The first step in having a decision reviewed is to ask Centrelink to review the decision themselves. When this request is made, the person should try to be specific as to why they believe the decision is unfair or incorrect.

A person simply telling Centrelink that they are not happy with a decision will not usually be considered to be asking for a review. A request for a review should be specific and should be undertaken with the following in mind.

When requesting a review, a person has the option of contacting the Original Decision Maker(ODM) (that is, the person who made the decision in dispute) and asking for more information, or a clarification or explanation of the decision. A person can also ask the Original Decision Makerto review their decision.

If the Original Decision Maker reviews their decision, and the decision still remains in dispute, a person can request that the decision then be looked at by a third party within Centrelink called an Authorised Review Officer (ARO). An ARO is a senior Centrelink officer not involved in the original decision.

It is not a requirement that the decision be reviewed by the Original Decision Maker. Any person can skip that step and go straight to requesting a review by an Authorised Review Officer if they choose.

Although it is possible to ask for a review over the phone or in person, it is best to do it in writing. A review by an ARO can be requested by either writing a letter or completing a Review of a decision form available from the Centrelink website.

If a review is requested over the phone, ask for a receipt number and confirmation in writing that Centrelink will review the decision.

The following information should be included in a written request for a review:

Once the decision has been reviewed, the ARO will send a letter outlining the reasons for their decision.

If a person is unhappy with the ARO’s decision, their next option is to consider an external review in the Administrative Review Tribunal. See External Review for more information.