for Urgent Action

The Ombudsman's report highlighted the slow response of Services Australia and the Department of Social Services to the issue. The agencies were also finalising their legal stance on the lawful calculation of employment income before resuming the evaluation of cases.

'Services Australia and DSS did not act promptly to address this issue—in the three years the agencies have known about this issue, we expected more action to have been taken to address it,' the report said.

The Ombudsman emphasised that when ‘agencies make a mistake that impacts people, they should acknowledge it and develop a fair way to address the mistake’.

‘They should also clearly explain the mistake and what they intend to do to fix it. The public deserves no less,’ the report read.

The report made eight recommendations, all of which have been accepted by the two agencies.

These included developing a strategy to assess a sample of historic debts, underpayments, Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions and debts referred to the prosecutor that were potentially affected by unlawful income apportionment and a way to manage remedies for affected customers.

‘Given the scale of income apportionment and the length of time involved...(an option) might be an approach involving large-scale waiver of debts...rather than seeking to re-calculate over 100,000 individual debts,’ the Ombudsman also suggested.

In its response, Services Australia mentioned that as of October, the Commonwealth prosecutor's office began informing individuals who were prosecuted in the last five years about the discoveries made by the Ombudsman.

Last November 6, the agency initiated mailing letters to customers impacted by the suspension of debt collection efforts.

The Human Cost of Miscalculated Debts

The miscalculated debts have had a profound impact on the lives of welfare recipients. Greens spokeswoman Janet Rice said the report showed the need to scrap all debt recovery because of its unacceptable human cost.

'Services Australia has broken the law by chasing people, across two decades, for debts they do not owe, and has then failed to produce any remediation or communication plan in the three years they’ve been aware of the issue,' Senator Rice stated.

'It is a complete failure that has left income support recipients in a distressing limbo, unable to live their lives without the shadow of debt hanging over them,’ she added.

Key Takeaways

• Two federal agencies, Services Australia and the Department of Social Services, miscalculated as many as 100,000 welfare debts between 2003 and 2020.
• The errors resulted from misinterpreted and unlawfully applied Social Security Act income apportionment rules, which affected the calculation of some recipients' employment income.
• The Commonwealth Ombudsman found that the agencies could not advise how many people were affected or how many payments were incorrectly calculated and criticised their slow response to resolve the issue.
• The report made eight recommendations accepted by the agencies, including developing a strategy to assess historical debts potentially affected by unlawful calculations and dealing with remedies for affected customers.

Have you been affected by Centrelink's miscalculated debts, members? Share your experiences in the comments below.

Well, for me anyway I found that it is much better not to go near the joint at all and make do with what I have got. I have been doing it for years, I have never been bothered with nor have I been worried of what Centrelink might do or will do to me. And that is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but.
It all based on bureaucracy and the bureaucrats themselves on how they interpret the Law and apply it accordingly, ad then you have got these issues and worries coming while someone are sleepness at night not knowing if they owe money back to the Government and where they get it from. Do you need these sort of headaches and worries.? I don't.

 

[Kelpie]

Not long after my husband died I was receiving a pension. Retired aged 68 I received a letter saying I owed $21,000 as they had paid me to much. How in a short time I accumulated that I couldn’t understand, but what could I do? They were kind and I paid it off bit by bit. After many years and 83 years old $6000 to go, apart from the cruelty so soon after his death my pension shrunk.

Honestly, I do feel for you/ But as I sadi before you are now suffering for the mistakes of a heartless Bureaucrat. He/she made the mistake in the first place and now you are forced to pay for it. Did this bureaucrat got a demotion.? Dream again, he/she might have got a promotion instead.

 

[Veggiepatch]

My son was asked to estimate his future income. His estimate was completed but he actually earned more than he anticipated. Due to his work as a mental health counsellor it was difficult to predict as at times in this line of work at times his Clients may be on *suicide watch*. He was hit with a debt of $30,000 Covid caused an increase in his Clients requiring more counselling. He appealed the fine, it was determined by a panel he had to pay this fine? He is married and has 3 school age children and was struggling financially. Centrelink is corrupt! One Employee said he wouldn't have to pay the fine. Days later the panel decided he did? Now he wants nothing to do with Centrelink! As life is hard enough without these shysters attempting to rob young, struggling families. An estimate according to Centrelink has to be exact to the dollar otherwise hefty fines are issued. Unless you're on a fixed income who can predict exactly the amount they will earn? Not happy. Are fines such as these being reimbursed now?

That's nasty! The Child Support Agency is no better. As my work was shift based with ample overtime, I was also asked for an estimate which was slightly underdone. The result was an increase from $226 to $272 per fortnight for ONE child to pay some BS penalty and arrears. The other two were over the age of 18 so no problems there.

