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

This matter concerned an application for a Special Benefit (SpB) by Mr Ho, who resided in Sydney with his young son and was unable to receive the age pension due to insufficient residency in Australia. The Secretary of the Department of Social Services affirmed the initial decision to refuse the SpB. The case was heard by Professor M McGrowdie, Senior Member.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Ho's interest in a property located in Vietnam constituted "realisable assets" exceeding the $5,000 threshold stipulated by the Long Term Available Funds Test, thereby disqualifying him from receiving SpB. This test, outlined in the Guide to Social Security Law, considers real estate, both domestic and overseas, as available funds unless it cannot be sold or used as security for borrowing.

The Tribunal considered Mr Ho's evidence that he could not rent or mortgage the Vietnamese property due to sale complications and local realities. However, the Tribunal found that the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the property was unsellable or that the asking price was not more than 10% above its market value, as required by the Guide to exclude an asset. While acknowledging Mr Ho's limited share and potential separation from his wife, the Tribunal concluded that his interest in the property should be regarded as available funds exceeding $5,000, leading to his exclusion from SpB.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the Special Benefit.