Reference no: EM133460751

Case study: Administrative law

Samantha lived in a public housing property for 10 years. In January 2023, she reported being a victim of family violence to the police. They advised her to vacate the property immediately due to concerns about her safety. After Samantha left the property, her violent ex-partner came to the property and damaged the front door and windows. The police were called to the property at the time and an incident report was prepared. Samantha's record with the public housing office shows that she was under physical threat from her ex-partner in the months leading up to her leaving the property. Samantha is now living in temporary accommodation at a women's refuge.

In February 2023, a housing officer from a state government department of public housing was working on Samantha's file and recorded that the property had been vacated. A home visit by the housing officer confirmed that the property was abandoned and that the front window and door were damaged. One week later the department of public housing generated a maintenance claim against Samantha, and she was sent a debt notice to pay the cost of repairing the window and door to the value of $3,000.

The housing officer's case file for Samantha shows that no attempt was made to contact her to discuss the circumstances surrounding the repairs. This is despite Samantha keeping the public housing department up to date regarding her whereabouts and her mobile phone number.

There was no evidence on file that the housing officer considered Samantha's circumstances as a victim of family violence. The public housing department policy in relation to maintenance claims states that:

"Special circumstances such as family violence and evidence of third-party criminal damage must be considered when assessing a maintenance claim. These circumstances can reduce the claim or defeat the claim. Housing officers are expected to engage with the tenant directly before determining any liability for damage to the property."

Q1 Identify two principles of administrative law that must be followed by the housing officer when processing Samantha's claim?
Q2 For each principle of administrative law identified above, explain why the housing officer failed to apply the principle in their decision making?
Q3 Identify the type of review that Samantha can request from the department?
Q4 What supporting evidence should the public housing department officer have sought before recommending the department pursue a maintenance claim against Samantha?