The government has conceded in Federal Court that a robodebt issued to a Victorian woman by Centrelink was unlawful, on the grounds that the algorithm used to determine the debt was not valid.
Legal Aid Victoria launched the case in June, following Deanna Amato discovering in January that her tax return had been garnished by $1709.87 to pay for a debt calculated by Centrelink’s automated ‘robodebt’ debt recovery system. Amato was previously unaware of the debt Centrelink had raised against her, with letters sent only to an address she no longer lived at.
[jwplayer Xsz0rrGu]
In a statement, Legal Aid Victoria executive director of civil justice and equity Rowan McRae said that this outcome proved that the methods used to generate these debts made the entire robodebt system illegitimate.
“Today, the Australian Government has conceded that the unfair and inaccurate income-averaging process used to calculate Deanna’s robo-debt was also unlawful. If a debt isn’t calculated properly, Centrelink cannot go on and pursue a person to pay the money,” said McRae. “Deanna’s case has helped to clarify the unlawfulness of the robo-debt system for hundreds of thousands of Australians in the same situation, who received or paid off a robo-debt based only on averaging.
“Today’s result shows the Australian Government has accepted what advocates have been saying for years – using only income averaging to raise debts is both inaccurate and inconsistent with the Social Security Act.”
While the Federal Government had previously refunded Amato the $1709 taken from her tax return, it was further ordered to repay $92 in interest on the money taken from her.
Amato said she was happy with the outcome, but that that wouldn’t mean much to the people who have already been fucked over by robodebt. “My robo-debt should never have occurred in the first place. I feel pleased to have won my case but it’s bittersweet to know so many people have paid money under this system. I think it’s important that people remember that they have legal rights to question decisions that get made about them,” said Amato.
“Getting rid of the averaging element of the system is a giant leap forward – my debt was raised because of this averaging, and it’s now so obvious how incorrect it can be. I had my money refunded to me but I hope that others who have chosen, or been forced to pay back dodgy debts will also have a way to get their money back.”
A separate class-action lawsuit against robodebt is yet to be resolved.
