Services Australia is facing accusations of inflating its payment accuracy ratings in recent reports.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) has released new figures revealing a concerning reality: nearly one in five individuals receiving welfare support payments are being paid incorrectly.

This revelation has prompted the government watchdog to recommend that Services Australia adopt more 'reliable' methods for reporting.

The audit report also shed light on another concerning statistic. One in four welfare claims did not meet the processing deadlines set by the agency itself. This failure to adhere to internal timelines further undermines Services Australia's claims of effective management.

At the heart of the audit was a critical question: Is the agency responsible for Centrelink centres truly delivering 'the right payment at the right time' to recipients?

The findings not only cast doubt on the agency's reporting accuracy but also raise concerns about the overall efficiency of the welfare payment system.

The Australian National Audit Office has found that approximately one out of every five payments made to Centrelink recipients contains errors, despite Services Australia giving itself high ratings for its performance. Credit: Shutterstock.

Services Australia and its operational procedures have come under intense scrutiny in the wake of scathing revelations from the Royal Commission investigating the Robodebt scheme, which revealed the agency's unlawful practice of issuing debts through the controversial 'income averaging' method.

In a report unveiled recently, the ANAO indicated that the welfare agency touted an impressive 98.9 per cent accuracy rate in disbursing support payments.

However, an independent inquiry conducted by the audit office painted a starkly different picture, pegging the accuracy rate at a notably lower 81.4 per cent.

Within this recalibrated statistic, the report dissected the numbers further: a substantial 13.5 per cent of the payments were identified as overpayments, while 5 per cent represented instances where welfare recipients were underpaid.

The huge difference is said to be due to Service Australia's reporting methodology, criticised as 'biased and incomplete' by the Department of Social Services in early 2021.

The agency excludes inaccurate payments resulting from errors on the recipient's end from its final reported statistics. For instance, if a recipient neglects to communicate changes in their circumstances to Services Australia, leading to an erroneous payment, such instances are not factored into the final percentage calculation.

In the fiscal year 2021-22, underpayments amounted to $514 million.

Meanwhile, overpayments totalled a staggering $7.2 billion, constituting approximately six per cent of the total disbursements. A closer look at these numbers revealed that $468.8 million stemmed from changes in a partner's income.

The report also found that the timeliness of payments was a concern, claiming that the change in how Services Australia reports timeliness has introduced a noticeable bias into the process.

In 2020, there was a remarkable surge in reported timeliness results by Services Australia. However, this failed to mirror any actual performance improvement, raising questions about the reliability of the reports from the agency.

With these findings, the ANAO report has put forth a recommendation for Services Australia: to develop a performance measure that is both 'reliable and unbiased'.

This measure, as suggested, should encompass not only statistics within the agency's control—such as administrative errors—but also those that fall within its sphere of influence, such as recipient fraud or mistakes.

However, a note emerged from the agency itself, opposing the recommendation. The agency argued against incorporating recipient-based errors into its reporting, deeming them irrelevant to assessing Service Australia's administrative performance.

Key Takeaways

• Services Australia has been accused of inaccurately reporting its payment accuracy to recipients, with an audit revealing nearly one in five of those receiving welfare support payments are being paid incorrectly.
• The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) report revealed a discrepancy between Services Australia's claimed accuracy rate of 98.9 per cent and the audit office's finding of 81.4 per cent.
• The report also raised concerns about the timeliness of payments, highlighting that one in four welfare claims were not processed within the agency's own deadlines.
• Following the report, Services Australia disagreed with the recommendation to develop a more reliable and unbiased performance measure, as it did not consider recipient-based errors to be relevant to its administrative performance.

Members, what do you think about these findings? Have you personally faced issues with Centrelink payments? How did you handle it? It’s alarming to think of how many recipients have been unknowingly underpaid. Share your experiences with us in the comments section below.

 

[Freda ttt]

I didn’t get the results because I don’t have a mobile phone and I don’t want one it is another bill I don’t need

 

[Rainy]

I think they are channeling their accountancy team from the 1400s. The Dark Ages. Their numbers make no sense even with basic numeracy skills. Try calling them up to query. You'll either die before they answer (or wake up the next day still listening to their music). Or better yet, your call is mysteriously ended. They have no KPIs because someone at the top doesn't give a rats.

 

[ElizaKaye]

It seems to me that our pension is reduced if our assets increase, because they have access to our financial records, but if they decrease we have to notify them if our assets decrease before they increase our pay.

