I act as Centrelink nominee for my daughter. The debt alleged that she owed $9409. After ringing Compliance and having the debt confirmed and it was strongly suggested that a payment plan be entered into. The alleged debt was completely false. During the period it arose my daughter studied some of the time and worked part time and full time for other periods. She had always be honeest in reporting income and her payments were adjusted accordingly.
I contacted the Minister for social services (Porter) and sent copies to my local member Darren Chester. On 11 Jan I was contacted by a review officer as a result of Darren Chesters intervention. This review officer reduced the debt to $3133 because the computer had doubled the income as employer name differences had assumed to be double the income. This same reviewer stated that the remaining $3133 remained as a result of computer averaging her income over 12 month periods. I stated to the reviewer that the remaining debt was incorrect, and it was in fact against human services debt collection guidelines to use the averaging method to determine income.
This reviewer lodged a request for authorised review officer. ARO rang me and comfirmed that the averaging method was used to determine the remaining debt. The review officer was not allowed to correct the false debt without sighting payslips covering the period. She also confirmed that the averaging method was used to calculate the debt. She took off the collection fee and the alleged debt was reduced to $2814.
We both agreed that the calculation of this debt was false, however she was not allowed to check the error without seeing pay slips. (These pay slips have been requested from employer, but are not forthcoming).
This review officer sent me around 10 pages of figures which show how the computer arrived at this false figure of $2814. Well I assume thats what they show because although I am trained in Accounting I have trouble understanding the crap figures generated by the computer.
I still maintained that this figure was incorrect, the review officer agreed it was likely to be incorrect because it was based on averaging the income. But she was not able to change it.
I asked her to note on the file that I beleived that Centrelink had failed in its duty of care. It has failed to ensure that the debt is a correct one before demanding payment.
Meanwhile today I got a letter of demand for $9409. Payable immediately, with threats to take money owing from bank accounts, wages or refer to debt collectors.
Of course this is all causing extreme stress to myself and my daughter. My daughter has had to take time off work, and annual holidays and seek medical assistance because of the stress it is causing her.
Unbeleivable. This is extreme extortion, with menace, that this government is inflicting on thousands of our most vulnerable citizens. Even though the accused and the centrelink workers know that the debts are false those responsible, the managers and the ministers, are refusing to acknowledge the errors and the immense harm that this is inflicting on everyone involved.
The long term cost including staff time, accused time, employers time, postage, debt collectors fees, refunds with costs and interest to those bullied into submission is likely to far outweigh the very minute debts detected. The most austounding aspect of this is that it is still continuing.