Preliminary Round – Fact Scenario 
Re Dursley and Secretary, Department of Social Services

Background
The Applicant is Ms Petrina Dursley, a 57 year old woman born in the United Kingdom. Ms Dursley became an Australian citizen in 2000 and now lives in Adelaide. She has previously worked in an administrative role in an office, but after experiencing violence in her first marriage, and the death of her only sister, she has increasingly experienced social isolation and withdrawal and been unemployed for several years. The Applicant now lives alone, and has one son who lives in Perth. She relies on Newstart Allowance payments to cover her daily expenses.

On 1 November 2014, the Applicant sold her house for $540,000, and moved into a rental property, before purchasing a new home on 2 December 2015. In the interim, the Applicant received interest on the proceeds from the sale of her house through a term deposit. She used this interest to contribute towards her purchase of the new home.

The Applicant was granted Newstart Allowance on 1 March 2008, and her eligibility for Newstart between 1 March 2008 and 1 November 2014 is not in dispute.

Centrelink issued notices to the applicant regarding her payments for Newstart Allowance on 29 October 2014, 26 November 2014, 21 January 2015, 18 February 2015, 12 March 2015, 28 May 2015, 10 June 2015, 11 August 2015, 2 September 2015, 29 October 2015 and 25 November 2015. Each of these notices reminded the applicant of her obligations to advise Centrelink within 14 days if her circumstances changed, including changes to her income, assets and investments.  These notices also showed the fortnightly income that was being used by the Department to assess her fortnightly payments of Newstart Allowance.

On 14 January 2016, Centrelink decided the Applicant was overpaid Newstart Allowance due to a failure to declare the interest earned on the proceeds of the sale of her house. 

It was therefore determined that, pursuant to s 1223 of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth), Ms Dursley owed a debt of $7,839 to the Commonwealth, which the Department has sought recovery. The Applicant subsequently sought internal review by a Centrelink Authorised Review Officer (ARO). 

The Decision Under Review
On 14 January 2016, Centrelink decided Ms Dursley owes a debt of $7,839 for overpayments for the period 1 November 2014 through to 2 December 2015.

A Centrelink authorised review officer reviewed the original decision and upheld the original decision. The Social Services and Child Support Division of the Tribunal affirmed the decision made by the Centrelink ARO. Ms Dursley applied for second-tier review by the General Division of the Tribunal on 2 January 2017.
The issues to be considered in this case are:

1.	Was the Applicant overpaid Newstart Allowance, and if so, is a debt owed for the period 1 November 2014 to 2 December 2015, and,

2.	Should the debt or any portion of it be written off (for a period) or waived?

Although the issues raised in this scenario are based on those found in real cases, all characters and other events referenced in this scenario are fictional.

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
GENERAL DIVISION
ADELAIDE REGISTRY

MATTER NO:	2017/ABCD

BETWEEN	PETRINA DURSLEY	
	APPLICANT	

AND:	
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
RESPONDENT	

INDEX TO T-DOCUMENTS
NO	PG	DATE	DESCRIPTION	
T1	2	02/01/2017	Application for Review of Decision	
T2	4	14/07/2016	Centrelink ARO decision	
T3	7	02/11/2016	AAT1 Decision	
T4	10	28/04/2017	Statement by the Applicant	
T5	11	15/12/2015	Term deposit closure notice	
T6	12	17/04/2017	Statement by Thomas Dursley	
T7	13	22/07/2016	Psychiatric assessment: Dr Angus Filch	
T8	14	03/04/2015	Newstart Allowance Notice	

T1

You can use this form to apply for an AAT second review of a decision made in the AAT’s Social Services & Child Support Division. Second reviews are conducted in the AAT’s General Division.
Please read the Guide to applying for review before completing this form. You must complete the fields and answer questions marked with an asterisk (*). 
SECTION 1   APPLICANT (Individual)	
Full name *	Mr     Mrs     Ms      Miss     Other:  	
	Family name: Petrina	
	Given name(s): Dursley	
	Female           Male  	       Unspecified  	Date of birth	23/1/1960	
	Are you of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin? 	Yes   	No   	
Street address *	1 King William Street, Adelaide	
		State:  SA	Postcode: 5000	
Postal address *
‘As above’ if also your street address	As above	
		State:  	Postcode:	
Email		
Telephone * / Fax	Landline: 08 8128 8000	Mobile: 	Fax: 	
Preferred method for receiving correspondence Please select one *	Email:  	Fax:  	Post:  	
				
