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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Best against a decision by Centrelink to reject his claim for a disability support pension. Mr Best lodged his claim on 15 September 2015, and on 16 November 2015, Centrelink determined he was not eligible. Mr Best subsequently sought a review of this decision, but the review was lodged more than 13 weeks after he was notified of the initial rejection. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Best had sought a review of the decision within the prescribed timeframe.

The Tribunal was required to consider the legal issue of when Mr Best was notified of the decision to reject his disability support pension claim and whether his subsequent request for review was made within the 13-week period stipulated by the relevant legislation. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess the credibility of Mr Best's assertion that he made a verbal request for review on 10 December 2015, and contrast this with the documentary evidence and his later written request for review dated 18 August 2017.

The Tribunal found that Mr Best was informed of the decision to reject his claim and the 13-week review period on 16 November 2015, both verbally by a Centrelink staff member and in writing via a letter from Centrelink. While Mr Best claimed to have made a verbal request for review on 10 December 2015, the Tribunal found no record of this request in the Centrelink files, despite numerous other communications being recorded. The Tribunal also noted inconsistencies in Mr Best's account, including the significant delay between the alleged verbal request and his written request for review, and the absence of any reference to a prior verbal request in his detailed written appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that Mr Best first sought a review of the decision on 18 August 2017, which was outside the 13-week timeframe.

The Tribunal applied section 107(3) of the *Social Security (Administration) Act 1999* (Cth), which provides that if a review is sought more than 13 weeks after notification of the original decision, any favourable determination will take effect from the date the review application was made. As Mr Best's review was lodged outside the 13-week period, the Tribunal affirmed the decision that any entitlement would commence from the date of his review request, 18 August 2017.