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

This matter concerned an appeal by Carmen Ledster against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which affirmed a decision by Centrelink to pay her Family Tax Benefit Part A at the base rate. The dispute arose because Ms Ledster's Family Allowance was withdrawn after her son, Child A, turned 18, and she believed she had complied with all necessary requirements.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Centrelink correctly determined that Ms Ledster had not taken reasonable maintenance action with respect to Child A, thereby entitling her only to the base rate of Family Tax Benefit Part A. This required the Tribunal to consider the provisions of Schedule 1 of the *A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act 1999* (Cth) and the relevant policy guidelines published in the Family Assistance Guide.

The Tribunal reasoned that to receive Family Tax Benefit Part A above the base rate for a child continuing in high school past the age of 18, a parent was required to apply for an extension to their Child Support Assessment before the child turned 18. The Family Assistance Guide stipulated that such an application would satisfy the requirement of taking reasonable maintenance action. Ms Ledster had not made such an application, instead notifying Centrelink that Child A would remain in high school. The Tribunal accepted that Ms Ledster honestly believed this notification was sufficient, but found that it did not meet the specific requirement of applying for an extension to the Child Support Assessment.

The Tribunal affirmed the AAT's decision, finding that Ms Ledster had not taken reasonable maintenance action as required by the legislation and policy. Consequently, she was only entitled to the base rate of Family Tax Benefit Part A.