Part 5: Specific Ombudsman roles and annual reports

Introduction

The Ombudsman Act 1976 (the Ombudsman Act) designates 5 specific Ombudsman roles to be performed by the Commonwealth Ombudsman. The Ombudsman Act requires an annual report on each role as per Table 4. We report publicly on each of the functions throughout the year, and these reports – combined with the below – constitutes the annual report.

TABLE 4: ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE OMBUDSMAN ACT

Title

Requirement

Defence Force Ombudsman

s 19FA(1) of the Ombudsman Act

Postal Industry Ombudsman

s 19X(1) of the Ombudsman Act

Overseas Students Ombudsman

s 19ZS(1) of the Ombudsman Act

Private Health Insurance Ombudsman

s 20ZG(1) of the Ombudsman Act

VET Student Loans Ombudsman

s 20ZX(1) of the Ombudsman Act

Defence Force Ombudsman

Our role as the Defence Force Ombudsman (DFO) involves 2 main enduring functions. We provide an independent complaints mechanism for serving and former members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF). Since 2016, we can receive reports of serious abuse from serving and former members of the ADF who feel they are unable to access the ADF's internal mechanisms.

For those reports of serious abuse accepted to be in jurisdiction, we can recommend to Defence that it make a reparation payment under the Defence Reparation Scheme. While this scheme was due to end on 30 June 2021, the Australian Government has extended the scheme by a further 12 months to 30 June 2022. This also includes an option for us to consider reports of serious abuse after 30 June 2022, provided an intention to report is submitted to our Office in writing before 30 June 2022, with the report to be submitted by 30 June 2023.

Complaints function

As the DFO, we receive and investigate complaints about administrative action taken by Defence agencies, including the 3 services (Navy, Army and Air Force), the Department of Defence (Defence) and Defence Housing Australia (DHA). We also receive and investigate complaints about the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA).

Complaints overview

In 2020–21, we received 343 complaints about Defence agencies and finalised 328, an increase of 3 per cent11 compared to complaints received in 2019–20. Complaints about Defence agencies raised issues such as:

During 2020–21, we received 155 complaints about DVA and finalised 141. This was an increase of 34 per cent compared to complaints received in 2019–20. Complaints about DVA included issues such as:

11 The number of entities reported against has increased due to a change in reporting practices. The Defence agencies about which we received complaints included in this count are the Australian Air Force Cadets, Royal Australian Air Force, Australian Army, Australian Signals Directorate, Department of Defence, Defence Housing Australia, Defence Honours and Awards Tribunal, Inspector-General Australian Defence Force and Royal Australian Navy.

Abuse in Defence reporting function

Since 1 December 2016, the Ombudsman can receive reports of contemporary and historical abuse in Defence. This provides an independent and confidential mechanism to report abuse for those who feel unable to access Defence's internal mechanisms.

Our delivery of this function is based on trauma-informed principles and includes:

Most reports of abuse made to our Office relate to conduct and behaviour that occurred many years ago. Of the total 2,554 reports received, 5 per cent of reports relate to abuse alleged to have occurred after 30 June 2014.

From 1 December 2016 to 30 June 2021, there were 2,554 reports of abuse received by the Office. Of these reports, 1,402 were found to be in jurisdiction, and 244 were outside the jurisdiction of our Office. Nine hundred and eight reports are still being assessed by our Office.

In 2020–21, we received 953 reports of abuse compared to 500 in 2019–20 (see Figure 7). The growth in reports of abuse may be in part due to increased knowledge of the scheme, the anticipated end of the scheme in June 2021 (now extended) and a campaign advertising the extension of the scheme.

FIGURE 7: 2020–21 REPORTS OF ABUSE RECEIVED

Figure 8 shows the most reported locations for reports assessed as in jurisdiction. As in previous years, the trend has continued with the same top 4 locations for reports of abuse, but with other locations featuring in the top 10 for the first time or changing position. This is due to the increase in reports received in 2020 about alleged abuse occurring in the 2000s at several Army locations and Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Base Amberley.

FIGURE 8: MOST REPORTED LOCATIONS

Reportees are assigned a single liaison officer where possible. Liaison officers have the training, skills and experience to communicate with people who have experienced trauma and find the reporting abuse process difficult. Liaison officers work closely with the reportees to establish rapport and encourage trust.

Reports of abuse are assessed under the Ombudsman Regulations 2017 (the Regulations). If a report is not accepted or the reportee does not agree with the reparation payment decision, they can request a review of the decision.

Reparation payments

For the most serious forms of abuse and/or sexual assault, the Ombudsman may recommend Defence make a reparation payment. There are 2 possible payments we may recommend:

If the DFO recommends one of these payments, an additional payment of $5,000 may also be recommended where the DFO is satisfied that Defence did not respond appropriately to the report of abuse. Not all reports of abuse meet the parameters set out in the framework for a payment.

Since the start of the Defence Reparation Scheme, the Office has sent 1,127 reparation payment recommendations to Defence. As at 30 June 2021, Defence had considered and accepted 1,006 recommendations, totalling approximately $42 million. As at 30 June 2021, 105 recommendations are awaiting Defence consideration.

Restorative Engagement Program

The first objective of the Restorative Engagement Program is to support a person who has made a report of abuse to tell their story to a senior representative from Defence in a private, facilitated meeting called a Restorative Engagement Conference. The conference provides the opportunity for Defence to acknowledge and respond to an individual's personal account of abuse.

