SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILIES, HOUSING, COMMUNITY SERVICES AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS and HAYWOOD
[2010] AATA 641
•26 August 2010
Administrative Appeals Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2010] AATA 641
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) Nos 2009/4495-4496
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION ) Re SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILIES, HOUSING, COMMUNITY SERVICES AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS Applicant
And
JOSEPHINE AND REGINALD HAYWOOD
Respondents
DECISION
Tribunal Senior Member K Bean Date26 August 2010
PlaceAdelaide
Decision 1. In application 2009/4495 the Tribunal varies the directions made by the SSAT so that they provide as follows:
(a) the amount Mrs Haywood is deemed to have received periodically over the relevant period, 18 October 1999 to 7 December 2008, is £1,163.23;
(b) in determining the amount of income she is deemed to have received in Australian currency, regard is to be had to the exchange rate specified in the Social Security Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Determination 2008, being the on-demand airmail buying rate for the currency available at the Commonwealth Bank of Australia at the start of business in Sydney on the 5th business day before the calculation day, with the calculation day being 1 December 2008;
(c) Centrelink is to recalculate the debt amount accordingly; and
(d) the resulting debt is to be recovered.
2. In application 2009/4496 the Tribunal varies the directions made by the SSAT so that they provide as follows:
(a) the amount Mr Haywood is deemed to have received periodically over the relevant period, 26 May 2003 to 7 December 2008, is £3,274.60;
(b) in determining the amount of income he is deemed to have received in Australian currency, regard is to be had to the exchange rate specified in the Social Security Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Determination 2008, being the on-demand airmail buying rate for the currency available at the Commonwealth Bank of Australia at the start of business in Sydney on the 5th business day before the calculation day, with the calculation day being 1 December 2008;
(c) Centrelink is to recalculate the debt amount accordingly; and
(d) the resulting debt is to be recovered.
..............................................
K BEAN
(Senior Member)
CATCHWORDS
SOCIAL SECURITY – Age Pension – lump sum payments of arrears of foreign pension – amounts deducted for National Insurance contributions – payment of contributions a condition of receiving arrears – gross amount of arrears be taken into account in determining entitlement to Australian Age Pension – Social Security Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Determination 2008 applicable to determining the value in Australian currency of amounts received by respondents – decision under review varied.
Social Security Act 1991 ss 8, 1072, 1100, 1228A, 1236(1A), 1237A, 1237AAD
Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 s 179
Re Aslanidis and Secretary, Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs [2010] AATA 429
Re Durant and Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services [1999] AATA 382 Re Makowski and Secretary, Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs [2007] AATA 21Secretary, Department of Social Security v Hales [1998] FCA 219
REASONS FOR DECISION
26 August 2010 Senior Member K Bean 1.Mr and Mrs Haywood (the respondents) are originally from the United Kingdom (UK). However, they currently reside in Australia. Mrs Haywood has been in receipt of an Australian Age Pension (AP) since 9 April 2003[1] and Mr Haywood has been in receipt of an Australian AP since 26 May 2003[2].
[1] T3/35
[2] T4/26
2.In December 2008, the UK Pension Service wrote to the respondents to advise each of them of changes to their respective entitlements to the UK State Pension[3]. Mr and Mrs Haywood provided Centrelink with a copy of their respective letters from the UK Pension Service and on 3 June 2009 Centrelink calculated their retrospective entitlement to the AP, taking into account the changes to their UK State Pensions. The result of the recalculation was that both Mr and Mrs Haywood had received more AP than their entitlement during the relevant period, being 9 April 2003 to 7 December 2008. Centrelink therefore raised two AP debts against Mrs Haywood and two AP debts against Mr Haywood.
[3] T3/61-64 and T4/57-60
3.Mr and Mrs Haywood subsequently sought review of these decisions and on 7 July 2009, an Authorised Review Officer (ARO) varied the decisions so as to provide for revised debt amounts as follows:
For Mrs Haywood:
(a) $148.68 for the period 9 April 2003 to 13 February 2005; and
(b) $1,335.17 for the period 26 May 2003 to 7 December 2008[4].
[4] T3/5
For Mr Haywood:
(a) $138.35 for the period 9 April 2003 to 13 February 2005; and
(b) $1,335.17 for the period 26 May 2003 to 7 December 2008[5].
