A Tasmanian woman has been fighting for six months to prove she is not responsible for a $29,000 Centrelink debt.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Donna Selby received a notice in February that claimed she owed the money because she had worked at a business on the mainland.
"You're pretty much guilty according to everyone," she said.
"This takes the robo-debt to another level."
READ MORE: Senate launches inquiry into robo-debt
Soon after we contacted the Department of Human Services about the case, the 'debt' was cleared.
Over many calls to Centrelink customer service, Mrs Selby was told she worked at a vineyard in South Australia between 2013 and 2015.
In reality she had just moved from Latrobe to Westbury at the time and did some casual farm work while raising her son as a sole parent.
She had never been to the South Australian business.
This takes the robo-debt to another level.
- Donna Selby
Mrs Selby was told her information had been "crossed over" with another person.
The Centrelink system showed a person with the same first and middle name, same date of birth, same tax file number but different surname and address who had allegedly worked at the vineyard.
"I had to do research to prove it's not my debt," she said.
"When I called up the vineyard, they've never heard of this Donna.
"Where did they get that information from?"
The debt was paused while her situation was under review.
However, the debt was made active again on her Centrelink account in July.
"The lady actually told me that a decision had been made and it was my debt.
"She'd made a mistake.
"You can tell how I felt being told the decision was final and I owed $30,000... it takes a toll."
READ MORE: Minister defends "robo-debt" scheme
Department of Human Services spokesman Hank Jongen said the department had "sincerely apologised Mrs Selby and confirmed she has no debt."
"This was a unique situation that occurred as a result of mismatched identity data and an oversight by our staff. We have a team of people to prevent this from happening, however in this case our processes fell down.
"We regularly look into cases to see what could have been done better.
"We take our responsibility to protect personal data very seriously and are reviewing what has occurred."
The case comes as the Senate plans to launch an inquiry into the controversial robo-debt scheme.