 

[Suzanne rose]

After waiting for 7 months I would just like to see an outcome if the are going to approve my claim or not

 

[mylittletibbies]

I am not the least surprised, I have been dealing with Centrelink for 46 years since my daughter was born and it has been one thing after the other.
They don't listen, continually stuff up, overpay, underpay and on and on it goes. Every time I have had to deal with them they have been in the wrong.
I went to business college when I was 15 and did very well, had many top notch secretarial jobs, worked my way up to executive assistant to the human resources manager of a large mining company. Also kept the books for my stepfathers very large cleaning company.
I am grateful for all this experience as it has kept me in a good position to deal with the dimwits at Centrelink.
However what about the people who haven't had the benefit of a good education it must be extremely difficult for them.

 

[mylittletibbies]

It seems to me that our pension is reduced if our assets increase, because they have access to our financial records, but if they decrease we have to notify them if our assets decrease before they increase our pay.

Actually they are not legally allowed to access your financial records directly, that is why you have to report, otherwise you can find yourself in a mess, owing money if you get overpaid.
They usually pick things up through tax records, employment records, etc.In some cases through someone who you may have told your financial situation to and they dob you in .
Always unwise to reveal your finances to anyone, even family, it's a need to know thing and most people don't need to know

 

[megp]

A security breach in Centrelink has resulted in my husband’s bank account number being changed and a loan being taken out (on line) and paid into a fraudulent account. Subsequent pension payments were also redirected to that account. Centrelink advised us that we are responsible for repayment of the loan, and pension payments are being reduced by $85 per fortnight until it is fully repaid. We were told by Centrelink staff (who were very helpful when we met with them) that there are many such incidences. However, proving that we did not make or authorise the change to the bank account number registered with Centrelink is apparently impossible, so we just keep on receiving a reduced pension to repay a debt that is not ours.

 

[mylittletibbies]

A security breach in Centrelink has resulted in my husband’s bank account number being changed and a loan being taken out (on line) and paid into a fraudulent account. Subsequent pension payments were also redirected to that account. Centrelink advised us that we are responsible for repayment of the loan, and pension payments are being reduced by $85 per fortnight until it is fully repaid. We were told by Centrelink staff (who were very helpful when we met with them) that there are many such incidences. However, proving that we did not make or authorise the change to the bank account number registered with Centrelink is apparently impossible, so we just keep on receiving a reduced pension to repay a debt that is not ours.

Did you get any legal advice on this matter, sounds a bit rough to me.
How long had you been receiving payments, have you ever changed your account number before, there are many things that could make a case. Also are you in the habit of taking out loans on the internet.
Of course I don't know what your circumstances are, but if it was me I would be taking it further as I could prove that I haven't had a loan of
any kind for so long I can't remember, have only changed bank accounts when we have moved
house, etc.
So sorry this has happened to you.

 

[Rainy]

A security breach in Centrelink has resulted in my husband’s bank account number being changed and a loan being taken out (on line) and paid into a fraudulent account. Subsequent pension payments were also redirected to that account. Centrelink advised us that we are responsible for repayment of the loan, and pension payments are being reduced by $85 per fortnight until it is fully repaid. We were told by Centrelink staff (who were very helpful when we met with them) that there are many such incidences. However, proving that we did not make or authorise the change to the bank account number registered with Centrelink is apparently impossible, so we just keep on receiving a reduced pension to repay a debt that is not ours.

File a police report if you have not already. Contact the Legal Aid group in your state or territory for advice. Then contact your bank telling them you wish to speak with a client representative about making a significant interest bearing investment. When they call you (in five minutes), tell what happened and ask how they can troubleshoot for you, and then you will have the discussion about that large investment..

 

[Trudi]

Actually they are not legally allowed to access your financial records directly, that is why you have to report, otherwise you can find yourself in a mess, owing money if you get overpaid.
They usually pick things up through tax records, employment records, etc.In some cases through someone who you may have told your financial situation to and they dob you in .
Always unwise to reveal your finances to anyone, even family, it's a need to know thing and most people don't need to know

You are correct in saying that Centrelink is not allowed to access financial records, but Eliza Kaye was talking about assets!

Centrelink will do an annual update of your assets - such as shares, but it is in your own interest to keep a close watch on their values yourself and advise them when there has been a significant change, or you have disposed of asssets or acquired more.

I don't receive any Centrelink payments, but I imagine you can check your asset values on the myGov website?