[5] T4/5
4.Mr and Mrs Haywood subsequently applied for review of these decisions by the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (the SSAT). On 18 August 2009 the SSAT set aside the decisions under review and remitted the matter back to Centrelink for reconsideration in accordance with directions that:
Mrs Haywood
(a) The amount that Mrs Haywood is deemed to have received periodically over the relevant period, 18 October 1999 to 7 December 2008 is £523.63 rather than £1,163.23;
(b) to determine the amounts of income that she was deemed to receive in Australian currency, regard is to be had to the exchange rates as varied from time to time during the period;
(c)Centrelink is to recalculate the s 1228A debt amount accordingly; and
(d)the resulting debt is to be recovered.
Mr Haywood
(a) The amount that Mr Haywood is deemed to have received periodically over the relevant period, 26 May 2003 to 7 December 2008 is £1,298.60 rather than £3,274.60;
(b) to determine the amounts of income that he was deemed to receive in Australian currency, regard is to be had to the exchange rates as varied from time to time during the period;
(c)Centrelink is to recalculate the s 1228A debt amount accordingly; and
(d)the resulting debt is to be recovered.
5.The main reason for the difference between the debt amounts as determined by the SSAT and the ARO was that the SSAT took the view that in calculating the debts, regard should be had only to the net amounts of pension received by Mr and Mrs Haywood after deduction of their National Insurance contributions, rather than the gross amounts.
6.On 21 September 2009, the Secretary, Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (the applicant) applied for review of the SSAT decision by this Tribunal, giving rise to these proceedings.
7.With the agreement of all parties, a hearing on the papers took place on 21 April 2010 so that no formal hearing was convened.
8.I should also note at the outset that, by reason of s 179 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999, where, as here, the SSAT has set aside a decision and sent the matter back to the Secretary for reconsideration in accordance with any directions or recommendations, this Tribunal’s jurisdiction is limited to reviewing those directions or recommendations[6].
[6] See Re Aslanidis and Secretary, Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs [2010] AATA 429 at [12]-[31].
background facts
9.There is no dispute as to the relevant facts in this matter. As outlined above, Mr and Mrs Haywood have each been in receipt of AP since 2003. On 19 December 2008, the UK Pension Service wrote to each of them advising them of changes in their UK State Pensions. In relation to Mrs Haywood, those changes were[7]:
·that she was entitled to a UK State Pension of £46.39 per week from 18 October 1999;
·that her UK State pension rate had increased to £53.63 per week from 14 February 2005;
·that she was entitled to arrears of the UK State Pension and interest earned for the period from 18 October 1999 to 7 December 2008, amounting to £1,163.23;
·that the amount of £639.60 had been withheld by agreement with Mrs Haywood to pay for additional contributions to the UK National Insurance Scheme for the tax years 1997/98 and 1998/99; and
·that she was to receive the balance of £523.63.
[7] T3/61-64
10.The letter also advised Mrs Haywood:
“Please note that in some countries, the UK State Pension remains frozen at the rate it was paid before you left the UK, or from your date of entitlement if later. This means that pensioners living in those countries do not receive the annual increases paid to pensioners living in the UK.
As you are living in one of those countries, and you decided to pay voluntary National Insurance contributions, your UK State Pension has been recalculated. You are now entitled to £53.63 per week. However, your UK State Pension will be frozen at this amount and will remain frozen unless you return to the UK or move to a country where annual increases are paid.”
11.The letter also contained details as to how her UK State Pension was made up, indicating that her basic pension of £39.95 was based on National Insurance contributions and her additional UK State Pension of £13.67 was based on her earnings from 1978 to 1997.
12.The letter of the same date received by Mr Haywood was in very similar terms and advised him of the following[8]:
·that he was entitled to a UK State Pension of £59.61 a week from 26 May 2003;
·that he was entitled to arrears of the UK State Pension and interest earned for the period from 26 May 2003 to 7 December 2008, amounting to £3,274.60;
·that the amount of £1,976 had been withheld by agreement from Mr Haywood to pay for additional contributions to the UK National Insurance Scheme for the tax years 1996/97 to 2001/02; and
·that he was to receive the balance of £1,298.60.
