Lackovic and Secretary, Dept of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs

[2011] AATA 583

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2011] AATA 583

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No 2011/0551

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION		)
Re		Ljuban Lackovic

Applicant

And Secretary, Dept of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Senior Member Jill Toohey

Date of decision               30 June 2011

Date of written reasons  23 August 2011

PlaceSydney

Decision The decision under review is affirmed.

................[sgd]..............................

Senior Member

CATCHWORDS

SOCIAL SECURITY – rent assistance – shared rate – whether applicant underpaid rent assistance – decision under review affirmed

Social Security Act 1991, ss 5A, Part 3.7, Division 3

REASONS FOR DECISION

23 August 2011 Senior Member Jill Toohey           

1.      Mr Lackovic has asked for written reasons for a decision made at a hearing on 30 June 2011.  These reasons reflect those given orally at the hearing.

Background

2.      This matter concerns how much rent assistance Mr Ljuban Lackovic is entitled to.  Mr Lackovic is 68.  He came to Australia from Serbia with his two adult daughters in 2002.  In August 2002, they moved into a flat in Liverpool where the rent was $330.00 a fortnight.  In July 2009, the rent increased to $440.00 a fortnight.  In July 2010, they moved to another flat and their rent increased to $580.00 a fortnight.  They have always contributed equally to the rent.

3.      When Mr Lackovic notified Centrelink in August 2010, that he and his daughters had moved and their rent had increased, his rent assistance payment was decreased.  Mr Lackovic says this cannot be correct and that Centrelink has made a mistake.

How is rent assistance calculated

4.      Rent assistance is an additional benefit paid to a person who is receiving a social security payment and paying private rent.  The amount of assistance varies according to a person’s circumstances. The relevant legislation is in the Social Security Act 1991 (the Act).

5.      A person must be paying rent greater than a minimum threshold before rent assistance is payable.  Rent assistance is paid at 75 cents for each dollar above the threshold up to a maximum rate.  The threshold and the maximum rate vary according to circumstances, and are indexed.

6.      A single person sharing accommodation is entitled to two-thirds of the rent assistance they would otherwise be entitled to.  Mr Lackovic is considered a “single sharer” because he is not a member of a couple, he has no dependent children and he shares the common areas of his accommodation with his daughters.  There are exemptions to the sharing provisions but none applies to Mr Lackovic (see Part 3.7, Division 3 of the Act, and s 5A).    

Is Mr Lackovic receiving the right amount of rent assistance

7.      Up until July 2010, Centrelink had not recorded that Mr Lackovic was sharing accommodation with his daughters, and calculated his rent assistance as if he were a single person.  It is not clear why this happened but there is nothing to suggest any fault on Mr Lackovic’s part.  Once Centrelink realised he was a “single sharer”, his rent assistance was reduced accordingly.  As Mr Lackovic met the definition and still meets the definition of a single person sharing accommodation, I am satisfied this was the correct decision.

8.      That was not the end of it, however, because Mr Lackovic’s rent assistance was further reduced when Centrelink realised that it had misunderstood the information he had given them about the amount of rent he had been paying.  Again, there is nothing to suggest fault on his part.

9.      Having seen the forms that Mr Lackovic completed, I can see how the misunderstanding occurred. When, originally, Mr Lackovic completed a form stating that he was paying rent of $330.00, Centrelink read this as meaning it was what he paid fortnightly after sharing the rent with his daughters.  Consequently, Centrelink took his weekly share to be $165.00, which entitled him to the maximum amount of rent assistance.  In fact, $330.00 was the total fortnightly rent which was shared three ways with his daughters, and Mr Lackovic’s share was only $55.00 a week. 

10.     The misunderstanding continued and was carried over after the rent increased to $440.00 per fortnight.  Consequently, for some years, he was paid more rent assistance than he was entitled to. 

11.     The mistake did not come to light until July 2010, when Mr Lackovic and his daughters moved and the rent increased to $580.00 a fortnight.  At that point, Centrelink noted that he was paying $193.00 a fortnight, or $86.50 a week, and that he was a “single sharer”.  The combined effect was to reduce his rent assistance considerably.  Having considered the provisions in the Act concerning calculation of rent assistance, I am satisfied that Centrelink has now correctly calculated his payment.

Conclusion

12.     Mr Lackovic is understandably confused about his payments.  He is relatively new to Australia; he speaks little English and has to communicate through an interpreter.  He is clearly frustrated, and it is not hard to see why he finds it hard to understand why, after some years, his rent assistance decreased just as his rent increased.  However, I am satisfied that Centrelink has now correctly calculated his rent assistance. 

13.I affirm the decision under review.

I certify that the 13 preceding paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of Senior Member Jill Toohey

Signed:         ............[sgd]....................................................................
           Diana Weston, Associate

Date of Hearing  30 June 2011
Date of Decision  30 June 2011
Date of Written Reasons          23 August 2011
Applicant  Self-represented
Solicitor for the Respondent     Ms S Memmott, Centrelink