Representative
If someone will represent you, please fill in these details	Name: To Be Confirmed	
	Organisation:	
	Postal address:	
		State:	Postcode:	
Email				
Telephone / Fax	Landline: (         )	Mobile:	Fax: (         )	
Preferred method for receiving correspondence 
Please select one	Email:  	Fax:  	Post:  	
	
Interpreter *	Do you need an interpreter?	Yes	
No		If yes, for which language or dialect?		

	Turn to page 2 	

Assistance	If you have a disability or other special need and would like some assistance, please indicate the type of disability/need and assistance you require:	
	Physical (e.g. wheelchair user)			
	Sensory (e.g. hearing or sight)			
	Other, please specify			

T1

SECTION 2   DECISION	

	
Date you received the decision of the AAT’s Social Services & Child Support Division *	6 November 2016	
	
Social Services & Child Support Division Review Number *	2016/WXYZ	

SECTION 3   REASONS FOR THE APPLICATION	
Why do you claim the decision is wrong? *	Please read the ‘Reasons you are making an application’ section in the Guide to applying for review before answering this question.	

The decision is wrong in fact and in law.

	
SIGNATURE 	
Signature	
PDursley	Date	2/1/2017	
* Mandatory field/question

T2

centrelink
Ms Petrina Dursley
1 King William Street
ADELAIDE SA 5000

14 July 2016

Dear Ms Dursley
Your Review Outcome
I am an Authorised Review Officer, an independent senior officer authorised to review decisions made by Centrelink. I have reviewed the decision made on 14 January 2016 to ask you to repay a Newstart Allowance debt of $7,839 for the period 1 November 2014 to 2 December 2015.
Explanation of Decision

In making this decision I have considered the facts and circumstances of your case and examined how the relevant legislation and policy applies to the facts.

You requested a review because you believe the debt was caused by the department’s error.

Issues
The main issues in this review are whether:
•	You have incurred a Newstart Allowance debt, and if so, if the amount of $7,839 is correct.
•	Recovery of all or any part of the debt should be waived, due to it being solely an administrative error or through special circumstances.

Law and Policy
I have applied the following:
•	Section 1068 of the Social Security Act 1991 (the Act). This sets out the rate calculator for Newstart Allowance.
•	
T2

Section 1076 of the Act says that if a person has financial assets, they are taken to receive ordinary income on those assets. To calculate the assessable income, the current legislated deeming rates are applied to the total value of the financial asset.
•	Section 1223 of the Act states that if a person is paid more than they are entitled to be paid, the excess payment is a debt to the Commonwealth. 
•	Section 1237A of the Act, which allows the recovery of a debt to be waived if the debt is solely attributable to an error by the Commonwealth, the person received the payment in good faith, and the debt is raised more than 6 weeks from the end of the notification period.
•	Section 1237AAD of the Act, which allows for recovery of a debt to be waived where there are special circumstances and the person has not knowingly made a false statement or failed to comply with provisions contained within Social Security Law.
•	Section 68 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999. This says that a person must advise the department of changes in their circumstances. Section 72 of the same Act says that a person must advise of these changes within 14 days.

To access the applied legislation, please go to www.comlaw.gov.au. Government policy referred to in this letter can be found at www.dss.gov.au/ 

Evidence
I have taken into account the following information:
•	Your Newstart Allowance payment records.
•	Letters from the department during the period, notifying you of what income was used to assess your fortnightly payments, and reminding you to advise the Department within 14 days of any changed circumstances, including to income, assets, and investments.
•	Copies of the reported statements the department sent to you.
•	The information provided to the department by you about your term deposit on 5 September 2015.
•	Debt and entitlement calculations provided by a subject matter expert.
•	The fact you did inform the department of the sale of your house and that you had received a cheque, but your subsequent failure to advise the department about your term deposit.
•	The fact your term deposit yielded you a total of $28,620 in interest.