[8] T4/57-60
13.The letter also contained advice effectively identical to the paragraphs reproduced above from the letter to Mrs Haywood, noting that as he had decided to pay voluntary National Insurance contributions, his UK State Pension had been recalculated to £59.61 per week.
14.Mr Haywood’s letter also advised him that his pension was comprised of basic pension based on National Insurance contributions of £44.15 and additional UK State Pension based on his earnings from 6 April 1978 to 5 April 1997 of £14.62, together with a very small additional amount based on earlier contributions.
15.The T documents also contain general information in relation to UK National Insurance contributions which appears to have been downloaded from the relevant website in the UK[9]. According to this document, there are a variety of different classes of contribution to the National Insurance Scheme, some of which are compulsory and some of which are voluntary. Class 3 contributions are described as “Voluntary contributions paid by people who wish to protect their entitlement to the State Pension and who do not pay enough National Insurance contributions in another class”. This document also describes one of the circumstances in which Class 3 contributions can be paid as when a person is:
“living abroad … and you want to keep or improve and maintain your entitlement to:
·Basic State Pension
·Bereavement Benefits
·Widowed Parent’s Allowance
·Bereavement Allowance
·Bereavement Payment.”
[9] T8/77-84
issues
16.The issues which arise from this application are as follows:
·whether the gross or net amount of foreign pension lump sum arrears payments should be taken into account as income in assessing the rate of AP payable to the respondents;
·whether the exchange rate, as it was at the time the arrears payments were received, is the correct exchange rate to be used to determine the value of the payments received in a foreign currency by the respondents;
·whether the respondents received an amount of AP during the period, from 9 April 2003 to 7 December 2008, in excess of their entitlements;
·whether the overpayments are debts owing to the Commonwealth; and
·whether the debts should be recovered, written-off or waived.
contentions
17.In their written submissions, the respondents stated as follows:
“The Secretary, in disagreeing with the decision of the SSAT notes that the Tribunal took into account the fact that we would not have received any arrears at all had we not agreed to pay our National Insurance obligations by foregoing some of the arrears. … The fact is, no other option for paying the National Insurance contributions was offered. Prior deduction of NI contributions was the only way to receive the arrears.”[10]
[10] Respondent’s Submissions dated 15 March 2010
18.In relation to their financial circumstances, they stated:
“We spent much of the money we received on necessary repairs to our house. We replaced a section of cracked and sunken concrete in the driveway. We replaced a window that was letting in water, and replaced a damaged shower screen. We did this in good faith, not anticipating being penalised for monies we had not received.”
They also stated:
“We ask the Tribunal not to burden us with a debt, not of our making, that we will have to carry for years and to take into account the errors made by Centrelink.”
19.In its Statement of Facts and Contentions, the applicant submitted that the Social Security Act 1991 (the Act) required the respondent’s gross income to be taken into account in calculating their pension entitlements. The applicant relied upon the income test definitions in ss 8 and 1072 of the Act, each of which relevantly provide as follows:
“8 Income test definitions
…
Earned, derived or received
(2)A reference in this Act to an income amount earned, derived or received is a reference to:
(a) an income amount earned, derived or received by any means; and
(b)an income amount earned, derived or received from any source (whether within or outside Australia).
…
1072 General meaning of ordinary income
A reference in this Act to a person’s ordinary income for a period is a reference to the person’s gross ordinary income from all sources for the period calculated without any reduction, other than a reduction under Division 1A.”
20.The applicant also directed the Tribunal’s attention to decisions of the Tribunal in Re Durant and Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services [1999] AATA 382 and Re Makowski and Secretary, Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs [2007] AATA 21 which will be discussed further below.
21.The applicant also submitted:
“The SSAT appears to have taken into consideration that the respondents were only entitled to their respective gross amounts if they agreed to pay their voluntary National Insurance contributions. The Secretary understands that pensioners are given the option by the UK National Insurance scheme to either pay additional contributions in advance of the reassessment of entitlement or make a commitment to pay these additional contributions out of any possible arrears that may be payable (T8/80). For this reason the Secretary contends that, if the SSAT approach was adopted, it could lead to inequitable results for pensioners in the same position but who exercised different choices in terms of the manner in which they paid their voluntary National Insurance contributions.
