Internal review process for care decisions 109-05110000

Chris and Sam are Lee’s parents and are customers of both Centrelink and Child Support.

Sam provided a new parenting agreement to Centrelink about the care of Lee. On 1 January Centrelink updated the care percentages so that Chris has 65% care of Lee and Sam has 35% care of Lee. This was transmitted to Child Support. On 5 January, Chris and Sam both received notification of the change to their Family Tax Benefit (FTB) rate based on the care decision.

Sam contacted Centrelink on 31 January to query the decision and spoke to Riley, a Centrelink Service Officer. Riley could not explain why Sam was receiving that specific rate of FTB. Riley advised Sam of their review and appeal rights, including the need to apply for a formal review within 28 days of being notified of the decision.

Sam requested an explanation of the decision to change the rate of FTB as they do not understand.

When investigating the decision on 5 February, Terry the SME found a coding error. The parenting agreement showed that Chris has 35% care of Lee and Sam has 65% care of Lee.

Correcting the error will affect the FTB and Child Support assessment for both customers. As it has been more than 28 days since Sam and Chris were notified of the decision, Terry needs to attempt to contact them as a priority before any changes are made, so they are aware of the impact of not applying for a formal review (as outlined on the Background page).

Either Sam or Chris can choose to apply for a formal review after being advised of the impact. If so, Terry will finalise the explanation on Sam’s record without changing the decision and record the application for a formal review for the person who requested it.

Anne and Joseph are Sally's parents and are customers of both Centrelink and Child Support.

Child Support made a care percentage decision about the care of Sally and this was transmitted to Centrelink.

Both parent's records were reassessed based on the decision and each parent was advised accordingly.

Anne contacted Centrelink to ask for a review of the care percentage decision and was warm transferred to Child Support as the care decision was made by Child Support. An objection was recorded.

Joseph also disagreed with the care percentage decision and requested a review by Centrelink. As Anne lodged her objection with Child Support before Joseph requested a review, the Child Support objection had to be finalised first.

The Objection Officer’s decision was in favour of Anne, who was found to have a higher level of care of Sally than had previously been assessed. This resulted in a new child support assessment and also resulted in a reduction in Joseph’s FTB rate and an FTB debt.

The new care percentage determined by the Objections Officer cannot be changed as part of the ARO review. However, as part of the review process, the ARO may examine the date the Objection Officer decision affected Joseph’s rate of FTB from and review the FTB debt. If either parent disagrees with the care percentage determined by the internal review, they may apply to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for an AAT first review.