Pereira and Secretary Department of Employment and Workplace Relations

[2007] AATA 1821

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2007] AATA 1821

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          N2006/1461

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION		)
Re		VALEILA  PEREIRA

Applicant

And SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Ms G Ettinger, Senior Member

Date2 October 2007

PlaceCoffs Harbour

Decision The decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal is varied to reflect my findings that that part of the debt of PPS which Ms Pereira incurred relating to the period 4 March 2004 to 7 February 2005 is waived. The matter is remitted to the Respondent for calculation and repayment of the remaining part of the debt as appropriate.

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

Ms G Ettinger
  Senior Member

CATCHWORDS –

Parenting Payment debt – whether it should be recovered – write-off not applicable  – sole administrative error considered -  whether special circumstances – sole administrative error to waive a part of the debt found - decision of SSAT varied.

Social Security Act 1991 - ss 1068A, 1223(1), 1236(1), 1237(1) & 1237AAD

Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 s 68(2)

Re Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services and Jonauskas (2001) 65 ALD 553

Re Beadle and Director-General of Social Security (1984) 6 ALD 1

Re Beadle and Director‑General of Social Security (1985) 7 ALD 670

Re Groves v Secretary Department of Family and Community Services (2005) 82 ALD 675

Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services v Sekhon (2003) 73 ALD 41

Secretary, Department of Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs v Prince (1997) 152 ALR 127

Re Ivovic and Director-General of Social Services (1981) 3 ALN N95

REASONS FOR DECISION

2 October 2007 Ms G Ettinger, Senior Member     

BACKGROUND

1.      Ms Valeila Pereira has been the recipient of Parenting Payment Single (“PPS”) since 2003 in respect of her son, now 12 years old. She has also earned income from part-time paid employment such as cleaning and berry picking over the years. Ms Pereira told me that she knows, and has always known, that she has to report all earnings to Centrelink on a regular basis, and indeed the records indicate that she regularly reported income from her paid employment. It is on this basis that her benefits are adjusted by Centrelink from time to time.  Ms Pereira also told me that she reads correspondence from Centrelink, but does not always understand it well.

2.      What occurred in relation to Ms Pereira is that through a series of administrative errors, and omission by her to report a one-off  bonus payment, (which she said she did not know she was going to receive), she has incurred an overpayment of PPS, now recalculated to be $2,019.59  for the period 9 September 2003 to 30 May 2005.

3.      Ms Pereira was unsuccessful in her appeal to have the debt waived by the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (“the SSAT”), and has now applied to this Tribunal for a review of the Secretary’s decision, and that of the SSAT.  I had a number of documents before me which were not…