Anderson and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)

This matter concerned an application for an extension of time to seek a review of a decision by the Secretary, Department of Social Services. The applicant, Ms Anderson, had received youth allowance and school kids bonus between July 2012 and April 2015, based on her enrolment in HSC studies. However, Departmental records indicated that from September 2012, Ms Anderson was not undertaking a full-time study load, leading to a determination that she had been overpaid $17,820.98 in youth allowance and $1,230.00 in school kids bonus. This determination was affirmed by the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) on 13 January 2016. Ms Anderson sought an extension of time to apply for a review of the SSAT decision on 13 March 2018.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether to grant Ms Anderson an extension of time to lodge her application for review. In considering this, the Tribunal was required to assess the reasons for the delay, the prejudice to the respondent (the Secretary), the merits of the substantive matter, and whether any special circumstances existed that warranted an extension. The substantive matter involved determining whether Ms Anderson was indeed overpaid the specified amounts and, if so, whether there were grounds to waive the debt under the Social Security Act 1991.

The Tribunal considered the principles for granting an extension of time, which typically involve examining the reasons for the delay, the prejudice to the respondent, and the merits of the substantive case. Ms Anderson's representative submitted that Ms Anderson had attempted to seek review earlier and that her condition of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and her approach to completing her HSC over a longer period contributed to the situation. While medical evidence of PTSD was provided, no evidence was presented to support the claim of earlier attempts to seek review. The Tribunal was satisfied, based on the evidence from the educational institution, that Ms Anderson had not completed a full-time study load and was therefore overpaid. The Tribunal also considered the provisions for waiving debt under sections 1237A and 1237AAD of the Act, finding no grounds for waiver due to administrative error and concluding that the circumstances did not meet the threshold for "special circumstances" that would make recovery unjust or unreasonable.

Ultimately, the Tribunal was not satisfied that it was reasonable in the circumstances to grant the extension of time. The application for an extension of time was refused.