In Brief
- The definition of "attendant care services" in s 1.4 of the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017 (MAIA) indicates that attendant care services "aim to provide assistance to people with everyday tasks...".
- External and internal house painting is not an "attendant care service" because it is not an "everyday task".
Facts
On 23 August 2024, the Personal Injury Commission published its decision in BLI v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2024] NSWPIC 436.
The Claimant was involved in a motor vehicle accident on 24 September 2023. He alleged various physical injuries, including to his neck, back, shoulder and hip.
The Claimant alleged that, at the time of his accident, he was planning to paint the exterior of his home. He had taken three weeks off work to complete the task. The Claimant alleged that his physical injuries now prevented him from doing the painting.
The Claimant obtained several quotes for the painting job and asked the Insurer to meet the cost as a treatment and care expense in his statutory benefits claim.
The Claimant argued such a request falls within the definition of "treatment and care" because:
- the definition of treatment and care in s 1.4 of MAIA includes "attendant care services".
- The definition of "attendant care services" in s 1.4 of MAIA includes assistance with "everyday tasks".
- Routine house painting "falls under the umbrella of home maintenance".
Relevant Provisions
The full definition of "attendant care services" reads as follows:
"attendant care services means services that aim to provide assistance to people with everyday tasks, and includes (for example) personal assistance, nursing, home maintenance and domestic services."
The Member's Reasons
The Member accepted that painting is a form of house maintenance.
The Member, however, did not accept that the house painting contemplated by the Claimant fell within the definition of "attendant care services" in s 1.4 of MAIA because it was not an "everyday task".
The Member accepted that an "everyday task" does not have to be performed, literally, every day. For example, lawn mowing is not required every day but would be considered an "everyday task".
The Member concluded that the house painting in question was not an "everyday task" for the following reasons:
- The job required three weeks to complete.
- In addition to painting, the job required tasks such as sanding, scraping back old paint, minor repairs, filling gaps and applying undercoats and topcoats for the whole of the dwelling.
- Painting the house was "out of the ordinary" because it occurred once every ten years or so.
Once the Member concluded that house painting was not an "everyday task", if follow that:
- House painting was not an "attendant care service" as defined by s 1.4 of MAIA.
- House painting was, therefore, not "treatment and care" as defined by s 1.4 of MAIA.
The Member, therefore, found that the Insurer was not liable to pay for the Claimant's house painting as a statutory benefit.
Key Learnings
The decision in BLI v Allianz is critical to understanding what tasks are "everyday tasks" and what are not.
An "everyday task" is one which is commonplace or ordinary. Examples include vacuuming, lawn mowing, pool cleaning, sweeping and laundry. They are not necessarily performed every day. But they are the kinds of tasks somebody might decide to perform on any given day. They are unlikely, however, to take all day.
By contrast, a major undertaking, like house painting, is not an "everyday task" because it is performed years or decades apart, takes days or weeks to complete and involves a considerable degree of planning.
Unlike, say, vacuuming, a person is unlikely to wake up one morning and decide that today would be a good day to paint the house.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