The second objective of the program is to enable a broader level of insight into the effects of abuse and its implications for Defence – which is critical to informing and building cultural change.

This year, the Restorative Engagement Program was affected by COVID-19 restrictions limiting the number of conferences conducted in person. The Office convened individual Restorative Engagement Conferences for 59 people who experienced serious abuse while a member of the ADF. Since the program started, a total of 168 conferences have been held.

Participation in the program is a choice made by reportees. Feedback from reportees demonstrates they are motivated to participate in a conference to:

The majority of reportees strongly agreed that Defence meaningfully acknowledged their story of abuse, strongly agreed the Defence representative was accountable for the abuse and expressed strong disapproval for what happened.

Written feedback from participating Defence representatives also told us that participating in the Restorative Conference will help them to better understand and respond to individuals reporting abuse in the future. The majority said the experience affirmed their resolve to implement cultural change to eliminate abuse and positively affect their role as a Senior Officer in Defence.

Defence inquiries and reports

In addition to receiving reports of abuse from ADF members, the Office conducts periodic inquiries into Defence policy and procedures relating to complaints of abuse.

In July 2020, we published a report titled Inquiry into behaviour training for recruits, which reviewed Defence’s framework for administering training to new recruits about its required behaviours across the 3 ADF services (Army, Navy and Air Force). We formed the view that the training appropriately reflected Defence’s policies and procedures on required behaviours, and the framework to administer training was sound. While the findings in our report were positive overall, we made 5 recommendations intended to support Defence to strengthen its assurance that the training is effective in addressing issues related to unacceptable behaviour.

Defence’s response to the report accepted all 5 recommendations, and the Office will monitor Defence’s ongoing work to implement the recommendations.

Postal Industry Ombudsman

Complaint function

The function of the Postal Industry Ombudsman (PIO) is to investigate complaints about postal and similar services provided by Australia Post and private postal operators. Australia Post is the only mandatory member of the PIO scheme. Private operators join voluntarily.

The current registered private operators are StarTrack, Cheque-Mates and D and D Mailing Services. FedEx Australia (Federal Express Australia) was registered until 31 March 2021.

Complaint overview

During 2020–21, we received 3,656 postal industry complaints, which represented an increase of 15 per cent compared to 3,185 complaints in 2019–20. The increase in complaints may be attributed to the effects of COVID-19 on postal services.

During 2020–21, we started 72 investigations. Eleven investigations were still ongoing at 30 June 2021 and will be finalised in 2021–22.

We did not complete any own motion investigations.

We did not issue any s 9 notices (under the Ombudsman Act) to require information from a postal operator.

More information can be found in our quarterly updates.

Overseas Students Ombudsman

Complaint function

The Office investigates complaints from prospective, current and former international students about private education providers.

We have 3 main functions in our Overseas Students Ombudsman (OSO) role. These functions are to:

  1. assess and investigate complaints about actions taken by private registered education providers in connection with student visa holders
  2. give private registered providers advice and training about best practice complaint handling for international student complaints
  3. report on trends and systemic issues arising from our complaint investigations.

During 2020–21, we did not complete any own motion investigations.

We did not use our s 9 powers under the Ombudsman Act to obtain information or documents in 2020–21.

Complaint overview

In 2020–21, we received 1,079 complaints and finalised 1,096. This is a 29 per cent decrease in complaints received compared to the 1,526 received in 2019–20. The decrease in complaints received reflects the decrease in international students studying in Australia due to border closures arising from COVID-19.

Quarterly updates are published for the OSO function, which provides detailed data and analysis of complaints. These updates can be found on our Publications webpage at ombudsman.gov.au

Investigation outcomes

During 2020–21, we started 253 investigations and finalised 271 investigations that included 321 issues.12 Table 5 details our views on whether providers met their responsibilities based on investigations finalised during the period.

TABLE 5: VIEWS ON PROVIDERS MEETING RESPONSIBILITIES IN COMPLAINTS FINALISED IN 2020–21

View

Total issues

%

Provider substantially met responsibilities

158

49

Provider did not substantially meet responsibilities

121

38

No view (see below)

42

13

In 13 per cent of investigations finalised, we did not form a view about whether the provider had substantially met their responsibilities towards students. This can be for one or more of the following reasons:

12 A single complaint can have more than one issue, which is why there are more issues than investigations.

Complaint issues

Written agreements (as they relate to fees and refunds) continued to be the most common issue in complaints we receive from overseas students (42 per cent of all complaint issues). In 2020–21, many refund disputes arose due to students wanting to cease study when face-to-face classes shifted to online delivery because of COVID-19 restrictions. Many of these students sought a refund of their unspent tuition fees.

We received complaints from international students about the actions or decisions of their providers in response to COVID-19. Students were affected by changes to their mode of study, financial hardship and international border closures. Many students reported other challenges because of COVID-19, including isolation, mental health issues, lack of support services and concerns about the validity of visas.

Students complaining about COVID-19-related issues sought outcomes including refunds of pre-paid fees, deferral or suspension of studies, reduction in fees, transfer to another provider and academic allowances due to remote learning and assessment.