T2

Findings of Fact
After careful consideration of the evidence, I have made these key findings:
•	You were informed of the obligation to inform Centrelink of any changes to your assessable income, including explicit references to term deposit interest income.
•	The debt creation provisions of the Act allow the department to recover excess payments even where they were received unintentionally or by mistake. A person does not have to deliberately set out to receive payments they were not entitled to.
•	Investigations show that your payments should have been reduced.
•	Based on your total income from financial investments, I have worked out you were paid $7,839 between 1 November 2015 to 2 December 2016, which should not have been paid to you. A debt of $7,839 is thus raised.
•	If a debt is caused solely by the department’s error, it may be waived. Here, you did not tell the department about your term deposit. This is not the department’s error, and so the debt cannot be waived on this ground.
•	A debt may also be waived whether there are special circumstances. While I have considered all of your circumstances, I have found they are not unusual, uncommon, or sufficiently exceptional enough to justify waiving your debt.
This means that I have decided you have a debt of $7,839 that must be repaid.

What to do if you think this decision is wrong
If you do not agree with this decision, you can apply for a review at the Social Services and Child Support division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

If you do not agree with the first AAT decision, you can apply to the AAT for a second review.

All of the above are free of charge.

There is no time limit if you are asking for a review about money you owe us, however, you may have to pay back the money while the decision is being considered.

Yours Sincerely,
CFudge
C. Fudge
Authorised Review Officer.

DECISION AND 
REASONS FOR DECISION

Administrative
Appeals Tribunal

Social Services & Child Support Division

REVIEW NUMBER 			2016/WXYZ
APPLICANT				Ms Petrina Dursley
OTHER PARTIES			Secretary
					Department of Human Services
TRIBUNAL 				R Weasle, Presiding Member
	
DECISION DATE: 2 November 2016			
DECISION POSTED: 6 November 2016		

DECISION

The Tribunal affirms the decision under review. 

RWeasle
R. Weasle
Presiding Member

REASONS FOR DECISION
BACKGROUND
1.	On 14 January 2016, the Department of Human Services (Centrelink), decided Ms Dursley had a Newstart Allowance debt of $7,839 for the period 1 November 2014 to 2 December 2015.
2.	On 20 January 2016, Ms Dursley asked Centrelink to review its decision.
3.	On 14 July 2016, a Centrelink authorised review officer reviewed the decision and affirmed it.
4.	On 5 August 2016, Ms Dursley lodged an application for a review of the decision with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal). On 2 November 2016, the tribunal conducted a hearing into this application. Ms Dursley attended the hearing and provided evidence. 

ISSUE
5.	The issues for the Tribunal to determine are:
a.	Was Ms Dursley overpaid Newstart Allowance for the period 1 November 2014 to 2 December 2015, and is the overpayment a debt? and,
b.	Should the debt or any portion of it be written off or waived?
APPLICATION OF THE LAW
6.	The law that applies in this case is contained in the Social Security Act 1991 (the Act).  Specifically, ss 1068, s 1076, s 1223, s 1237A, s 1237AAD. I have also considered s 68 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999.
7.	I have also examined the Guide to Social Security Law.

CONSIDERATION
Issue 1- Was the Applicant overpaid Newstart Allowance, and if so, is the overpayment a debt?
8.	A person’s entitlement to Newstart Allowance is calculated in accordance with the provisions set out in the Act. Section 643 of the Act provides that the rate of a person’s Newstart Allowance is worked out using the benefit rate calculator B at the end of section 1068 of the Act. The rate calculator takes into account a person’s family circumstances and includes whether a person is single or partnered. If a person is partnered the income, and, if relevant, the assets of the person and their partner are taken into account in calculating the rate of payment that is payable. If a person is single the person’s income and assets must be taken into account in calculating their rate of Newstart Allowance.
9.	It is not in dispute that Ms Dursley was overpaid Newstart Allowance. The reason for the overpayment was because Centrelink calculated Ms Dursley’s rate of payment without taking into account income she derived from a term deposit account commenced on 1 November 2014.
10.	I thus concur with the decisions made by the delegate and the Authorised Review Officer that a debt of $7,839 is raised, for the period 1 November 2014 through 2 December 2015. In its submissions, the Applicant has not disputed this period or the amount initially raised before the application of any waiver or writing off of said debt.

