The old s1073B seems clear to me. It's saying once the earned, derived or received period has been determined (separate issue) then the income will be assessed over the relevant instalment periods in such a way that the daily income will be the same for a particular instalment period. Say somone earned $10 a day for 17 consecutive days, 1 day in intalment period 1, 14 days in instalment period 2, and 2 days in instalment period 3. s1073B says that the income will be assessed over the 42 days of the 3 instalment periods. For instalment period 1, the assessed amount will be $10/14 per day for each of the 14 days. In instalment period 2, the assessed amount would be $10/day for each of the 14 days. For instalment period 3, the assessed amount would be $20/14 days per day for each of the 14 days. The ombudsman's report says that this would be correct. What Centrelink was doing wrong was assessing $10 per day over 17 days and this was incorrect because the 17 days were not contained in one instalment period.
The old s1073B seems clear to me. It's saying once the earned, derived or received period has been determined (separate issue) then the income will be assessed over the relevant instalment periods in such a way that the daily income will be the same for a particular instalment period. Say somone earned $10 a day for 17 consecutive days, 1 day in intalment period 1, 14 days in instalment period 2, and 2 days in instalment period 3. s1073B says that the income will be assessed over the 42 days of the 3 instalment periods. For instalment period 1, the assessed amount will be $10/14 per day for each of the 14 days. In instalment period 2, the assessed amount would be $10/day for each of the 14 days. For instalment period 3, the assessed amount would be $20/14 days per day for each of the 14 days. The ombudsman's report says that this would be correct. What Centrelink was doing wrong was assessing $10 per day over 17 days and this was incorrect because the 17 days were not contained in one instalment period.
Asking for a friend - does this strengthen arguments that all Robodebts based on bank statements should be reviewed and cancelled?