 

[samtumino]

Services Australia is facing accusations of inflating its payment accuracy ratings in recent reports.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) has released new figures revealing a concerning reality: nearly one in five individuals receiving welfare support payments are being paid incorrectly.

This revelation has prompted the government watchdog to recommend that Services Australia adopt more 'reliable' methods for reporting.

The audit report also shed light on another concerning statistic. One in four welfare claims did not meet the processing deadlines set by the agency itself. This failure to adhere to internal timelines further undermines Services Australia's claims of effective management.

At the heart of the audit was a critical question: Is the agency responsible for Centrelink centres truly delivering 'the right payment at the right time' to recipients?

The findings not only cast doubt on the agency's reporting accuracy but also raise concerns about the overall efficiency of the welfare payment system.

View attachment 28853

The Australian National Audit Office has found that approximately one out of every five payments made to Centrelink recipients contains errors, despite Services Australia giving itself high ratings for its performance. Credit: Shutterstock.

Services Australia and its operational procedures have come under intense scrutiny in the wake of scathing revelations from the Royal Commission investigating the Robodebt scheme, which revealed the agency's unlawful practice of issuing debts through the controversial 'income averaging' method.

In a report unveiled recently, the ANAO indicated that the welfare agency touted an impressive 98.9 per cent accuracy rate in disbursing support payments.

However, an independent inquiry conducted by the audit office painted a starkly different picture, pegging the accuracy rate at a notably lower 81.4 per cent.

Within this recalibrated statistic, the report dissected the numbers further: a substantial 13.5 per cent of the payments were identified as overpayments, while 5 per cent represented instances where welfare recipients were underpaid.

The huge difference is said to be due to Service Australia's reporting methodology, criticised as 'biased and incomplete' by the Department of Social Services in early 2021.

The agency excludes inaccurate payments resulting from errors on the recipient's end from its final reported statistics. For instance, if a recipient neglects to communicate changes in their circumstances to Services Australia, leading to an erroneous payment, such instances are not factored into the final percentage calculation.

In the fiscal year 2021-22, underpayments amounted to $514 million.

Meanwhile, overpayments totalled a staggering $7.2 billion, constituting approximately six per cent of the total disbursements. A closer look at these numbers revealed that $468.8 million stemmed from changes in a partner's income.

The report also found that the timeliness of payments was a concern, claiming that the change in how Services Australia reports timeliness has introduced a noticeable bias into the process.

In 2020, there was a remarkable surge in reported timeliness results by Services Australia. However, this failed to mirror any actual performance improvement, raising questions about the reliability of the reports from the agency.

With these findings, the ANAO report has put forth a recommendation for Services Australia: to develop a performance measure that is both 'reliable and unbiased'.

This measure, as suggested, should encompass not only statistics within the agency's control—such as administrative errors—but also those that fall within its sphere of influence, such as recipient fraud or mistakes.

However, a note emerged from the agency itself, opposing the recommendation. The agency argued against incorporating recipient-based errors into its reporting, deeming them irrelevant to assessing Service Australia's administrative performance.

Key Takeaways

• Services Australia has been accused of inaccurately reporting its payment accuracy to recipients, with an audit revealing nearly one in five of those receiving welfare support payments are being paid incorrectly.
• The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) report revealed a discrepancy between Services Australia's claimed accuracy rate of 98.9 per cent and the audit office's finding of 81.4 per cent.
• The report also raised concerns about the timeliness of payments, highlighting that one in four welfare claims were not processed within the agency's own deadlines.
• Following the report, Services Australia disagreed with the recommendation to develop a more reliable and unbiased performance measure, as it did not consider recipient-based errors to be relevant to its administrative performance.

Members, what do you think about these findings? Have you personally faced issues with Centrelink payments? How did you handle it? It’s alarming to think of how many recipients have been unknowingly underpaid. Share your experiences with us in the comments section below.

Services Australia is facing accusations of inflating its payment accuracy ratings in recent reports.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) has released new figures revealing a concerning reality: nearly one in five individuals receiving welfare support payments are being paid incorrectly.

This revelation has prompted the government watchdog to recommend that Services Australia adopt more 'reliable' methods for reporting.

The audit report also shed light on another concerning statistic. One in four welfare claims did not meet the processing deadlines set by the agency itself. This failure to adhere to internal timelines further undermines Services Australia's claims of effective management.

