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

This matter concerned appeals by Ms Li and Mr Price against decisions of Services Australia (Centrelink) which determined that they had been overpaid Newstart Allowance and subsequently Jobseeker Payment, resulting in recoverable debts. The applicants had failed to report changes in their circumstances, specifically Mr Price's receipt of income protection payments following an injury. Centrelink subsequently calculated debts of $10,829.51 for Mr Price and $4,329.38 for Ms Li, which were later adjusted to $10,650.25 and $4,562.28 respectively. The appeals were heard by Senior Member A.A. Nikolic, AM CSC.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants had failed to report changes in their circumstances as required by social security legislation, whether this failure resulted in overpayments of their allowances, and whether there were any "special circumstances" that would warrant the write-off or waiver of the debts owed to the Commonwealth. The Tribunal was also required to consider the applicants' contention that they were misinformed by Centrelink staff regarding the reporting obligations for income protection payments.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the applicants' admitted failure to report Mr Price's income protection payments, which were received from 5 June 2019 onwards, and which exceeded the income limits for their allowances. The Tribunal found that the applicants were aware of their obligation to report changes in circumstances and that the information provided in their initial claims was inaccurate. While Mr Price gave evidence that Centrelink staff had advised him that income protection payments did not need to be reported, the Tribunal found no written corroboration for this claim and considered it implausible. The Tribunal also noted that Mr Price failed to provide complete information on the relevant forms and did not provide a copy of his income protection policy when requested. Applying the principles established in cases such as *Angelakos* and *Dranichnikov*, the Tribunal determined that the applicants' circumstances, including their assets and Mr Price's current employment, did not constitute "special circumstances" that would justify waiving the debts.

The Tribunal affirmed the reviewable decisions, finding that the debts were lawfully raised and that there were no grounds to write them off or waive them. The applicants' appeals were therefore dismissed.