Transfers between providers (16 per cent) and progress, attendance and course duration (8 per cent) and deferring, suspending or cancelling enrolment (8 per cent) were the next most common complaint issues.

FIGURE 9: ISSUES RAISED IN FINALISED COMPLAINTS

Complaints by education sector

The Vocational Education and Training (VET) sector continues to receive the most complaints; however, it also has the highest number of organisations that fall under our jurisdiction.

FIGURE 10: COMPLAINTS BY EDUCATION SECTOR

Stakeholder engagement

Due to COVID-19 and associated restrictions, face-to-face stakeholder engagement could not occur during 2020–21. We continued to meet virtually with industry stakeholders, including regular liaison meetings with the Department of Home Affairs, the Department of Education, Skills and Employment (DESE), the Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA), and the Tuition Protection Service to ensure we have oversight of emerging issues across the sector. We also continued to raise awareness of the role of the OSO through activities such as presentations at ASQA’s Sector Insights series and to ISANA International Education Association Inc.

As well as publishing quarterly updates and newsletters, we produced guidance material and publications for providers. This included factsheets on ‘how to deliver an effective apology’ and ‘implementing our views’. Further information, including a copy of these materials, is available on our Brochures and factsheets webpage at ombudsman.gov.au

Reports to the regulators

Under s 35A of the Ombudsman Act, we may disclose information of concern about a provider’s actions to the relevant government regulator if in the public interest. In 2020–21, we made 4 disclosures to ASQA and the Tuition Protection Service about 3 providers. We made 3 disclosures because the providers refused to refund unspent tuition fees after changing the mode of study without the student’s agreement. We made the other disclosure because the provider refused to refund the student’s course fees despite our view that an invalid written agreement meant the student was entitled to a refund.

Private Health Insurance Ombudsman

Complaint function

The role of the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman (PHIO) is to protect the interests of consumers in relation to private health insurance and to resolve complaints about private health insurance matters across the health system. We report and provide advice to industry and government about these issues.

Complaints overview

In 2020–21, we received 3,496 complaints. This represented a 5.7 per cent decrease in complaints received compared to 2019–20 when we received 3,706 complaints. We finalised 3,503 complaints.

In 2020–21, 78 per cent of complaints were finalised as ‘assisted referrals’. In these cases, we refer a complaint directly to a nominated representative of the insurer or service provider on behalf of the complainant. Our assisted referral process generally ensures a quicker resolution of the complaint but also assures the complainant to return to the Office if they are still dissatisfied with the insurer’s response.

Seven per cent of complaints were finalised through a 'standard referral' – that is, the complainant received advice from our Office and then lodged their complaint directly with the appropriate body themselves.

Approximately 4 per cent of complaints were classified as 'grievances'. These complaints were finalised by considering the issue and providing more information or a clearer explanation directly to the complainant, without the need to contact or seek additional information from the health insurer or health care provider.

Approximately 8 per cent of complaints were classified as 'disputes' – a decrease from 11 per cent compared to 2019–20. In these cases, we request a detailed report from the health insurer or other subject of the complaint (such as a hospital, broker or other healthcare practitioner). We review this report to decide whether the initial response was satisfactory or if further investigation is warranted.

Of disputes handled by our Office, 87 per cent were resolved by giving a more detailed explanation to the complainant, 5 per cent were resolved by a payment and 8 per cent by another satisfactory outcome, for example, backdating a change to a policy.

No complaints were referred to another body under s 20L of the Ombudsman Act in 2020–21.

No inspections or audits were conducted under s 20SA of the Ombudsman Act in 2020–21.

No investigations were conducted under s 20T of the Ombudsman Act in 2020–21.

VET Student Loans Ombudsman

Complaint function

The Office investigates complaints from students about Vocational Education and Training (VET) providers authorised to receive funding under Australian Government loan schemes. We also deliver best practice complaint-handling advice and training to VET loan scheme providers to help improve their ability to manage complaints, resulting in better outcomes for students and providers.

If required, we have powers to compel VET loan scheme providers to attend meetings. We can also make disclosures to other Australian Government agencies in relation to systemic issues in provider practices uncovered through our investigations.

VET FEE-HELP Student Redress Measures

We continued to assess complaints about the VET FEE-HELP program under the VET FEE-HELP Student Redress Measures (SRM), which started in January 2019. Under the SRM, we can recommend to re-credit a VET FEE-HELP debt where we find it is reasonably likely the provider engaged in inappropriate conduct towards the student. The Office assesses complaints and makes a recommendation to the Secretary of the DESE, who decides to either re-credit or not re-credit the debt, in full or in part.

We also continued to work with DESE to identify groups of students who are reasonably likely to be subjected to inappropriate conduct by a provider so those students’ debts can be considered for re-credit through Secretary Initiated Actions (SIAs) without the need for a complaint to have been lodged with us.

The SRM had an initial end date of 31 December 2020 but was extended to 31 December 2022. For applications made after 31 December 2020, complainants need to have exceptional circumstances for not approaching the Office earlier in order to have their complaint considered.

During 2020–21, we made 3,021 recommendations to DESE to remove a VET FEE-HELP debt – comprising 14,597 units of study with a total value of $45.0 million, including $37.6 million in tuition fees and $7.5 million in loan fees. In addition, we continued to assist DESE in preparing several SIAs and finalised 1,369 complaints following DESE’s removal of student debts under these SIAs. SIAs have resulted in more than $2.1 billion dollars being re-credited to students up to 30 June 2021.