For example, as already mentioned, the respondents chose to meet their National Insurance obligations by forgoing a portion of their arrears. Another person, also in receipt of arrears, could choose to meet similar obligations by paying in a different fashion. The second person would be unfairly disadvantaged as s/he would, unlike the respondents, be assessed according to the gross amount received. The Secretary submits that this is not the intention of the legislation. We say therefore that the gross amounts paid to the respondents by way of lump sum arrears payments are the correct amounts to be assessed for the purposes of section 1228A of the Act.”[11]
[11] Applicant’s Statement of Facts and Contentions [4.18]-[4.19]
22.In relation to the applicable exchange rate, the applicant relied upon s 1100 of the Act which relevantly provides as follows:
“1100 How value of a payment received in a foreign currency is to be determined
(1)If:
(a)the rate of a payment to be made to a person under this Act is being worked out for a calculation day; and
(b)an amount received by the person in a foreign currency needs to be taken into account in working out the rate;
the value in Australian currency of the amount received is to be determined in accordance with this section.
(2) Except in the case of:
(a)amounts received in a foreign currency in respect of which the Secretary determines that it is not appropriate for this subsection to apply; or
(b)a payment, or class or kind of payments, received in a foreign currency, being a payment or a class or kind of payments in respect of which the Secretary determines that it is not appropriate for this subsection to apply;
the value in Australian currency of the amount received is to be calculated using the appropriate market exchange rate for the foreign currency on the fifth business day before the calculation day.
…
(4)In the case of a foreign currency or a payment in a foreign currency in respect of which the Secretary has determined that it is not appropriate for subsection (2) to apply, the value in Australian currency of the amount received is to be calculated using a rate of exchange that the Secretary determines to be appropriate.
(5)The Secretary may make written determinations for the purposes of this section.
(6) In this section:
business day means a day other than:
(a) a Saturday; or
(b) a Sunday; or
(c)a day that is a public holiday or bank holiday in Canberra or Sydney.
calculation day means the first business day for each month.
month means one of the 12 months of the calendar year.”
23.The applicant submitted that, in the case of the United Kingdom pound, the Secretary had determined that it was not appropriate for sub-s 1100(2) to apply and that an applicable determination had been made pursuant to sub-s 1100(5).
24.The applicant initially submitted that the applicable determination was the Social Security Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Determination 2009 (No 1). In response to correspondence from the Tribunal however, the applicant submitted that the respondents should be deemed to have received the arrears on 29 December 2008. The applicant indicated that that date was arrived at by application of a standard procedure adopted by Centrelink, whereby 10 days is added to the date of an overseas letter to arrive at the deemed date of receipt, noting that in this case both letters were dated 19 December 2008.
25.The applicant further submitted that if a date of receipt of 29 December 2008 was adopted, then the applicable determination was the Social Security Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Determination 2008 (the 2008 Determination)[12]. Part 3 of that Determination at 3.2(2) sets out the appropriate market exchange rate for currencies mentioned in Table A, which includes “United Kingdom (Pound)”. It states:
[12] Applicant’s Further Submissions dated 1 July 2010
“It is appropriate to use the on-demand airmail buying rate for the currency available at the Commonwealth Bank of Australia at the start of business in Sydney on the 5th day before the calculation day”.
26.The applicant submitted that, pursuant to sub-s 1100(6), the calculation day is the first business day of each month, and as the arrears were received in December 2008, the relevant calculation day was the first business day of that month.
27.I should add that following receipt of the further submissions of the applicant in relation to this issue, the respondents were also given an opportunity to make any further submissions but indicated they had no further submissions to make.
28.As to whether there was an overpayment, the applicant submitted that s 1228A of the Act applied with a result that the overpayments of AP paid to the respondents as a result of their arrears of UK State Pension were debts due to the Commonwealth.
29.In relation to possible write-off or waiver of the debts, the applicant submitted that write-off pursuant to s 1236(1A) of the Act was inappropriate as the respondents had the capacity to repay the debts, and were currently doing so from withholdings from their AP[13]. In relation to possible application of s 1237A, the applicant submitted that this was also inapplicable as the debts did not arise solely due to an administrative error made by Centrelink. In relation to the possible application of s 1237AAD, the applicant submitted that there was nothing before the Tribunal to establish that the respondents’ circumstances were “special” within the meaning of that provision.
