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

This matter concerned an appeal by Michelle Parker against a decision by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services regarding a Centrelink debt. The dispute centred on whether Ms Parker was a member of a couple during specific periods, which would affect her entitlement to a sole parent payment and parenting payment. The case was heard by C Edwardes M of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT).

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine whether Ms Parker and Mr Richard Connell were members of a couple for the purposes of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) during the period from 28 December 1995 to 14 April 2000. This determination was crucial for assessing whether Ms Parker had been overpaid sole parent and parenting payments, thereby creating a debt to the Commonwealth. The Tribunal was required to consider the various criteria outlined in section 4(3) of the Act, which include financial aspects, the nature of the household, social aspects, sexual relationship, and the nature of the commitment to each other.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on an objective assessment of all the circumstances of the relationship between Ms Parker and Mr Connell, as evidenced by affidavits and other documents submitted in Family Court proceedings. It considered evidence relating to financial contributions, such as Ms Parker's significant financial support for Mr Connell's qualifications and property, the shared living arrangements and responsibilities for children, their presentation to friends and family as a couple, and the existence of a sexual relationship and a child together. The Tribunal noted that while Ms Parker had claimed in Family Court proceedings to have been in a de facto relationship, she later asserted she had "lied" in those proceedings. However, the Tribunal found that the evidence, including third-party verification, supported the conclusion that they were members of a couple during the relevant debt periods. The Tribunal also considered and rejected arguments for waiver or write-off of the debt, finding that the circumstances did not meet the criteria for special circumstances or administrative error, and that the debt was recoverable.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Secretary, finding that Ms Parker was not eligible for the payments during the specified periods as she was a member of a couple. Consequently, the Tribunal determined that Ms Parker had been overpaid a total of $20,546.21 for the period 28 December 1995 to 19 March 1998, and $19,830.11 for the period 20 March 1998 to 14 April 2000. The Tribunal noted that the debt was being repaid through fortnightly deductions from Ms Parker's disability support pension.