|
Post by zorro1 on Mar 30, 2012 10:30:12 GMT 7
Good info here. I reckon that a large portion of travelers are forced back to OZ in a game of chicken, they push as far as they can on a bluff knowing full well that a portion will just accept because they have NO choice, to frightened to say anything for fear of being cut off. Actually Ausralia isnt to bad when it comes to the big bluff, the USA sets a stunning benchmark and according to USA heath forums that I trawl occasionally, the yanks knock back 80% on the 1st go, just because they can! the only people getting rich are the lawyers working for 40-60% back payments considering applications can drag out for a year or more My case is interesting Im able to discuss it because I fuly disclosed that I own property in Thailand. They approved it after a INT. title search which i signed for and authorised. Im half looking forward to a challenge ( i must be bored : regarding my portibility, how could they possibbly use it against mne? yeah yeah I know the laws changed not long after but still..
|
|
|
Post by barnsy on Mar 30, 2012 10:55:56 GMT 7
Thanks anotherdsp, most welcome your info. will keep you posted as to how i go. today got a lawyer involved and centrelink have no grounds to do some of what they are doing to me.
|
|
|
Post by rowdy on Mar 30, 2012 11:03:27 GMT 7
Rowdy, I am getting the bare minimum of payment with no consession card. They told me if left australia to go to my family they would terminate my pension Anotherdsp, From what you have posted to date, it would seem that the only decision that has in fact actually been made is that Centrelink has recently decided that you are a resident of Australia for Centrelink purposes. You have this in writing from them dont you? You have now told this person at Centrelink that you are planning to go overseas again and he has now said that he will now deem you a non-resident if you do, and will send you confirmation of this in the mail. **My view is that he will actually make this decision once you have departed Australia**My first issue with this is why wasn't this explained in the original letter you firstly received stating that you are now deemed a resident? What is very alarming however is what he has recently told you. How can an ARO possibly review a decision of a subordinate that relates to your alleged future conduct - something you havent even done yet. No different at all from a policeman saying if you go through a red traffic light next week I will give you a ticket, but you can can have my decision reviewed now if you like. How absurd would that be? I strongly suggest you do the following: 1. Any request for ARO review must be in writing only. Never ever request an ARO review over the phone. Use the appropriate form that you can download from the Centrelink website (link below). Remember most of what Centrelink tell you over the phone they would never put in writing as they know they are not applying the law correctly or just giving you their own incorrect interpretation of the law, and furthermore anything they do can be appealed through the proper appeal processes (ARO - SSAT - AAT). It is a lot easier to review a delegates decision in writing than a "he said, she said telephone conversation" 2. Make sure you get this persons supposed decision in writing. You will note from the "Review of a Centrelink Decision Form" it actually say's "You should ask for a review within 13 weeks of receiving the decision in writing". We are entitled to have any decisions made about us in writing. If he refuses or doesnt supply one, then lodge an ARO review (in writing) of that decision, for example something like the following: "On **/**/** I received written notification that I am currently deemed a resident of Australia for Centrelink purposes. On the **/**/** I notified ********* at Centrelink that I was intending to go overseas on the **/**/**. This person then informed me that if I did go overseas he would now deem me a non-resident. Despite my request for his decision in writing I have not received one. Prior to any SSAT review options that I may have I am seeking internal review from an ARO of the following: 1) Failure of the delegate to afford me with procedural fairness by not supplying me with written confirmation of his decision so that I can properly prepare my request for ARO review, 2) The delegates decision to deem me a non-resident for my future intention to travel overseas. When dealing with CentrelinkAlways keep notes of dates/times people you spoke to. Get a receipt number for every conversation. Any decision they make, request it in writing - We are entitled to it.
Any decision you are not happy with, request an ARO review in writing (link to appropriate form below).
Any ARO review should include not only the primary reason for you seeking a review, but their conduct/behavior as well. Review of a Centrelink decision - PDFwww.centrelink.gov.au/internet/internet.nsf/filestores/ss351_1005/$file/ss351_1005en.pdf
|
|
|
Post by anotherdsp on Mar 30, 2012 16:54:49 GMT 7
wow thanks rowdy,as you have prob gathered i am not real sure of what to do but that has given me an understanding of what is going on! well without him deeming me a non resident before i leave in writing all off this means nothing then in a way? i have taken in what procedure to use( he said my ARO) would take at least 6/8 weeks??? an if that was negative i would still have 28 days where they are still required to pay me?? does this sound right?? thanx for the guiding hand
|
|
|
Post by anotherdsp on Mar 30, 2012 17:12:12 GMT 7
to rowdy chex the link thanx mate,found a funny paragraph on the 2nd colum. it is additional info about the obudsman and what he does ect but it also mentions that before ringing the obudsman give them a ring 1st an try to wrk it out>lol has anyone tried this avenue with the custermer relations or the obudsman?? the last thing i would do is ring them before i ring the obudsman!!
|
|