At the heart of the audit was a critical question: Is the agency responsible for Centrelink centres truly delivering 'the right payment at the right time' to recipients?

The findings not only cast doubt on the agency's reporting accuracy but also raise concerns about the overall efficiency of the welfare payment system.

View attachment 28853

The Australian National Audit Office has found that approximately one out of every five payments made to Centrelink recipients contains errors, despite Services Australia giving itself high ratings for its performance. Credit: Shutterstock.

Services Australia and its operational procedures have come under intense scrutiny in the wake of scathing revelations from the Royal Commission investigating the Robodebt scheme, which revealed the agency's unlawful practice of issuing debts through the controversial 'income averaging' method.

In a report unveiled recently, the ANAO indicated that the welfare agency touted an impressive 98.9 per cent accuracy rate in disbursing support payments.

However, an independent inquiry conducted by the audit office painted a starkly different picture, pegging the accuracy rate at a notably lower 81.4 per cent.

Within this recalibrated statistic, the report dissected the numbers further: a substantial 13.5 per cent of the payments were identified as overpayments, while 5 per cent represented instances where welfare recipients were underpaid.

The huge difference is said to be due to Service Australia's reporting methodology, criticised as 'biased and incomplete' by the Department of Social Services in early 2021.

The agency excludes inaccurate payments resulting from errors on the recipient's end from its final reported statistics. For instance, if a recipient neglects to communicate changes in their circumstances to Services Australia, leading to an erroneous payment, such instances are not factored into the final percentage calculation.

In the fiscal year 2021-22, underpayments amounted to $514 million.

Meanwhile, overpayments totalled a staggering $7.2 billion, constituting approximately six per cent of the total disbursements. A closer look at these numbers revealed that $468.8 million stemmed from changes in a partner's income.

The report also found that the timeliness of payments was a concern, claiming that the change in how Services Australia reports timeliness has introduced a noticeable bias into the process.

In 2020, there was a remarkable surge in reported timeliness results by Services Australia. However, this failed to mirror any actual performance improvement, raising questions about the reliability of the reports from the agency.

With these findings, the ANAO report has put forth a recommendation for Services Australia: to develop a performance measure that is both 'reliable and unbiased'.

This measure, as suggested, should encompass not only statistics within the agency's control—such as administrative errors—but also those that fall within its sphere of influence, such as recipient fraud or mistakes.

However, a note emerged from the agency itself, opposing the recommendation. The agency argued against incorporating recipient-based errors into its reporting, deeming them irrelevant to assessing Service Australia's administrative performance.

Key Takeaways

• Services Australia has been accused of inaccurately reporting its payment accuracy to recipients, with an audit revealing nearly one in five of those receiving welfare support payments are being paid incorrectly.
• The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) report revealed a discrepancy between Services Australia's claimed accuracy rate of 98.9 per cent and the audit office's finding of 81.4 per cent.
• The report also raised concerns about the timeliness of payments, highlighting that one in four welfare claims were not processed within the agency's own deadlines.
• Following the report, Services Australia disagreed with the recommendation to develop a more reliable and unbiased performance measure, as it did not consider recipient-based errors to be relevant to its administrative performance.

Members, what do you think about these findings? Have you personally faced issues with Centrelink payments? How did you handle it? It’s alarming to think of how many recipients have been unknowingly underpaid. Share your experiences with us in the comments section below.

CAN ANYONE BETTER THIS ONE?
I had to provide some documents, urgently requested by Centerlink, and they would not accepted them over the counter because, according to them, they had to be posted even though one of the options of the requesting letter was: "Visit our service centre".
As I unsuccessfully insisted, soon after I received a nasty letter in which, among other intimidations, I was threatened that they would contact the police if I continued to be too argumentative...
Apparently they have time to write threatening letters but no time to accept the delivery of a document.

 

[Petra]

A security breach in Centrelink has resulted in my husband’s bank account number being changed and a loan being taken out (on line) and paid into a fraudulent account. Subsequent pension payments were also redirected to that account. Centrelink advised us that we are responsible for repayment of the loan, and pension payments are being reduced by $85 per fortnight until it is fully repaid. We were told by Centrelink staff (who were very helpful when we met with them) that there are many such incidences. However, proving that we did not make or authorise the change to the bank account number registered with Centrelink is apparently impossible, so we just keep on receiving a reduced pension to repay a debt that is not ours.

