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

This matter concerned an application by the applicant, Ms. Page, for a review of a decision by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services regarding an overpayment of Parenting Payment Single (PPS). The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant had failed to report her employment and fortnightly income, leading to an overpayment, and if so, whether the resulting debt should be written off or waived. The review was heard by Senior Member A. Poljak.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were: (a) whether the applicant received PPS in excess of her entitlement during the relevant debt period; (b) the specific amounts of any overpayments; (c) whether these overpayments constituted a debt to the Commonwealth; and (d) if a debt existed, whether any part of it should be written off or waived. The applicant contended that the income records used to calculate her entitlement were inaccurate, claiming she had only earned modest amounts and had always declared her income. She also questioned the accuracy of information provided by her employer, citing discrepancies in her date of birth on some forms and suggesting her employer reported vastly different income figures to the Australian Tax Office and Centrelink.

Senior Member Poljak found that the information provided by the applicant's employer, in response to notices issued under the *Administration Act*, was contemporaneous and reliable. Despite a minor error in the applicant's date of birth on some forms, the employer's responses to requests for information from the Agency contained the correct date of birth. The Tribunal determined there was no reason to doubt the accuracy of the income declared by the employer, especially given it was provided under compulsion and contemporaneously, with the employer being aware of penalties for false or misleading information. This employer-provided income was considered more accurate than the applicant's recollection from over 20 years prior, particularly in light of her plea of guilty and conviction for related offences. The Tribunal noted significant discrepancies between the applicant's declared income and her employer's reported payments, confirming that the applicant had failed to accurately declare her income during the debt period.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted it with a decision that the applicant owes a debt to the Commonwealth in the amount of $5,362.18. The Tribunal ordered that this debt was to be fully recovered, as no grounds were found for it to be written off or waived.