Post by grilledsnapper on Jan 6, 2013 10:10:06 GMT 7
CENTERLINK and THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT
Incompetent And Inhumane
For many years the Australian Government have allowed DSP recipients to start new lives in other countries. In many cases they have new families and in all cases many new friends. They were permitted to return every 13 weeks and then return to their countries. Centrelink and the Australian government have ripped those very lives that they allowed to evolve from under those peoples feet in a most vicious and inhumane way.
The Australian Government in their reasons for introducing unlimited portabilty of the DSP pension, in their 2012 budget said it was to target under 25 recipients and allow Dsp recipients to live overseas with friends and families. It also said that “The estimated savings of the expanded portability of DSP is $19 million over four years from 1 July 2012. These savings are realised from the non-payment of ancillary payments provided to DSP recipients that will cease after absence overseas for 13 weeks. While the payment of the primary pension, the DSP is continued, the ancillary payments are not. In many/most cases, the DSP recipients who may want to take advantage of their DSP being portable, would otherwise have stayed in Australia and continued to attract DSP and also the ancillary payments.”
I went on DSP in August 1993 after a number of heart attacks an an event that almost killed me. I had never been on Social Security and my Centrelink records show that I have lived in Australia for 60 years and worked for 45 years. I am now 62 and in my case Centrelink and other Government departments have been seen to be totally incompetent with no knowledge of the new Social Security Laws as amended in 2012. Many of their decisions have ignored the amendments. For instance the words “Terminally Ill “ was to be replaced by “The secretaries determination”, however “terminally ill” has been used in many decisions and reasons. I will relate what has occurred.
After 21 years of violence and at times horror from an alcoholic wife I made an escape to The Philippines on advice from a from a friend and my solicitor. Centrelink have vast documentation of this as she was my carer and her payment was taken of her while in prison. My condition and mental health was deteriorating and found friendship and a carer here who I still pay for from my pension. I made no plans as was only aware of what people like myself where allowed to do.
During a very stressful trip back to Australia in April 2012 where I also had to go to court and face my wife I realised my health was not good. On the return flight I collapsed in Kuala Lumpa airport which prompted me to see a cardiologist here in the Philippines. I was hospitalised on two occasions which caused me to contact Centrelink where I was told I should apply for unlimited portability, something I was not aware of. I did just that with letters from my doctor , solicitor, an anonymous Centrelink officer and a friend.
I was to hear nothing until the 27th June when I received a letter from Centrelink telling me that my payments would continue after the 1st August ( from due return date). That my discount card would be cancelled and my pension would be an amount less my medical supplement. I acted on this, paying outstanding medical bills from the money I had saved for my airfare. Some weeks later I was to receive a call from Centrelink telling me that I shouldn't have received that letter and that my pension would stop if I did not return. They made an application for compensation on my behalf and that would take 3 months. I have heard nothing of that, some 5 or 6 months later. I received a letter telling me that my application for unlimited portability had been denied. The criteria is plain and simple but none of it was mentioned in the reasons of denial. Instead it went on about what I had done leading up to the 1st August. “The explanation of decision” begun with and I quote
“ I have applied the following:
Section 94 of the 1991 Social Security act, which sets out the qualifications for disability pension. A persons medical condition must score 20 impairment points and a person must have a continuing inability to work for 15 hours a week.” The laws where amended in 2012 and these amendments were not taken into account. Further to this, the 15 hour a week law only applies to people who went on DSP after 30th June 1996. My starting date was 8th August 1993 and so this didn't apply to me. Also and I quote again “ A person with a DSP start date on or before 10 March 2004 qualifies and continues to be reviewed against the old qualification rules for DSP”. Again the new rules do not apply to me.
I was further hospitalised and my doctor sent medical certificates and letters explaining it would be dangerous under my condition to fly. My nerves were shot and I was having continuous angina. My portability was extended till the 1st August. I made an appeal to the SSAT ( Social Security Appeals Tribunal) and then the AAT (Administrative Appeals Tribunal) and they made decisions on the same incorrect laws that Centrelink did. My portability was extended until the 10th of November and the blundering and ignorance of the law was just starting. They are as follows:
I was originally granted an extension pending the SSAT appeal. This decision was overturned. I was told that Centrelink could not do that and I was to get medical evidence for an extension. The Centrelink representative at the AAT hearing admitted that they could.