During 2020–21, we revisited previously closed VET FEE-HELP complaints to determine if those debts were eligible for consideration under the SRM. We identified 172 potentially eligible complaints and re-opened them for assessment under the SRM.

At 30 June 2021, 1,314 open complaints required assessment under the SRM by our Office.

VET FEE-HELP outreach activities

The Office is particularly conscious of the effects that inappropriate VET FEE-HELP debts have on people residing in remote communities. We are looking at innovative ways to ensure these Australians can access our services to have their case for re-credit considered before the SRM expires on 31 December 2022. This effort is intended to address circumstances where disadvantaged Australians, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, are unaware of the debt, unable to recall details of their enrolment in any training course or cannot be located or contacted by our Office and the community groups we work with. Our approach includes:

Specific outreach activity carried out by the Office included:

Complaints relating to VET FEE-HELP assistance

During 2020–21, we received 4,186 complaints and finalised 5,575 complaints from students disputing a VET FEE-HELP debt or raising other issues with their VET FEE-HELP provider. This compares to 8,140 complaints received and 11,733 complaints finalised in 2019–20.

Loan amounts, lack of enrolment information or misleading or inaccurate enrolment information were the most common complaints raised, accounting for 47 per cent of complaints received in 2020–21.

The significant reduction in the number of finalised complaints in 2020–21 was due to our Office starting to process a larger proportion of complaints in relation to open (available) providers. Compared to the assessment of complaints regarding closed (unavailable) providers, this commonly involves assessing more correspondence, greater analysis of competing information and the requirement to allow procedural fairness to providers (an opportunity to respond to our views).

Complaints relating to the VET Student Loans program

During 2020–21, we received 222 complaints and finalised 241 complaints relating to the VET Student Loans program. This compares to 223 complaints received and 243 complaints finalised in 2019–20.

During 2020–21, the most common issues raised in complaints about the VET Student Loans program relate to loan amount disputes and post-census date re-credits. The Office commenced 13 VET Student Loan complaint investigations and finalised 12. As of 30 June 2021, 2 investigations were still ongoing.

A significant proportion of complaints about the program (45 per cent) were finalised by referral to the provider for the complainant to go through the provider’s internal complaint process.

We did not commence any own motion investigations under s 20ZO(b) of the Ombudsman Act

We did not use our s 9 powers under the Ombudsman Act to obtain information or documents in 2020–21.

VET Student Loans Code of Practice

During 2020–21, we created a VET Student Loans Code of Practice (the Code) under section 20ZM(1)(c) of the Ombudsman Act. We engaged with government agencies, VET Student Loans approved providers, peak provider bodies and students to inform the development of the Code. The Code is voluntary and was designed around issues we identified in complaints about VET Student Loans and education providers. The Code will be reviewed 18 months from its publication to ensure it remains relevant.

Stakeholder engagement

In 2020–21, we engaged with government agencies and the community to increase awareness of the VET FEE-HELP SRM. The focus was to establish and develop relationships with the agencies that interact with people who have a VET FEE-HELP debt and who wish to dispute the debt. We continue to work with DESE, Services Australia, the Australian Taxation Office, ASQA, TAFE Directors Australia and the Independent Tertiary Education Council Australia (ITECA).

One area of our engagement with DESE was to negotiate a pathway to progress VET Student Loans complaints about education providers that had closed. We now have arrangements in place to refer these complaints to the Secretary of DESE to consider whether to re-credit debts associated with these loans.

In 2020–21, we participated in the:

Quarterly updates

We publish quarterly updates for the VET Student Loans Ombudsman function, which provide detailed data and analysis of complaints and issues handled by our Office. These updates are published on our Publications webpage at ombudsman.gov.au

Skip to main content
    0 results available.
      0 results available.
      language assistant menu topper outer language assistant menu topper inner

      Read documents in your language

      If you need more translations, please contact us via: 1300 362 072 or ombudsman@ombudsman.gov.au

      Part 5: Specific Ombudsman roles and annual reports

      Part 5: Specific Ombudsman roles and annual reports

      Introduction

      The Ombudsman Act 1976 (the Ombudsman Act) designates 5 specific Ombudsman roles to be performed by the Commonwealth Ombudsman. The Ombudsman Act requires an annual report on each role as per Table 4. We report publicly on each of the functions throughout the year, and these reports – combined with the below – constitutes the annual report.

      TABLE 4: ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE OMBUDSMAN ACT

      Title

      Requirement

      Defence Force Ombudsman

      s 19FA(1) of the Ombudsman Act

      Postal Industry Ombudsman

      s 19X(1) of the Ombudsman Act

      Overseas Students Ombudsman

      s 19ZS(1) of the Ombudsman Act

      Private Health Insurance Ombudsman

      s 20ZG(1) of the Ombudsman Act

      VET Student Loans Ombudsman

      s 20ZX(1) of the Ombudsman Act

      Defence Force Ombudsman

      Our role as the Defence Force Ombudsman (DFO) involves 2 main enduring functions. We provide an independent complaints mechanism for serving and former members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF). Since 2016, we can receive reports of serious abuse from serving and former members of the ADF who feel they are unable to access the ADF's internal mechanisms.

