A family violence survivor had her child support payments unjustly revoked after a government agency acted on a claim by her ex-partner.
The woman known as Ms H tried to dispute the allegation but Services Australia failed to give her enough time to provide evidence, an ombudsman found.
"'In my opinion, actions undertaken were unreasonable, unjust, oppressive, and otherwise wrong in all the circumstances," Commonwealth Ombudsman Iain Anderson said.
The agency's officers treated her in inflammatory and judgemental ways while disregarding her circumstances, the ombudsman said in his report.
As a result, she was forced to go without child support payments for a year and pay an incorrectly raised debt.
Services Australia received information from Ms H's ex-partner that the two had reconciled their relationship for seven months before separating, and an officer called her on a Thursday to let her know that any evidence to the contrary would have to be sent through by close of business on Monday.
During this call, the officer asked leading questions, made comments that were "adversely judgemental" towards Ms H and disregarded her requests for assistance, all of which "raised concerns about the impartiality of child support service officers".
She asked for an extension the next day but was denied and on the Sunday - a day before Ms H's deadline - the child support agency decided the two had reconciled in accordance with the ex-partner's claims.
Two weeks later, the agency incorrectly advised her to go through a review process that involved an open exchange of information between the two parties.
Because of family violence and safety concerns, she withheld part of her evidence, and the agency denied her objection.
She eventually made a complaint to the ombudsman and applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to review the child support decision.
Months later, the tribunal decided Ms H and her ex-partner had not reconciled, and it took another two-and-a-half months before the agency's decision was corrected.
The former partner was working when the dispute first arose but by the time the record was set straight, his circumstances had changed and child support payments could no longer be collected from him.
Across this entire saga, the ombudsman found child support officers had failed to consider Ms H's circumstances, refer her to support services, document their decision and use the correct procedure to address the unfairness.
It also took an inflammatory approach that was not trauma-informed, and unnecessarily exposed her to debt collection and appeal processes.
The watchdog recommended Services Australia update its guidance and training, appropriately keep records, retrain service officers and potentially compensate Ms H.
The agency has accepted all recommendations, acknowledged its staff errors and committed to supporting victim-survivors.
Lifeline 13 11 14
Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578