[13] Applicant’s Statement of Facts and Contentions [4.30]
consideration
30.Although I am not aware of any decision directly on point, circumstances analogous to those under consideration in this matter have been considered by a number of previous Tribunals. In Re Durant, Deputy President Forgie considered whether, in respect of a Canadian pension, the gross amount or the amount before deduction of taxation should be taken into account in assessing the applicant’s Social Security entitlements. As to the definition of “income” in s 8 of the Act, Deputy President Forgie observed in relation to the facts of the matter before her:
“… Payment of tax from money which Mr Durant earns, derives or receives is part of the money for his own use or benefit. It is for his own use or benefit that he pays his taxation obligations whether those obligations arise in Canada or Australia. The fact that he is not called upon to meet those obligations from the pensions moneys he actually receives and that the money is deducted before the balance is sent to him is of no consequence. The analogy lies in the PAYE system used in Australia. The fact that the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 requires an employer to deduct instalments of income tax from an employee's salary before paying the employee his or her salary does not mean that the payment of income taxation is not the employee's obligation. …”[14]
[14] At [23]
31.The Deputy President went on to refer to s 1072 of the Act, which provides that a reference in the Act to a person’s ordinary income for a period is a reference to the person’s “gross ordinary income” from all sources for the period and that his or her ordinary income is to be calculated without any reduction, other than a relevant deduction under Division 1A. She went on to observe:
“It seems to me that the clear intention of the SS Act is that, provided money can be said to be earned, derived or received for a person's use or benefit, no deductions are to be made unless they are permitted under Division 1A of Part 3.10. Compulsory deduction of taxation before it comes into the hands of the recipient does not make the money deducted any less a payment in satisfaction of a person's obligations and so a payment for the person's use or benefit.”[15]
[15] At [27]
32.Member Fice reached the same conclusion in Re Makowski, in circumstances where the applicant had received only half of a lump sum of arrears for his German pension because he had engaged the services of an organisation to assist him in claiming the German pension and, by agreement, that organisation received 50 percent of the lump sum payment. Member Fice concluded that the gross amount without deduction should be taken into account in calculating the applicant’s Social Security entitlements.
33.Having regard to those authorities and the terms of the legislation, in particular ss 8 and 1072, I am also satisfied that it is the total lump sum amount which should be brought to account in calculating Mr and Mrs Haywood’s AP entitlements, rather than the net amount after deduction of their National Insurance contributions. In reaching that conclusion, I have had regard to the fact that, on the material before me, it appears that the payment of those contributions was a pre-condition to receipt of the arrears, since it appears that otherwise, Mr and Mrs Haywood would not have made sufficient contributions to entitle them to the arrears. That being the case, there is little doubt in my view that the entire lump sum amounts were received for their own use or benefit and were employed by them for their benefit, namely to qualify for payment of UK State Pension. I see no meaningful distinction between their situation and that of a person who receives a net amount of arrears, after taxation has been deducted. In fact, it appears to me that Mr and Mrs Haywood have received a more direct and tangible benefit from payment of their National Insurance contributions than they would have from the payment of taxation.
34.I have accordingly concluded that in each case the gross amount of the arrears received by them should be taken into account in calculating their AP entitlements and the debts owed as a result of receipt of those arrears.
35.In relation to the applicable exchange rate, I have had regard to the legislation to which I was directed by the applicant and the terms of the 2008 Determination and I am satisfied the 2008 Determination is applicable in these circumstances. I am therefore satisfied that the correct exchange rate to be used is the Commonwealth Bank of Australia’s on-demand airmail buying rate, current on the 5th working day before the calculation day, being the first business day in the month in which the arrears were received, which is 1 December 2008.
36.I am also satisfied that Mr and Mrs Haywood have each received overpayments, within the meaning of ss 1223(1) and 1228A of the Act and that these amounts are debts due to the Commonwealth.