      For those reports of serious abuse accepted to be in jurisdiction, we can recommend to Defence that it make a reparation payment under the Defence Reparation Scheme. While this scheme was due to end on 30 June 2021, the Australian Government has extended the scheme by a further 12 months to 30 June 2022. This also includes an option for us to consider reports of serious abuse after 30 June 2022, provided an intention to report is submitted to our Office in writing before 30 June 2022, with the report to be submitted by 30 June 2023.

      Complaints function

      As the DFO, we receive and investigate complaints about administrative action taken by Defence agencies, including the 3 services (Navy, Army and Air Force), the Department of Defence (Defence) and Defence Housing Australia (DHA). We also receive and investigate complaints about the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA).

      Complaints overview

      In 2020–21, we received 343 complaints about Defence agencies and finalised 328, an increase of 3 per cent11 compared to complaints received in 2019–20. Complaints about Defence agencies raised issues such as:

      • discharge
      • unacceptable behaviour
      • allegations of abuse or improper conduct by ADF members.

      During 2020–21, we received 155 complaints about DVA and finalised 141. This was an increase of 34 per cent compared to complaints received in 2019–20. Complaints about DVA included issues such as:

      • disability pension/compensation
      • service delivery
      • health care and medical services
      • financial remedies.

      11 The number of entities reported against has increased due to a change in reporting practices. The Defence agencies about which we received complaints included in this count are the Australian Air Force Cadets, Royal Australian Air Force, Australian Army, Australian Signals Directorate, Department of Defence, Defence Housing Australia, Defence Honours and Awards Tribunal, Inspector-General Australian Defence Force and Royal Australian Navy.

      Abuse in Defence reporting function

      Since 1 December 2016, the Ombudsman can receive reports of contemporary and historical abuse in Defence. This provides an independent and confidential mechanism to report abuse for those who feel unable to access Defence's internal mechanisms.

      Our delivery of this function is based on trauma-informed principles and includes:

      • a dedicated liaison officer to communicate with each person who reports abuse to the DFO from the beginning to the end of the process
      • facilitated referrals for counselling for reportees
      • assessment of each report of abuse to determine whether serious abuse is reasonably likely to have happened
      • recommendations to Defence for reparation payments for the most serious forms of abuse and abuse involving unlawful interference, accompanied by some element of indecency
      • delivery of our Restorative Engagement Program for former and serving members of Defence who experienced serious abuse.

      Most reports of abuse made to our Office relate to conduct and behaviour that occurred many years ago. Of the total 2,554 reports received, 5 per cent of reports relate to abuse alleged to have occurred after 30 June 2014.

      From 1 December 2016 to 30 June 2021, there were 2,554 reports of abuse received by the Office. Of these reports, 1,402 were found to be in jurisdiction, and 244 were outside the jurisdiction of our Office. Nine hundred and eight reports are still being assessed by our Office.

      In 2020–21, we received 953 reports of abuse compared to 500 in 2019–20 (see Figure 7). The growth in reports of abuse may be in part due to increased knowledge of the scheme, the anticipated end of the scheme in June 2021 (now extended) and a campaign advertising the extension of the scheme.

      FIGURE 7: 2020–21 REPORTS OF ABUSE RECEIVED

      Figure 8 shows the most reported locations for reports assessed as in jurisdiction. As in previous years, the trend has continued with the same top 4 locations for reports of abuse, but with other locations featuring in the top 10 for the first time or changing position. This is due to the increase in reports received in 2020 about alleged abuse occurring in the 2000s at several Army locations and Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Base Amberley.

      FIGURE 8: MOST REPORTED LOCATIONS

      Reportees are assigned a single liaison officer where possible. Liaison officers have the training, skills and experience to communicate with people who have experienced trauma and find the reporting abuse process difficult. Liaison officers work closely with the reportees to establish rapport and encourage trust.

      Reports of abuse are assessed under the Ombudsman Regulations 2017 (the Regulations). If a report is not accepted or the reportee does not agree with the reparation payment decision, they can request a review of the decision.

      Reparation payments

      For the most serious forms of abuse and/or sexual assault, the Ombudsman may recommend Defence make a reparation payment. There are 2 possible payments we may recommend:

      • a payment of up to $45,000 to acknowledge the most serious forms of abuse
      • a payment of up to $20,000 to acknowledge other abuse involving unlawful interference, accompanied by some element of indecency.

      If the DFO recommends one of these payments, an additional payment of $5,000 may also be recommended where the DFO is satisfied that Defence did not respond appropriately to the report of abuse. Not all reports of abuse meet the parameters set out in the framework for a payment.

      Since the start of the Defence Reparation Scheme, the Office has sent 1,127 reparation payment recommendations to Defence. As at 30 June 2021, Defence had considered and accepted 1,006 recommendations, totalling approximately $42 million. As at 30 June 2021, 105 recommendations are awaiting Defence consideration.

      Restorative Engagement Program

      The first objective of the Restorative Engagement Program is to support a person who has made a report of abuse to tell their story to a senior representative from Defence in a private, facilitated meeting called a Restorative Engagement Conference. The conference provides the opportunity for Defence to acknowledge and respond to an individual's personal account of abuse.

      The second objective of the program is to enable a broader level of insight into the effects of abuse and its implications for Defence – which is critical to informing and building cultural change.

