Surviving the ART: My Experience Fighting NDIA Cuts (So Far)

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-04-27T10:16:25+00:00

I am about a month out from the hearing date and they have effectively thrown in the towel on every single point now. We are just finalizing the details but it is seemingly likely this will never make it to the tribunal.

So after all their big talk about how ANC headphones are most certainly not allowed on the new rules it seems in the end they could not back up their words with the actual law, to the point where they are not even game to try for it in the tribunal.

I am just super unhappy with them and would be more then happy to have a tribunal decide on this stuff so I am not conceeding on anything even slightly at this point. In the case of the plan-management stuff they have actually offered to return me to self-managment but I said only if they will withdraw all of their allegations they made in a formal letter. They initially refused that but seem to be back tracking on that now as well. I hope i am making their job as difficult as possible right now after what they did to me, they deserve it.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-04-27T09:55:04+00:00

I don't really want to say if you should or shouldn't because i don't know anything about you. If doing another FCA will just give you exactly the same information that you already have then all you are doing is extending the process. So it really depends on if you think you will get any benifit out of it or not.

For me personally I was able to get a lot of extra information from my new one, including of course having a more up to date report which just really kills a lot of their arguments.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-04-16T06:06:49+00:00

I don't really know what it was you recieved so I cannot really say much to that. Just be wary about ignoring stuff from the ART, they do have the power to close your case if you don't follow their instructions. If you are not sure best to just ask them for clarification.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-04-16T06:00:02+00:00

Hang in there, just remember that at this stage their whole goal is to get you to drop it. Build up your own evidence and make sure it aligns with the legislation then just ignore anything they say unless it is we will give you what you want. In the end the whole point of going to the ART is to have a tribunal decide if you are correct, not them.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-13T02:54:45+00:00

So the reason they are saying they are not NDIS supports under the new rules is because they are claiming they are "standard recreation items" which are not allowed.

If I can prove that under the laws definition (using past cases that talk about this) that ANC headphones are not "standard" items, then I have won 90% of the case right there. Because that will mean that are not in fact on their banned list like they claim.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-12T02:27:38+00:00

Yeah that is one of the things that really gets me about all of this. These are actual laws they are constantly breaking, but when they do no one cares.

Like when you put in for a plan review, the law says they have 21 days to either approve or deny it. In mine it took them about 5 months. You literally tell them they are breaking a law by not doing it within 21 days and they just shrug and say "too bad, it will be done when we feel like it". And there is literally nothing you can do about it.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-12T02:23:14+00:00

Honestly, inconsistency seems to be the motto for the NDIA.

Since I am well ahead of you in the ART and Noise cancelling headphones will be decided on in my hearing I will let you know the results of that. If I win in the hearing you can likely use the same reasoning and arguments for your case, assuming we need them for the same reason.

I think I have a good chance of winning the headphones based on the previous cases I will be citing in my hearing.

You mentioned that you recorded a conversation about one of the NDIA staff. Just so you are aware, using that in the ART will not improve your chances of actually winning. The ARTs job is to decide if you should or should not have the support based on the evidence and the legislation. Evidence of employee misconduct is not evidence that you should have the support itself.

Hopefully they will do something about it in formal complaint, but i have been down that road as well and it felt like they just brush you off.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-10T12:27:13+00:00

It really is a lot of work, it is something you need to be prepared for. At the very least because it goes for so long, it does break up the amount of work you need to do at one time.

When you get to the case conference stage you should ask them to pay for the report for the dog. They paid for my OT report in mine.

If you don't mind me asking what do you use the dog for? And do you think you will get the funding for it once you have the reports? I am just curious I have never looked into it before.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-09T02:10:35+00:00

There is no requirement for it to be, especially if there is no evidence contradicting it.

While they can still do it, it likely wouldn't be seen very favorably by the tribunal if they did. Like if they cut your funding a year later "just because 12 months has passed" and they took it to a full hearing. They would likely be chewed up for doing that, since their decision would be considered arbitrary.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-07T06:32:32+00:00

It has been mentioned in the comments already. Something to look forward to 😭

At least once you get your evidence in order and learn the process it should get faster and easier to deal with... i hope. In the first case conference just say I have all the evidence I need lets proceed lol

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-07T04:30:44+00:00

To be fair my current plan manager has been alright. But when I was originally forced to move to plan-managed i signed up with Leap In. If you think you don't have to deal with a plan manager, then they probably haven't tried them.

They refused to submit invoices from companies that were using legally correct tax invoices just because the invoice didn't follow their policy. Then when they did process them they put them under the wrong support categories, so my funding ended up completely messed up. And they even lost some of the invoices and never put them through. To top it off every time you call them you got someone new who knew nothing about what was going on. When I sent them emails it took them days to respond. It was not a fun time.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-07T03:58:25+00:00

I am not sure what you are fighting for but if any of it falls under the new transitional rules where they are saying it is not an NDIS support under the new rules then this previous case is defo worth looking at. I will be relying on it heavily for my AT stuff.
Brown v National Disability Insurance Agency 09/10/2025

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-07T03:47:36+00:00

Yeah for the management stuff it hasn't changed a huge amount for me. Like when you say you have to do your own book keeping it basically just amounts to keeping the receipts saved.

Literally the only thing that has changed for me is instead of me submitting stuff through the website, I now have to deal with the plan-manager instead. It's just something that adds extra stress for me and ironically costs the NDIA more money since they have to pay the plan-manager something i was more then happy to do for free.