Issue 2- Can the debt or any part of the debt be written off or waived?
11.	Section 1236 of the Act provides that a debt can be written off (its collection deferred to a later date) if among other things the debtor has no capacity to repay the debt. Because Ms Dursley receives Newstart Allowance, s 1236(1C) of the Act requires the Tribunal to consider that she has the capacity to repay the debt, unless repayment via deductions from her Newstart Allowance will result in severe financial hardship.
12.	Ms Dursley has contended she has several immediate living needs, referring to a brokenoven,, and a need to hire a cleaner. I find none of these are sufficient to write off a portion of the debt for a period of time.
13.	Subsection 1237A(1) of the Act provides that the proportion of the debt that was incurred by a person because of sole Commonwealth error must be waived if the payments that led to the debt were received in good faith.
14.	Section 66A of the Administration Act obliges a recipient of a social security benefit to inform Centrelink within 14 days of changes in their circumstances which might affect their payment. 
15.	Given Ms Dursley did not inform Centrelink of the interest earned from her term deposit within the required period, I cannot find it was a sole Commonwealth error that led to the debt being incurred. 
16.	Section 1137AAD provides that if a person had not knowingly contributed to the creation of the debt by making false statements or failing to comply with the provisions of the relevant legislation then when there are special circumstances (other than financial hardship alone) that make it desirable to waive or write off a debt, the debt, or a portion of the debt, may be waived.
17.	Medical certificates described Ms Dursley as suffering from severe depression and social isolation. Her treating doctor has diagnosed her with depression and anxiety related disorders.
18.	The Respondent submitted that the Applicant misled Centrelink through a failure to inform it of her changed financial position, and made false statements to Centrelink. The Respondent has failed to support this claim with evidence, and so I cannot give any weight to this submission.
19.	It is not disputed that Ms Dursley is experiencing both financial and emotional difficulties however the Tribunal is not satisfied that these circumstances are so unique that it is appropriate to exercise the discretion. 
20.	I gave significant weight to the fact the Applicant owns property, and thus has assets which substantially exceed those of the average Centrelink recipient.
21.	For these reasons, the Tribunal must affirm the decision under review.
DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL
The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.  This means the appeal is not successful.
APPEAL RIGHTS
If you do not agree with this decision you may apply to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a review of this decision. 

RWeasle
R Weasle
Presiding Member
Statement by the Applicant

28/4/2017

To Whom It May Concern:

I have been on Centrelink payments for quite a few years now, and it is the only way I have been able to live.

Centrelink told me a couple of years ago that I owe them some money, which seems quite peculiar to a poor unemployed person. They say that the interest I earned on proceeds from selling my house puts me over what I should have been earning.

I rely on help from wherever I can get it: my son isn’t much help because he’s in Perth, and the only family I have in Adelaide are my parents who are in their 80s, and they struggle themselves, so I feel bad that I can’t help them too. They still do their best to help me, with money and they bring food for me sometimes. I need my day to be well planned and to have a routine though- otherwise I just get so stressed.

What’s happening to me now is just making things worse- I constantly feel like the Government’s bugging my house, they just seem to want to know everything about how much I’m earning, and what I do each day. So every day I get home I have to search the room and make sure I’m not being watched- it’s really got me scared. My son says I’m just being foolish, and says I’ve got nothing to worry about, but no matter how much I kind of feel like he’s right, I can’t stop myself from being constantly scared.

I get that I might have been overpaid a bit, but I can’t possibly afford the exorbitant amount that is being asked of me. I live in a modest flat, day to day, and there’s no way I can afford that much. At the moment I’m paying it off weekly, and recently I’ve had a huge phone bill come through last week thanks to a scam I accidentally got into, and my oven broke down a few months ago and I can’t afford to fix it. I also like to have a cleaner come in every now and then but that’s not happening at the moment either. The money I got from the interest just went towards buying my flat. Is it really so ridiculous that I use my money to buy a place to live? Someone I spoke to on the phone told me that maybe I should have moved further from the city and it would have saved me money. But I can’t do that- my parents live close to me here, and living in the city makes me feel better.

So far I’ve been paying off as much as I can afford to each week, but I just can’t see an end in sight, and it’s really getting to me. I’ve thought about getting work again, and I think I’ll try as soon as I feel well enough, but right now I just don’t feel like I can, so this debt is just staring me in the face every single day.