      This year, the Restorative Engagement Program was affected by COVID-19 restrictions limiting the number of conferences conducted in person. The Office convened individual Restorative Engagement Conferences for 59 people who experienced serious abuse while a member of the ADF. Since the program started, a total of 168 conferences have been held.

      Participation in the program is a choice made by reportees. Feedback from reportees demonstrates they are motivated to participate in a conference to:

      • achieve healing in some way
      • receive an apology
      • contribute to preventing future abuse in Defence
      • contribute to cultural change
      • have their story of abuse meaningfully acknowledged by Defence
      • to reconnect with Defence.

      The majority of reportees strongly agreed that Defence meaningfully acknowledged their story of abuse, strongly agreed the Defence representative was accountable for the abuse and expressed strong disapproval for what happened.

      Written feedback from participating Defence representatives also told us that participating in the Restorative Conference will help them to better understand and respond to individuals reporting abuse in the future. The majority said the experience affirmed their resolve to implement cultural change to eliminate abuse and positively affect their role as a Senior Officer in Defence.

      Defence inquiries and reports

      In addition to receiving reports of abuse from ADF members, the Office conducts periodic inquiries into Defence policy and procedures relating to complaints of abuse.

      In July 2020, we published a report titled Inquiry into behaviour training for recruits, which reviewed Defence’s framework for administering training to new recruits about its required behaviours across the 3 ADF services (Army, Navy and Air Force). We formed the view that the training appropriately reflected Defence’s policies and procedures on required behaviours, and the framework to administer training was sound. While the findings in our report were positive overall, we made 5 recommendations intended to support Defence to strengthen its assurance that the training is effective in addressing issues related to unacceptable behaviour.

      Defence’s response to the report accepted all 5 recommendations, and the Office will monitor Defence’s ongoing work to implement the recommendations.

      Postal Industry Ombudsman

      Complaint function

      The function of the Postal Industry Ombudsman (PIO) is to investigate complaints about postal and similar services provided by Australia Post and private postal operators. Australia Post is the only mandatory member of the PIO scheme. Private operators join voluntarily.

      The current registered private operators are StarTrack, Cheque-Mates and D and D Mailing Services. FedEx Australia (Federal Express Australia) was registered until 31 March 2021.

      Complaint overview

      During 2020–21, we received 3,656 postal industry complaints, which represented an increase of 15 per cent compared to 3,185 complaints in 2019–20. The increase in complaints may be attributed to the effects of COVID-19 on postal services.

      During 2020–21, we started 72 investigations. Eleven investigations were still ongoing at 30 June 2021 and will be finalised in 2021–22.

      We did not complete any own motion investigations.

      We did not issue any s 9 notices (under the Ombudsman Act) to require information from a postal operator.

      More information can be found in our quarterly updates.

      Overseas Students Ombudsman

      Complaint function

      The Office investigates complaints from prospective, current and former international students about private education providers.

      We have 3 main functions in our Overseas Students Ombudsman (OSO) role. These functions are to:

      1. assess and investigate complaints about actions taken by private registered education providers in connection with student visa holders
      2. give private registered providers advice and training about best practice complaint handling for international student complaints
      3. report on trends and systemic issues arising from our complaint investigations.

      During 2020–21, we did not complete any own motion investigations.

      We did not use our s 9 powers under the Ombudsman Act to obtain information or documents in 2020–21.

      Complaint overview

      In 2020–21, we received 1,079 complaints and finalised 1,096. This is a 29 per cent decrease in complaints received compared to the 1,526 received in 2019–20. The decrease in complaints received reflects the decrease in international students studying in Australia due to border closures arising from COVID-19.

      Quarterly updates are published for the OSO function, which provides detailed data and analysis of complaints. These updates can be found on our Publications webpage at ombudsman.gov.au

      Investigation outcomes

      During 2020–21, we started 253 investigations and finalised 271 investigations that included 321 issues.12 Table 5 details our views on whether providers met their responsibilities based on investigations finalised during the period.

      TABLE 5: VIEWS ON PROVIDERS MEETING RESPONSIBILITIES IN COMPLAINTS FINALISED IN 2020–21

      View

      Total issues

      %

      Provider substantially met responsibilities

      158

      49

      Provider did not substantially meet responsibilities

      121

      38

      No view (see below)

      42

      13

      In 13 per cent of investigations finalised, we did not form a view about whether the provider had substantially met their responsibilities towards students. This can be for one or more of the following reasons:

      • The issue was not investigated, even though other issues complained about were investigated.
      • The issue was resolved between the student and provider during the investigation.
      • The investigation of that issue stopped before a determination could be made, for example, because the complainant withdrew their complaint or the issue was transferred to another complaint-handling body that specialises in handling complaints on that issue.

      12 A single complaint can have more than one issue, which is why there are more issues than investigations.

      Complaint issues

      Written agreements (as they relate to fees and refunds) continued to be the most common issue in complaints we receive from overseas students (42 per cent of all complaint issues). In 2020–21, many refund disputes arose due to students wanting to cease study when face-to-face classes shifted to online delivery because of COVID-19 restrictions. Many of these students sought a refund of their unspent tuition fees.

      We received complaints from international students about the actions or decisions of their providers in response to COVID-19. Students were affected by changes to their mode of study, financial hardship and international border closures. Many students reported other challenges because of COVID-19, including isolation, mental health issues, lack of support services and concerns about the validity of visas.