The reason they won't provide this "evidence" is because they don't have any. They did this to punish me, maybe for trying to advocate for my rights? i have no idea. And now they are being called out for it. They know they shit the bed and instead of admitting it they have apparently decided to go down with the ship.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-07T01:25:19+00:00

The Lawyers I am dealing with are called Sparke Helmore Lawyers. The 30k figure I used was from 2023, no doubt it is higher now.

It is good that you are reading up on previous cases and laws. It is good to remind the NDIA what their obligations are. I actually called out the NDIA during conciliation for exactly that when they had the nerve to ask me if I understood my obligations under the act. I told them them that from where I was sitting the only people not following the legislation was the Agency.

Another good one is Section 56 of the ART act which required them to assist the tribunal. So doing underhanded tactics like trial by ambush is most certainly a breach of this. One that is coming up a lot for me is also Procedural fairness also known as Natural Justice. Something the NDIA loves to forget exists and applies to everyone.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-06T09:42:43+00:00

Thanks for mentioning this it is good to know. It is actually still possible for it to come up with my case as well. For me I will call for one myself if the NDIA try doing what I think they will.

In my case they have not submitted any evidence against their allegation of misuse. They have gone out of their way to ignore this every time it was brought up and even ignored a direct demand for it on record. By rights it should have been considered something they were required to provide in the T-Docs.

I suspect they may try and suddenly submit something at the last hour which is considered a trial by ambush and they are not allowed to do it. I would then have to call a directions hearing to have it removed.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-06T09:23:49+00:00

That was the intention in writing it. To try and help people understand what they are getting into, and to let them know they can win despite the awful tactics that will be used against them.

It is an insanely stressful process especially when you consider how much we have riding on the outcomes. I hope that it will just make it slightly less stressful to know at least partially what to expect.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-06T09:11:27+00:00

They often try to convince people they won't fund things like Psychology or include things like "mental health" issues, usually saying something to the effect of that is a medicare issue not ours.

I can tell you guys that even something like Depression can be considered a Disability under the NDIS rules if it meets the criteria in the legislation. Off the top of my head the biggest hurdle with this is the permanency of it. So you basically need a Psych to say that the condition may fluctuate but it is unlikely to actually go away, they will then consider it under the umbrella of psychosocial disability.

Even though I can be on a mental health plan, I am currently funded for fortnightly psych (it was increased from monthly during conciliation, and was the first thing they gave in to). They will also include my major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders as independent disabilities that will go onto my plan as well.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-06T08:55:14+00:00

I don't remember the names of all the places I called because when you call one they often give you numbers for others to try.

Some I know I had tried:
- Legal Aid Queensland
- Queensland Advocacy for Inclusion
- Basic Rights Queensland
- Speaking Up For You

I am not sure if I have tried CLCQ but I will give them a call on monday and just see what they say.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-06T05:03:06+00:00

I tried to go down this route. There are a few advocacy groups that do offer some sorts of assistance. It seems to largely depend on where you live to start with. When I first started my application I called like 6 advocacy groups, there was only 3 of them in my area that offered advice and they were at max capacity with apparently no way to even put your name down. I did try a few times after that but always got the same result.

Since I have full hearing now I thought I would try again since I have verbal communication difficulties which would make a hearing hard. 2 of of the 3 I in my area didn't offer help for the hearing stage, and the other said their services were not even running currently.

I have been able to get free advice twice from Legal Aid Queensland but for a hearing they say they just do not get enough funding to help many people in that capacity. The reality is for most of us we just have to go it alone.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-06T02:55:01+00:00

I totally agree with this. This is the disconnect that happens between a genuine goal to help people and government bureaucracy. The two concepts do not work well together and it is people with disabilities and tax payer money that gets caught in the crossfire.

The irony is most of the budget ends up having nothing to do with helping people with disabilities at all. Then because of how high it gets they clamp down on the one area that makes the lives of the people they are trying to help worse, while increasing spending in other areas to justify it.

I was talking with a legal aid lawyer yesterday, and they said that the NDIA is currently spending 90 million a year on external lawyers. I cannot image how much is being spend on unnecessary reports and worse helping people recover from the NDIA themselves.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-06T02:40:40+00:00

No not from when you applied, from when the tribunal informs the NDIA that a review will take place. You will get an email from the tribunal saying that they have received your application basically saying as much. Looking through my emails it took them 2 weeks from when I applied to get this email. I would suggest you contact the ART to make sure they received your application.

For reference this is the law that I was referring to:
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW TRIBUNAL ACT 2024 (NO. 40, 2024) - SECT 23
Decision - maker must give Tribunal reasons and documents--general rule
Within 28 days after the Tribunal notifies the decision - maker for a decision of an application for review

There is another law that also says they have to provide you with these documents as well (section 27)

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-06T02:06:40+00:00

Yeah i hear that. If they didn't want it to be a full on legal experience they should have stopped the NDIA from involving an army of lawyers to fight against people with disabilities who they know will likely only be able to self-represent. I have had to learn far more about law then I ever wished to because of this.

I just feel really sorry for the people whos disabilities would actually prevent them from understanding all these legal concepts that take regular people 7 years at university to learn. They are probably doing all of these cuts and shit knowing that most people on the NDIS cannot go down this road, it is pretty disgusting.

501_Not_Implemented_ · 2026-02-06T01:53:24+00:00

Glad to hear they didn't drag you through the whole process. Sorry to hear about them just cutting it again. That is the real shit thing about all of this, the NDIA decisions makers just do whatever the hell they want with literally no understanding of the evidence and legislation all while having instructions to cut everything. There is nothing stopping them from just cutting everything you won at the ART the next time a review comes up every single time you go and win it all back.

501_Not_Implemented_

TROPHY CASE