Following letters of complaint to the Ombudsman and The Minister, I received a phone call from a Centrelink officer telling me that she would arrange everything for my assessment in Darwin, including social worker assistance, but she was not to hear from the ombudsman or ministers office again. That has to be blackmail.
I shortly after received a letter from the same person telling me that my assessment was a medical one and I would be assessed on the 15 hours a week law. “You may lose your pension, do you want to continue” I explained that that doesn't apply to me and an ensuing letter from here agreed and said that I would be assessed under the 30 hour a week law. That also doesn't apply to me as an assessment, moreover it only means that if I were to work more than 30 hours a week I would lose my pension.
I was sent a rather long document for my doctor to fill out as a requirement for my assessment for unlimited portability. She could not book my appointment until she had that. It was difficult for me to attend his office as I was now quite sick, but I sent it. The assessment appointment was booked and I booked my airfare around it. About three days before I was to leave I received a phone call from her telling me that the doctor from the Philipines document would not be accepted and I would have to see a doctor in Darwin to fill it out. I might add that Centrelink were arranging an angiogram through my doctor here without even discussing it with me. The cost was to much and now, even if I had gone ahead with that operation, I find that Centrelink would not have accepted it.
An extract from the AAT determination reads as follows: “Support for Mr Webster was also provided in the report from Dr Michael Kan who noted that Mr Webster suffers from the conditions identified by Dr Razon as well as post-traumatic stress disorder, headaches, memory impairment and scoliosis.” I was told that as this was not a Centrelink doctor it wouldn't be taken in to consideration”. Doctor Kan is an AAT doctor who was present at my AAT hearings. I am still to talk to a Centrelink doctor.
I returned in November for my assessment were I spent a week in hospital after collapsing about 5 hours after my arrival. I am hardly able to cope with anything now and I received great support by the hospital cardiologist, mental health people and social workers. I am awaiting Centrelinks determination, which of course I hold little hope for.
My situation now is that I have wonderful people caring for me. Centrelink are aware that, because of my health I need someone with me. My wife alienated my family and friends and because I covered for her for so long I have no one to turn to in Australia except a friend who died the day before my last return.
Incompetent And Inhumane
For many years the Australian Government have allowed DSP recipients to start new lives in other countries. In many cases they have new families and in all cases many new friends. They were permitted to return every 13 weeks and then return to their countries. Centrelink and the Australian government have ripped those very lives that they allowed to evolve from under those peoples feet in a most vicious and inhumane way.
The Australian Government in their reasons for introducing unlimited portabilty of the DSP pension, in their 2012 budget said it was to target under 25 recipients and allow Dsp recipients to live overseas with friends and families. It also said that “The estimated savings of the expanded portability of DSP is $19 million over four years from 1 July 2012. These savings are realised from the non-payment of ancillary payments provided to DSP recipients that will cease after absence overseas for 13 weeks. While the payment of the primary pension, the DSP is continued, the ancillary payments are not. In many/most cases, the DSP recipients who may want to take advantage of their DSP being portable, would otherwise have stayed in Australia and continued to attract DSP and also the ancillary payments.”
I went on DSP in August 1993 after a number of heart attacks an an event that almost killed me. I had never been on Social Security and my Centrelink records show that I have lived in Australia for 60 years and worked for 45 years. I am now 62 and in my case Centrelink and other Government departments have been seen to be totally incompetent with no knowledge of the new Social Security Laws as amended in 2012. Many of their decisions have ignored the amendments. For instance the words “Terminally Ill “ was to be replaced by “The secretaries determination”, however “terminally ill” has been used in many decisions and reasons. I will relate what has occurred.
After 21 years of violence and at times horror from an alcoholic wife I made an escape to The Philippines on advice from a from a friend and my solicitor. Centrelink have vast documentation of this as she was my carer and her payment was taken of her while in prison. My condition and mental health was deteriorating and found friendship and a carer here who I still pay for from my pension. I made no plans as was only aware of what people like myself where allowed to do.
During a very stressful trip back to Australia in April 2012 where I also had to go to court and face my wife I realised my health was not good. On the return flight I collapsed in Kuala Lumpa airport which prompted me to see a cardiologist here in the Philippines. I was hospitalised on two occasions which caused me to contact Centrelink where I was told I should apply for unlimited portability, something I was not aware of. I did just that with letters from my doctor , solicitor, an anonymous Centrelink officer and a friend.
