If you receive an “Account payable” from Centrelink, or a phone call asking you to come to the local Centrelink office to “discuss” alleged over-payments:
If you ever receive a letter like this, you are being conned. The bad news is that the Federal Police know it is a government con but will not touch it with a 10-foot pole! Letters like this violate your legal rights and you need to realize that it is a way that Centrelink uses to recover the hundreds of millions of dollars in stuff-ups that occur each year. (See the URL link below in (c) for more details of this stuff-up.)
NOTE: The short link for this URL is: http://wp.me/p1n8TZ-m5
1. – DO NOT lodge an appeal to an Authorized Review Officer. (ARO) They are NOT “independent” as they claim:- They are Centrelink employees who, like the police, can use anything that you say against you in a court or tribunal hearing, e.g. during any SSAT appeals that you may lodge!)
(a) If you do not appeal, then Centrelink has to PROVE that you were in the wrong in a (local) court and that is very expensive for Centrelink. So much so, that it actually may be cheaper for Centrelink to comply with the Waiver of Debt law in paragraph 1,237a of the Social Security Act and waive the debt because it was their mistake!
(b) NOTE: if you appeal, it is a good as saying you were in the wrong and then you have to prove that you were not in the wrong! Dial 13 32 76 and listen for the “This call will be recorded for your security” statement. That call will not be made available to you if Centrelink is in the wrong and you will then get stuck with a bill that should have been waived by Centrelink!
(c) Check this out:
(d) Centrelink is over-paying tens or hundreds of millions of dollars every year and, despite the waiver of debt law, they try to get every single cent back.
DON’T BE A VICTIM OF CENTRELINK’S “WAIVERGATE” SCAM:
“YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT.”
2. – POLITELY inform Centrelink that you intend to seek LEGAL advice from a lawyer or welfare rights advocate before discussing the issue with Centrelink. This is your legal right and if Centrelink try to continue asking questions, DO NOT ANSWER ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS – JUST SAY “I HAVE NO COMMENT AT THIS TIME” then hang up the phone before you say something that can be used against you in an appeals tribunal hearing.
Believe it or not, any ‘threat’ to take you to court is actually very good news for you. Why?
Because it is so expensive to do that that it is often a non-option for Centrelink, i.e. the threat is often just a bluff, and in court Centrelink has to prove that you were at fault – you can simply insist that the court listen to the 13 32 76 recording of the phone call in dispute. If they accuse you of fraud, then you are entitled to LEGAL AID and you can point out to Centrelink that your lawyer will want the phone calls PLUS the details of the number of times torts have resulted in fatal outcomes. (See my next posting which should be up within a week.)
If Centrelink do not have the phone call recording of your alleged “mistake” that caused the over-payments, then they have no case.
If Centrelink does have the recording and it is bad news for you because you made a mistake, you can then point out to the court that it is “poisoned fruit” and is inadmissible as evidence because it violates the Coco v R  HCA 15 BINDING legal precedent. (Coco v the Crown – High Court case 15 in 1994)
This precedent requires that:
“Statutory authority to engage in what otherwise would be tortious conduct must be clearly expressed in unmistakable and unambiguous language.”
Translation: Centrelink has lied to you about the real use of the phone call because they did not record it for your benefit but for theirs. Therefore you could not give informed consent for the conversation to be recorded and it is thus inadmissible by Centrelink in their court case against you.
No phone call recording means no “factual certainty”, i.e. no hard evidence of who was in the wrong and responsible for the over-payment. The above URL link can be used by you to prove that Centrelink was most likely responsible for the error and under the Waiver of Debt law you do not have to pay.
VITAL: You do not have to answer questions so do not ‘take the stand’, i.e. allow yourself to be sworn in.
“Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat”
A core principle in our system of criminal justice than the presumption of innocence that is accorded to the defendant in every criminal trial’.
“Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat” is one of the fundamental rights found in the International Convention for Civil and Political Rights. ‘No principle is more firmly established in our system of criminal justice than the presumption of innocence of wrong-doing that is right of any defendant in any trial’. Because “The Right to a Fair Trial” includes this presumption that you are innocent, anyone accusing you of doing something must prove it.
SO – ADMIT NOTHING
– DO NOT ANSWER QUESTIONS
– ASK THEM!
In my next posting I will provide shocking evidence of what happens when you get sucked into Centrelink’s deadly game of “Appeal”. You really can wind up dead once Centrelink “stupefies and overwhelms you with a truckload of legal crap!
Remember, until you know your legal rights as well as Centrelink does, you are fair game – just don’t wind up as ‘dead meat’.
Ronald Medlicott – A Christian advocate for justice in Australia.