37.In relation to potential write-off or waiver of the debts, the applicable provisions are ss 1236(1A), 1237A and 1237AAD of the Act, each of which relevantly provides as follows:
“1236 Secretary may write off debt
…
(1A)The Secretary may decide to write off a debt under subsection (1) if, and only if:
(a) the debt is irrecoverable at law; or
(b) the debtor has no capacity to repay the debt; or
(c)the debtor’s whereabouts are unknown after all reasonable efforts have been made to locate the debtor; or
(d)it is not cost effective for the Commonwealth to take action to recover the debt.
…
1237AWaiver of debt arising from error
Administrative error
(1)Subject to subsection (1A), the Secretary must waive the right to recover the proportion of a debt that is attributable solely to an administrative error made by the Commonwealth if the debtor received in good faith the payment or payments that gave rise to that proportion of the debt.
…
1237AAD Waiver in special circumstances
The Secretary may waive the right to recover all or part of a debt if the Secretary is satisfied that:
(a)the debt did not result wholly or partly from the debtor or another person knowingly:
(i) making a false statement or a false representation; or
(ii)failing or omitting to comply with a provision of this Act, the Administration Act or the 1947 Act; and
(b)there are special circumstances (other than financial hardship alone) that make it desirable to waive; and
(c)it is more appropriate to waive than to write off the debt or part of the debt.”
38.In relation to s 1236(1A), there is nothing before me to suggest that the respondents do not have the capacity to repay the debts and I note the submission for the applicant that they are currently repaying their debts through withholdings from their AP. Accordingly, I am not satisfied that it would be appropriate to write-off either of the debts pursuant to s 1236(1A).
39.In relation to s 1237A, which provides for waiver in the case of “sole administrative error”, I am not satisfied that either of the debts in this case arose as a result of, partly or wholly, any administrative error made by the Commonwealth. Accordingly, it is not appropriate for me to waive either of the debts pursuant to this provision.
40.In relation to s 1237AAD, I note that the applicant does not submit and there is nothing before me to suggest that the respondents or another person knowingly made a false statement or representation, or failed to comply with the Act. Therefore the pre-conditions for application of this provision are met. In order for a debt to be waived pursuant to that provision however, it is necessary for “special circumstances” to be established. Whilst I accept Mr and Mrs Haywood are not well off and these debts have and will continue to cause them some financial stress, I note that they are in relatively comfortable circumstances compared with many welfare recipients, and own their own home. On the material before me, there is no aspect of their circumstances which is exceptional or unusual in the relevant sense[16], and accordingly I am not satisfied that their circumstances are “special” such as to make it appropriate for me to waive either of the debts pursuant to s 1237AAD.
[16] See Secretary, Department of Social Security v Hales [1998] FCA 219.
41.I have accordingly concluded that the relevant overpayments are debts owing to the Commonwealth and must be recovered.
decision
42.I have therefore decided to vary the directions made by the SSAT so that they provide as set out below.
43.In application 2009/4495:
(a)the amount Mrs Haywood is deemed to have received periodically over the relevant period, 18 October 1999 to 7 December 2008, is £1,163.23;
(b)in determining the amount of income she is deemed to have received in Australian currency, regard is to be had to the exchange rate specified in the Social Security Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Determination 2008, being the on-demand airmail buying rate for the currency available at the Commonwealth Bank of Australia at the start of business in Sydney on the 5th business day before the calculation day, being 1 December 2008;
(c)Centrelink is to recalculate the debt amount accordingly; and
(d)the resulting debt is to be recovered.
44.In application 2009/4496:
(a)the amount Mr Haywood is deemed to have received periodically over the relevant period, 26 May 2003 to 7 December 2008, is £3,274.60;
(b)in determining the amount of income he is deemed to have received in Australian currency, regard is to be had to the exchange rate specified in the Social Security Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Determination 2008, being the on-demand airmail buying rate for the currency available at the Commonwealth Bank of Australia at the start of business in Sydney on the 5th business day before the calculation day, being 1 December 2008;
(c)Centrelink is to recalculate the debt amount accordingly; and
(d)the resulting debt is to be recovered.
I certify that the 44 preceding paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of Senior Member K Bean
Signed: .....................................................................................
AssociateDate of Hearing on papers 21 April 2010
Date of Decision 26 August 2010
2
3
0