Breach of CCO for Centrelink Fraud
Our client was facing a Breach of CCO for Centrelink Fraud due to non-compliance with one of the conditions of the CCO: failure to complete the required 200 work hours before the order expired. He originally received a Community Corrections Order in 2014, with 200 community work hours for charges relating to Obtaining a Financial Advantage By Deception from the Commonwealth (namely benefits on Newstart).
It was very important for the client that he be able to finish the work hours on the CCO. With a Breach of a Community Corrections Order, the client is at risk of being re-sentenced for the original offence that had caused him to receive the CCO.
Hester Kelly represented the client at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court.
For this case, it was crucial that the magistrate be made aware of the circumstances of our client that had led to the difficulties in being able to complete the required work hours.
We made submissions as to the client’s excellent employment history, work ethic, and his personal circumstances which eventually allowed the magistrate to gain an understanding of his situation. Our client was supported in court by his employer who also wrote an excellent reference. Ultimately, he was resentenced to a Community Correction Order with 150 work hours. A small fine was also imposed for the contravention of the CCO for Centrelink Fraud to be paid via instalments. The client was happy with this result and was glad to have been given another opportunity to complete the order.
Hester graduated with First Class Honours in Law in 2012 from Monash University, with a degree in Bachelor of Arts / Bachelor of Laws. She completed two internships at the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law and has volunteered with the HIV/Aids Legal Centre in Melbourne.
Visit this page to know more about Hester.
DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 01/03/2017