Also, make an appointment with your local member of parliament. I did once, and it was sorted very quickly. So very sorry it happened to you :'(

 

[mylittletibbies]

CAN ANYONE BETTER THIS ONE?
I had to provide some documents, urgently requested by Centerlink, and they would not accepted them over the counter because, according to them, they had to be posted even though one of the options of the requesting letter was: "Visit our service centre".
As I unsuccessfully insisted, soon after I received a nasty letter in which, among other intimidations, I was threatened that they would contact the police if I continued to be too argumentative...
Apparently they have time to write threatening letters but no time to accept the delivery of a document.

I had the opposite, when I returned papers twice, the first they said they didn't receive, the second they apparently also didn't receive despite it being sent registered mail and signed for and then they said I should have taken it to the service centre ??
Typical!!!

 

[mylittletibbies]

Also, make an appointment with your local member of parliament. I did once, and it was sorted very quickly. So very sorry it happened to you :'(

I have suggested this many times, has always worked for me.

 

[Rainy]

CAN ANYONE BETTER THIS ONE?
I had to provide some documents, urgently requested by Centerlink, and they would not accepted them over the counter because, according to them, they had to be posted even though one of the options of the requesting letter was: "Visit our service centre".
As I unsuccessfully insisted, soon after I received a nasty letter in which, among other intimidations, I was threatened that they would contact the police if I continued to be too argumentative...
Apparently they have time to write threatening letters but no time to accept the delivery of a document.

You win!

 

[Aussie all the Way]

I've paid money back twice and I argued that it was WRONG but as you know Centrelink are NEVER wrong, so a month or so ago you reported how centrelink had miss calculated earnings etc so what is happening with that, this was besides the ROBO DEBT fiasco

 

[JayyDee]

I am not the least surprised, I have been dealing with Centrelink for 46 years since my daughter was born and it has been one thing after the other.
They don't listen, continually stuff up, overpay, underpay and on and on it goes. Every time I have had to deal with them they have been in the wrong.
I went to business college when I was 15 and did very well, had many top notch secretarial jobs, worked my way up to executive assistant to the human resources manager of a large mining company. Also kept the books for my stepfathers very large cleaning company.
I am grateful for all this experience as it has kept me in a good position to deal with the dimwits at Centrelink.
However what about the people who haven't had the benefit of a good education it must be extremely difficult for them.

Wow it must be tough being perfect. I worked for Centrelink for 15 years on the front line in many roles. Staff rely on the correct information being provided by the client computer programs work out the payment. It’s not a person adding it up on a piece of paper. Staff do their best, put up with lots of abuse and threats but keep coming back to work because they want to help. Centrelink is a huge system which provides a service to just about every Australian. How can you expect a system that big to be perfect. It’s always let’s bash Centrelink dimwits. Let’s forget that they leave their families to provide money services social work support following floods or fire. Staff working closely with homeless those experiencing domestic violence mental health young people in crisis. No let’s just bash the dimwits because they are not perfect

 

[mylittletibbies]

I've paid money back twice and I argued that it was WRONG but as you know Centrelink are NEVER wrong, so a month or so ago you reported how centrelink had miss calculated earnings etc so what is happening with that, this was besides the ROBO DEBT fiasco

You can ask for a review by an independent person apparently
My friend worked in a country court house part-time, where they not only handled court matters, but mines, and I can't remember the other two departments
She was advised she had been over paid $9,000. It turned out some peabrain had recorded it as four separate jobs that she had, not one.They argued and argued with her until she got this indeoendent review which proved she owed nothing.

 

[dazzle]

Actually they are not legally allowed to access your financial records directly, that is why you have to report, otherwise you can find yourself in a mess, owing money if you get overpaid.
They usually pick things up through tax records, employment records, etc.In some cases through someone who you may have told your financial situation to and they dob you in .
Always unwise to reveal your finances to anyone, even family, it's a need to know thing and most people don't need to know

ATO and Centrelilnk can check all your financial records. I receive a part pension as I work part time and have to check online every 2 weeks on the APP to confirm that the pay from my employer is correct. Centrelink already has my payslip on the APP and I simply have to confirm that is correct. Very similar to Tax Returns. Most of the information is prefilled. Big Brother knows everything. Our CRN and TFN tie all our records financial and other together in the cyber world. After saying this i do not understand how there is so much fraud. For those of you having issues with Centrelink I have found over the past 2 years that I been receiving the pension that the best way to contact Centrelink is via the APP. I lodged my pension application 2 years ago using the APP and was approved in 5 days