Extract from ABC News
Australians targeted by the illegal robodebt income averaging scheme are considering their legal options after the damning royal commission report suggested there was evidence to support a further civil case.
Key points:
- More than half a million robodebt victims could pursue civil action against the ministers and public servants found responsible
- The royal commission into the scheme found there was evidence to support a civil prosecution
- A number of victims and their legal representatives say they are considering their options
Buried in the depths of the report, commissioner Catherine Holmes pointed to a little-used avenue for a civil claim.
The commissioner found "elements of the tort of misfeasance in public office appear to exist".
The tort in question provides an avenue to access damages for harm caused by a public office holder breaching their obligations — both the wrong itself and any consequential loss.
A previous class action resulted in the refunding of incorrect debts with interest and wiping of other debts accrued through the illegal system, but did not provide compensation for associated losses, including distress and suffering.
'We deserve compensation no matter what'
Sydney resident Barbara Dampney is considering joining a potential civil action.
The 75-year-old, who works part-time as a nurse, was almost forced to sell her home when she was hounded to repay a $7,000 debt incorrectly raised against her.
"I was afraid I was going to lose my unit. I was paying a mortgage, and I'm a nurse and my wages were hardly covering the bills, let alone what I had to pay back," she said.
"I was one of the lucky ones. I survived, but only just."
Ms Dampney recounts receiving countless letters in the mail demanding she repay a debt she did not owe before an encroaching timeline. She was also threatened with court action.
She says the tort of malfeasance offers victims new hope of being compensated for the immense harm caused by the scheme, which illegally raised $1.76 billion in alleged debts owed to Centrelink against more than half a million people.
"The parliamentarians should be held responsible unequivocally. Something has to be done, too many people have suffered," she said.
"People have to be compensated for the harm that's been done.
"The taxpayer will have to pay. It's unfortunate, but taxpayers have to pay for a lot of things and we deserve compensation no matter what."
Tasmanian mother of one Skye Polmear said she was also interested in joining any future compensation action.
The small business owner had a $3,000 debt raised against her at the same time she was dealing with multiple health conditions and was pregnant.
She said the saga was incredibly stressful and exacerbated her health conditions.
"I was going through a difficult time with my health and just to get a letter like that, it was just completely out of the blue," she said.
"I started getting heaps of calls from the debt collectors which was really stressful.
"Some days I swear it was like 10 calls were coming through, and I'd just be 'hang up, hang up, hang up' because I did not have the capacity. I was pregnant and unwell.
"It's such a validating thing to know that people are actually being held accountable because there were just so many humans impacted by this."
'A very egregious wrongdoing'
The head of Gordon Legal, the law firm that led the Robodebt class action which recouped $110 million for victims in 2020, has written to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to invite negotiations on a potential new claim of misfeasance in public office, abuse of process or misrepresentation.
Peter Gordon has called on the Prime Minister to discuss an effective, quick and fair way of compensating those most egregiously hurt by the former Coalition government's scheme.
"The elements of that tort appear to be made out here. Not just by one person, not even by one category of people, but by senior members of the government, people in cabinet and also senior public servants," he said.
"It constitutes a separate wrongdoing, the cover-up, the sanitisation of legal advice. All of these things constitute a very egregious wrongdoing, the like of which I can't recall ever being exposed in Australian public life before.
"There are various categories, very, very serious categories of compensation which simply weren't available in the class action that appear to be available now."
For the tort to apply, someone in public office must be shown to have invalidly, or unlawfully exercised a power in bad faith which resulted in a loss.
The plaintiff is responsible for proving the defendant acted with the intention to cause harm or was recklessly indifferent to the likelihood of harm.
Mr Gordon said the firm was still considering the royal commission report, released on Friday, but would have guidance on a way forward in coming weeks.
No comments:
Post a Comment