Nov4,
Stuff 'government policy'.. 'government policy' is still subordinate to the law of the land, government policy should be to observe scrupulously the law of the land. The government intention may not have been to maliciously deceive but the ministry still has a commercial duty of care.
If it transpires that the state failed to discharge that duty of care, if some bean counter was guilty of some sub standard performance of duties, if they were neglectful of generally fair dealing standards and still had no malicious intent, then I would stick them with a suit so fast their eyes would water.
And if it transpires that Crown Immunity (or the lack of) does not prevent you from taking legal action immediately, without jumping through those silly administrative hoops, I'd add that final paragraph to the writ as well - it . And if you are prevented, I'd appeal it as discriminatory. 'Statutory rights and protection under the covenant', my ar$e.