Yours sincerely,

Petrina Dursley.

myBank

15/12/2015

Dear Customer

Term Deposit closed account notice

Below are relevant details of your recently closed Term Deposit:

Term Deposit account number	09 1234 56789123	
Account name	PETRINA DURSLEY	
Investment balance at start of the reporting period 1 July 2014	$540,000.00	
Closing balance at 5 December 2015	$568,620.00	
Total interest paid for the financial year ending 30 June 2016	$28,620	
Federal Government Tax File Number/Australian Business Number Withholding Tax deducted from interest already paid for the financial year ending 30 June 2016	$0.00	
Federal Government Non Resident Withholding Tax deducted from interest already paid for the financial year ending 30 June 2016	$0.00	
Prepayment Interest Adjustment deducted for the Financial Year ending 30 June 2016	$0.00	
Prepayment Administration Fee deducted for the Financial Year ending 30 June 2016	$0.00	

17/4/2017 Statement by Thomas Dursley

To Whom It May Concern,

I write today in support of my mother, Petrina Dursley, in her application for review of a decision made by Centrelink to raise a debt against her.

My mother has been particularly sick for several years now. She has been clinically diagnosed with depression, and is always nervous talking to anyone other than myself and my grandparents. Due to my current work commitments I am unable to live in the same city as my mother, and so it becomes particularly difficult for her to get by emotionally and financially. The sheer amount of time this review has taken has also taken its toll on my mother’s mental health, and every phone call I have with her gets worse.

A couple of years ago my mother sold her old house and purchased an apartment in the city, so as to be closer to her parents and to be in the city, around a more exciting area. This seemed to help her at least initially, and the apartment is hardly exorbitant- she has all she needs, but certainly nothing more. To get a place in the city for $570,000 seemed a pretty good buy, so she could hardly turn it down. She is currently saving up for a trip to go overseas for a month or two, just to relax and hopefully get back on her feet, but with this debt owing I don’t see this as being possible.

Yours Sincerely,

Thomas Dursley.

Dr Angus Filch
MBBS FRANZCP
18 Franklin Street
Adelaide, SA 5000
       (08) 8128 8043

22 July 2016

To Whom It May Concern,

As you are aware, since June 2013 I have been treating Ms Petrina Dursley, a 56 year old female who presented with symptoms of Depression and Anxiety. I reviewed Ms Dursley last week and she asked if I could write to you about her condition and treatment in the future. 

On initial presentation, Ms Dursley reported mood swings and feelings of panic, fear and uneasiness. Her presentation was complicated by the overlay of the cognitive impairment and personality changes associated with a long history of familial issues. Ms Dursley has experienced substantial hardship, resulting predominantly from an abusive relationship with her first husband, and compounded more recently with the death of her only sister.

Ms Dursley has responded well to the Noradrenaline-Serotonin Specific Antidepressant (NaSSA) mirtazapine and is now stabilised on 15 milligrams orally daily at bedtime. You will be aware that NaSSAs are helpful in the face of depression with anxiety and sleep disorders. She has also completed a course of cognitive therapy with me in July 2014 and has told me she is attending yoga and relaxation classes on a weekly basis and using the relaxation tapes I gave her. 
Ms Dursley continues to report not going out regularly anymore, not being able to get things done at home, and being unable to concentrate and enjoy usual activities. Unfortunately, Ms Dursley lives alone, and has little family, and so recovery is made particularly difficult, as is the potential to return to work and earn an income. She has few close friends, and appears socially isolated and nervous in groups of people.

Yours Sincerely,
Dr Angus Filch.
MBBS FRANZCP

Lb 3 Regents Park DC NSW 2143

Reference:
600 000 000A

Mrs Petrina Dursley
1 The Avenue
Tea Tree Gulley

Your Newstart Allowance
Payment from 06/03/2016 - 19/03/2015 due on 20/03/2015	$598.37	
Payment from 20/03/2015 - 20/03/2015 due on 03/04/2015	$26.40	
Regular Payment from payment date 03/04/2015		
Newstart Allowance	$510.50	
Plus Clean Energy Supplement	+ $8.70	
Plus Pharmaceutical Allowance	+ $6.20	
Plus Rent Assistance	+ $84.27	
Total	$609.67	

Information used for calculating your regular payment
Total Fortnightly Income …………………………………………………………… $3.46

•	Important Information
•	Your medical certificate says you are currently unable to work. You do not have to look for work and are exempt from your Activity Test requirements from 15 January 2015 to 1 April 2015.