I lived on a rural property about 20 kms outside Nowra on the NSW South Coast with a single mother with three kids as the only neighbours for a kilometre or so. Being a glutton for punishment, I struck up an intimate relationship with her and subsequently moved into my three bedroom rented house. Her being on single mother payments and me being fully employed in a decent paying job, we cleaned up. Almost $3000 per fortnight to play with! At least I got some back from the legal thieves, albeit not directly.

 

[Kelpie]

I cannot believe you have had to endure this treatment. Was it an error on your part or theirs? Did they prove their case or did you take their word for it?

If you still have no idea how this hapoened, I would go to see a lawyer.

True and I would have to agree with you but, do you know how much it would cost you for a Lawyer.?
Do your proper research before going down that track because at times it would be cheaper for you to come to an agreement with Centrelink first thaan paying to costs of a Lawyer. Some Lawyers are charging between $400 and $750 dollars per hour and some others (Greedy ones) charge you even a fixed fee for just any phone call regardless of the time spent, plus plus plus. Being there done that myslef as I went down that track few times.
IMHO, the only difference betwen Lawyers and Ned Kelly is that Ned Kelly was wearing a mask.

 

[Kelpie]

Actually Scumo and his "brother in Christ" Roberts changed the law. They legislated that it was up to the accused to prove that they did not owe the money. And Services Australia could have you arrested and put in gaol if you did not pay the "debt" back fast enough. That is why neither the Liberal Party, nor their enablers, the National Party, should EVER be let back into government. They are mongrel bastards and if you vote for them ... well, lie down with dogs ...

And what have you got to say which is favourite content of the current Labour Governemnt led by none else than the biggesb liar in the Party History...ALBO.?
Hence why I will and always be an Apolitical person for, to choose one over another, it will only come back to bait you very very hard on the rear end.
Tell me what they managed to do thus far to help poor John the Citizen besides heartaches and hardship.??
My advise to you Maurice, stay away from Politics because you will only be their pawns.
I remember telling a highly respected Politician many many years ago who was looking for me to help him in the scrutineering after voting was completed, something which I did for many years before, and inviting me to a barbaques after that.
I replied to him: Look XXXXXX I am sick of you licking my backside for a couple of months during the election and then me having to lick your backside for at least three years just to get a simple Hello back from you. How quickly can we forget. He laughed and agreed with me but I didn't help him with his scrutineering.

My advise to you Maurice, just keep the Politics out of these Forums as they are not a Political Forum at all. If you don't like the current Opposition it is your prerogative but just keep it to yourself. PERIOD. !!

 

[Kelpie]

@Maurice_McGahey did you just buy a soap box from Kmart this morning? Keep up the good work....I'm enjoying it but I need some popcorn. Pause that thought....I don't have any teeth! (Really as I'm waiting for dentures!)

YOU did deserve a big thumb up for that.
Talk about people wearing thick rosed coloured glasses handed out freely by some Party Politicians.

 

[Veggiepatch]

YOU did deserve a big thumb up for that.
Talk about people wearing thick rosed coloured glasses handed out freely by some Party Politicians.

In fear of sounding like a broken record, I say it how it is how it is, without fear or favour. Or was that a broken CD? Nah...a broken streaming service served by a broken telecommunications provider!

 

[Kelpie]

My son was asked to estimate his future income. His estimate was completed but he actually earned more than he anticipated. Due to his work as a mental health counsellor it was difficult to predict as at times in this line of work his Clients may be on *suicide watch*. He was hit with a debt of $30,000 Covid caused an increase in his Clients requiring more counselling. He appealed the fine, it was determined by a panel he had to pay this fine? He is married and has 3 school age children and was struggling financially. Centrelink is corrupt! One Employee said he wouldn't have to pay the fine. Weeks later the panel decided he did? Now he wants nothing to do with Centrelink! As life is hard enough without these shysters attempting to rob young, struggling families. An estimate according to Centrelink has to be exact to the dollar otherwise hefty fines are issued. Unless you're on a fixed income who can predict exactly the amount they will earn? Not happy. Are fines such as these being reimbursed now?

While I do agree with you entirely, You will have to forgive me for saying that if your son completed or gave an estimate of his future earnings and his earnings turned to be greater that what he stated originally, he should have got in touch with Centrelink or whoever else it was at the time and notify them that he was earning more than what he anticipated and let them handle it the way they wanted. If he was to do that, the blame then would have fallen straight back to the Department, not to him.
Sorry Janolivery but these are the facts.