      Students complaining about COVID-19-related issues sought outcomes including refunds of pre-paid fees, deferral or suspension of studies, reduction in fees, transfer to another provider and academic allowances due to remote learning and assessment.

      Transfers between providers (16 per cent) and progress, attendance and course duration (8 per cent) and deferring, suspending or cancelling enrolment (8 per cent) were the next most common complaint issues.

      FIGURE 9: ISSUES RAISED IN FINALISED COMPLAINTS

      Complaints by education sector

      The Vocational Education and Training (VET) sector continues to receive the most complaints; however, it also has the highest number of organisations that fall under our jurisdiction.

      FIGURE 10: COMPLAINTS BY EDUCATION SECTOR

      Stakeholder engagement

      Due to COVID-19 and associated restrictions, face-to-face stakeholder engagement could not occur during 2020–21. We continued to meet virtually with industry stakeholders, including regular liaison meetings with the Department of Home Affairs, the Department of Education, Skills and Employment (DESE), the Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA), and the Tuition Protection Service to ensure we have oversight of emerging issues across the sector. We also continued to raise awareness of the role of the OSO through activities such as presentations at ASQA’s Sector Insights series and to ISANA International Education Association Inc.

      As well as publishing quarterly updates and newsletters, we produced guidance material and publications for providers. This included factsheets on ‘how to deliver an effective apology’ and ‘implementing our views’. Further information, including a copy of these materials, is available on our Brochures and factsheets webpage at ombudsman.gov.au

      Reports to the regulators

      Under s 35A of the Ombudsman Act, we may disclose information of concern about a provider’s actions to the relevant government regulator if in the public interest. In 2020–21, we made 4 disclosures to ASQA and the Tuition Protection Service about 3 providers. We made 3 disclosures because the providers refused to refund unspent tuition fees after changing the mode of study without the student’s agreement. We made the other disclosure because the provider refused to refund the student’s course fees despite our view that an invalid written agreement meant the student was entitled to a refund.

      Private Health Insurance Ombudsman

      Complaint function

      The role of the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman (PHIO) is to protect the interests of consumers in relation to private health insurance and to resolve complaints about private health insurance matters across the health system. We report and provide advice to industry and government about these issues.

      Complaints overview

      In 2020–21, we received 3,496 complaints. This represented a 5.7 per cent decrease in complaints received compared to 2019–20 when we received 3,706 complaints. We finalised 3,503 complaints.

      In 2020–21, 78 per cent of complaints were finalised as ‘assisted referrals’. In these cases, we refer a complaint directly to a nominated representative of the insurer or service provider on behalf of the complainant. Our assisted referral process generally ensures a quicker resolution of the complaint but also assures the complainant to return to the Office if they are still dissatisfied with the insurer’s response.

      Seven per cent of complaints were finalised through a 'standard referral' – that is, the complainant received advice from our Office and then lodged their complaint directly with the appropriate body themselves.

      Approximately 4 per cent of complaints were classified as 'grievances'. These complaints were finalised by considering the issue and providing more information or a clearer explanation directly to the complainant, without the need to contact or seek additional information from the health insurer or health care provider.

      Approximately 8 per cent of complaints were classified as 'disputes' – a decrease from 11 per cent compared to 2019–20. In these cases, we request a detailed report from the health insurer or other subject of the complaint (such as a hospital, broker or other healthcare practitioner). We review this report to decide whether the initial response was satisfactory or if further investigation is warranted.

      Of disputes handled by our Office, 87 per cent were resolved by giving a more detailed explanation to the complainant, 5 per cent were resolved by a payment and 8 per cent by another satisfactory outcome, for example, backdating a change to a policy.

      No complaints were referred to another body under s 20L of the Ombudsman Act in 2020–21.

      No inspections or audits were conducted under s 20SA of the Ombudsman Act in 2020–21.

      No investigations were conducted under s 20T of the Ombudsman Act in 2020–21.

      VET Student Loans Ombudsman

      Complaint function

      The Office investigates complaints from students about Vocational Education and Training (VET) providers authorised to receive funding under Australian Government loan schemes. We also deliver best practice complaint-handling advice and training to VET loan scheme providers to help improve their ability to manage complaints, resulting in better outcomes for students and providers.

      If required, we have powers to compel VET loan scheme providers to attend meetings. We can also make disclosures to other Australian Government agencies in relation to systemic issues in provider practices uncovered through our investigations.

      VET FEE-HELP Student Redress Measures

      We continued to assess complaints about the VET FEE-HELP program under the VET FEE-HELP Student Redress Measures (SRM), which started in January 2019. Under the SRM, we can recommend to re-credit a VET FEE-HELP debt where we find it is reasonably likely the provider engaged in inappropriate conduct towards the student. The Office assesses complaints and makes a recommendation to the Secretary of the DESE, who decides to either re-credit or not re-credit the debt, in full or in part.

      We also continued to work with DESE to identify groups of students who are reasonably likely to be subjected to inappropriate conduct by a provider so those students’ debts can be considered for re-credit through Secretary Initiated Actions (SIAs) without the need for a complaint to have been lodged with us.

      The SRM had an initial end date of 31 December 2020 but was extended to 31 December 2022. For applications made after 31 December 2020, complainants need to have exceptional circumstances for not approaching the Office earlier in order to have their complaint considered.