You must continue to lodge your Reporting Statement when it becomes due. We may review this decision if your circumstances change, or if we receive new information about your capacity to work or take part in suitable activities.

You can be paid Pharmaceutical Allowance during this time.

Contact information	
If you have any questions about this letter please ring
132 850 OR
13 1202 for Multilingual Services	Your local Centrelink Office
298-302 Main North Road
Prospect SA 5082	
Monday - Friday 8.30am - 5.00pm
(Please Quote Reference Number)	Office Hours
Monday to Friday 8.30am - 4.30pm	

2017 MOOT PRELIMINARY ROUND
BRIEF FOR THE APPLICANT

You are counsel for the Applicant, Ms Petrina Dursley.
On 14 January 2016, the Department of Human Services (Centrelink) made a decision to raise a debt of $7,839 to the Commonwealth. This decision was subsequently affirmed both by a Centrelink Authorised Review Officer, and by the Social Services and Child Support Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT).
As the decision is reviewable, the Applicant lodged a further appeal with the General Division of the AAT on 2 January 2017.
The relevant legislation in this area is the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth). 
The question before the Tribunal, therefore, is whether the Applicant owes a debt of $7,839 to the Commonwealth, and if so whether the debt should be written off or the right to recover the debt should be waived. 
The Applicant contends that the debt ought to be waived.
At the hearing, the Applicant gave oral evidence confirming the contents of her witness statement and the evidence provided in the T-documents. Each witness who provided a witness statement did the same.  
Your role, as counsel for Applicant, is to assist the Tribunal in coming to the correct or preferable decision.  
From the information provided, you must prepare and present arguments to the Tribunal as to why it should find in favour of the Applicant.  Your argument should be in the form of closing submissions.  You should cite any relevant provisions of the legislation, regulations and case law (if applicable) to support your argument.
For the purpose of the scenario, please note the following:
1.	There is no need to engage in quantitative calculations as to the amount of the debt raised. You may dispute the time period over which the debt is raised, but both parties accept that the Applicant was paid $7,839 between 1 November 2014 and 2 December 2015.

Although the issues raised in this scenario are based on those found in real cases, all characters and other events referenced in this scenario are fictional.

2017 MOOT PRELIMINARY ROUND
BRIEF FOR THE RESPONDENT

You are counsel for the Respondent, the Secretary, Department of Social Services.
On 14 January 2016, Centrelink made a decision to raise a debt of $7,839. This decision was subsequently affirmed both by a Centrelink Authorised Review Officer, and by the Social Services and Child Support Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT).
As the decision is reviewable, the Applicant lodged a further appeal with the AAT on 2 January 2017.
The relevant legislation in this area is the Social Security Act 1991.
The question before the Tribunal, therefore, is whether the Applicant owes a debt of $7,839 to the Commonwealth, and if so whether the debt should be written off or the right to recover the debt should be waived. 
The Respondent contends that the Applicant owes a debt of $7,839, and that the debt should not be written off or waived.
At the hearing, the Applicant gave oral evidence confirming the contents of her witness statement and the evidence provided in the T-documents.  Each witness who provided a witness statement did the same.  
Your role, as counsel for the Respondent is to assist the Tribunal in coming to the correct or preferable decision.
From the information provided, you must prepare and present arguments to the Tribunal as to why it should find in favour of the Respondent.  Your argument should be in the form of closing submissions.  You should cite any relevant provisions of the legislation, regulations and case law (if applicable) to support your argument.
For the purpose of the scenario, please note the following:
2.	There is no need to engage in quantitative calculations as to the amount of the debt raised. You may dispute the time period over which the debt is raised, but both parties accept that the Applicant was paid $7,839 between 1 November 2014 and 2 December 2015.

Although the issues raised in this scenario are based on those found in real cases, all characters and other events referenced in this scenario are fictional.