I was to hear nothing until the 27th June when I received a letter from Centrelink telling me that my payments would continue after the 1st August ( from due return date). That my discount card would be cancelled and my pension would be an amount less my medical supplement. I acted on this, paying outstanding medical bills from the money I had saved for my airfare. Some weeks later I was to receive a call from Centrelink telling me that I shouldn't have received that letter and that my pension would stop if I did not return. They made an application for compensation on my behalf and that would take 3 months. I have heard nothing of that, some 5 or 6 months later. I received a letter telling me that my application for unlimited portability had been denied. The criteria is plain and simple but none of it was mentioned in the reasons of denial. Instead it went on about what I had done leading up to the 1st August. “The explanation of decision” begun with and I quote
“ I have applied the following:
Section 94 of the 1991 Social Security act, which sets out the qualifications for disability pension. A persons medical condition must score 20 impairment points and a person must have a continuing inability to work for 15 hours a week.” The laws where amended in 2012 and these amendments were not taken into account. Further to this, the 15 hour a week law only applies to people who went on DSP after 30th June 1996. My starting date was 8th August 1993 and so this didn't apply to me. Also and I quote again “ A person with a DSP start date on or before 10 March 2004 qualifies and continues to be reviewed against the old qualification rules for DSP”. Again the new rules do not apply to me.
I was further hospitalised and my doctor sent medical certificates and letters explaining it would be dangerous under my condition to fly. My nerves were shot and I was having continuous angina. My portability was extended till the 1st August. I made an appeal to the SSAT ( Social Security Appeals Tribunal) and then the AAT (Administrative Appeals Tribunal) and they made decisions on the same incorrect laws that Centrelink did. My portability was extended until the 10th of November and the blundering and ignorance of the law was just starting. They are as follows:
I was originally granted an extension pending the SSAT appeal. This decision was overturned. I was told that Centrelink could not do that and I was to get medical evidence for an extension. The Centrelink representative at the AAT hearing admitted that they could.
Following letters of complaint to the Ombudsman and The Minister, I received a phone call from a Centrelink officer telling me that she would arrange everything for my assessment in Darwin, including social worker assistance, but she was not to hear from the ombudsman or ministers office again. That has to be blackmail.
I shortly after received a letter from the same person telling me that my assessment was a medical one and I would be assessed on the 15 hours a week law. “You may lose your pension, do you want to continue” I explained that that doesn't apply to me and an ensuing letter from here agreed and said that I would be assessed under the 30 hour a week law. That also doesn't apply to me as an assessment, moreover it only means that if I were to work more than 30 hours a week I would lose my pension.
I was sent a rather long document for my doctor to fill out as a requirement for my assessment for unlimited portability. She could not book my appointment until she had that. It was difficult for me to attend his office as I was now quite sick, but I sent it. The assessment appointment was booked and I booked my airfare around it. About three days before I was to leave I received a phone call from her telling me that the doctor from the Philipines document would not be accepted and I would have to see a doctor in Darwin to fill it out. I might add that Centrelink were arranging an angiogram through my doctor here without even discussing it with me. The cost was to much and now, even if I had gone ahead with that operation, I find that Centrelink would not have accepted it.
An extract from the AAT determination reads as follows: “Support for Mr Webster was also provided in the report from Dr Michael Kan who noted that Mr Webster suffers from the conditions identified by Dr Razon as well as post-traumatic stress disorder, headaches, memory impairment and scoliosis.” I was told that as this was not a Centrelink doctor it wouldn't be taken in to consideration”. Doctor Kan is an AAT doctor who was present at my AAT hearings. I am still to talk to a Centrelink doctor.
I returned in November for my assessment were I spent a week in hospital after collapsing about 5 hours after my arrival. I am hardly able to cope with anything now and I received great support by the hospital cardiologist, mental health people and social workers. I am awaiting Centrelinks determination, which of course I hold little hope for.
My situation now is that I have wonderful people caring for me. Centrelink are aware that, because of my health I need someone with me. My wife alienated my family and friends and because I covered for her for so long I have no one to turn to in Australia except a friend who died the day before my last return.
) would be shocked by the way CL has treated you.