      During 2020–21, we made 3,021 recommendations to DESE to remove a VET FEE-HELP debt – comprising 14,597 units of study with a total value of $45.0 million, including $37.6 million in tuition fees and $7.5 million in loan fees. In addition, we continued to assist DESE in preparing several SIAs and finalised 1,369 complaints following DESE’s removal of student debts under these SIAs. SIAs have resulted in more than $2.1 billion dollars being re-credited to students up to 30 June 2021.

      During 2020–21, we revisited previously closed VET FEE-HELP complaints to determine if those debts were eligible for consideration under the SRM. We identified 172 potentially eligible complaints and re-opened them for assessment under the SRM.

      At 30 June 2021, 1,314 open complaints required assessment under the SRM by our Office.

      VET FEE-HELP outreach activities

      The Office is particularly conscious of the effects that inappropriate VET FEE-HELP debts have on people residing in remote communities. We are looking at innovative ways to ensure these Australians can access our services to have their case for re-credit considered before the SRM expires on 31 December 2022. This effort is intended to address circumstances where disadvantaged Australians, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, are unaware of the debt, unable to recall details of their enrolment in any training course or cannot be located or contacted by our Office and the community groups we work with. Our approach includes:

      • identifying townships where the population was targeted, incurred debts and received no educational or training benefit and gathering evidence to support SIAs from those towns without the need for individual assessment
      • engaging experts in social media to target our digital messaging at sections of the community that are more difficult to reach through traditional outreach to alert them to the issue of student debt and how we can help
      • working with local community organisations in disadvantaged communities to streamline our application and assessment practices to ease access if possible
      • conducting targeted outreach in remote locations to build on our evidence base to help eligible vulnerable citizens be re-credited.

      Specific outreach activity carried out by the Office included:

      • exhibiting at the Financial Counselling Australia National Conference in Darwin in May 2021
      • engaging with the Ombudsman Western Australia (WA) in a series of outreach activities in regional areas of WA to raise awareness of the issue of inappropriately raised VET FEE-HELP debt, including a videoconference in the Pilbara region in May 2021
      • running a digital media campaign with DESE to promote the SRM in June 2021.

      Complaints relating to VET FEE-HELP assistance

      During 2020–21, we received 4,186 complaints and finalised 5,575 complaints from students disputing a VET FEE-HELP debt or raising other issues with their VET FEE-HELP provider. This compares to 8,140 complaints received and 11,733 complaints finalised in 2019–20.

      Loan amounts, lack of enrolment information or misleading or inaccurate enrolment information were the most common complaints raised, accounting for 47 per cent of complaints received in 2020–21.

      The significant reduction in the number of finalised complaints in 2020–21 was due to our Office starting to process a larger proportion of complaints in relation to open (available) providers. Compared to the assessment of complaints regarding closed (unavailable) providers, this commonly involves assessing more correspondence, greater analysis of competing information and the requirement to allow procedural fairness to providers (an opportunity to respond to our views).

      Complaints relating to the VET Student Loans program

      During 2020–21, we received 222 complaints and finalised 241 complaints relating to the VET Student Loans program. This compares to 223 complaints received and 243 complaints finalised in 2019–20.

      During 2020–21, the most common issues raised in complaints about the VET Student Loans program relate to loan amount disputes and post-census date re-credits. The Office commenced 13 VET Student Loan complaint investigations and finalised 12. As of 30 June 2021, 2 investigations were still ongoing.

      A significant proportion of complaints about the program (45 per cent) were finalised by referral to the provider for the complainant to go through the provider’s internal complaint process.

      We did not commence any own motion investigations under s 20ZO(b) of the Ombudsman Act

      We did not use our s 9 powers under the Ombudsman Act to obtain information or documents in 2020–21.

      VET Student Loans Code of Practice

      During 2020–21, we created a VET Student Loans Code of Practice (the Code) under section 20ZM(1)(c) of the Ombudsman Act. We engaged with government agencies, VET Student Loans approved providers, peak provider bodies and students to inform the development of the Code. The Code is voluntary and was designed around issues we identified in complaints about VET Student Loans and education providers. The Code will be reviewed 18 months from its publication to ensure it remains relevant.

      Stakeholder engagement

      In 2020–21, we engaged with government agencies and the community to increase awareness of the VET FEE-HELP SRM. The focus was to establish and develop relationships with the agencies that interact with people who have a VET FEE-HELP debt and who wish to dispute the debt. We continue to work with DESE, Services Australia, the Australian Taxation Office, ASQA, TAFE Directors Australia and the Independent Tertiary Education Council Australia (ITECA).

      One area of our engagement with DESE was to negotiate a pathway to progress VET Student Loans complaints about education providers that had closed. We now have arrangements in place to refer these complaints to the Secretary of DESE to consider whether to re-credit debts associated with these loans.

      In 2020–21, we participated in the:

      • DESE VET Student Loans Provider Reference Group Meeting
      • ITECA VET Student Loans Provider Interest Group Meeting
      • ASQA Sector Insights series
      • Financial Counselling Australia National Conference.

      Quarterly updates

      We publish quarterly updates for the VET Student Loans Ombudsman function, which provide detailed data and analysis of complaints and issues handled by our Office. These updates are published on our Publications webpage at ombudsman.gov.au