An insurer may have to pay a car crash victim’s dog walking fees after the NSW Personal Injury Commission ruled the task is a domestic service. 

Claimant Jeffrey Forrest suffered neck, shoulder, arm and hand injuries in 2020 when his car was hit from behind. He also developed post-traumatic stress disorder. 

Last September he asked compulsory third party insurer QBE to cover fees paid to a dog walk business under his statutory benefits claim. 

He ended up spending about $800 on the service around this time. 

The insurer had made some payments for dog walks about March last year – at $39.95 per session – but it refused any more. 

It said dog walking was no longer a “reasonable and necessary cost” because Dr Forrest had recovered from an operation in March. The walks were not considered treatment or care and did not fall under the covered category of “attendant care services”, it said. 

But in a dispute ruling, commission member Belinda Cassidy found dog walking does fall under the definition of attendant care services and attracts a benefit under the state’s Motor Accident Injuries Act. 

She notes attendant care services are those that aim to “provide assistance to people with everyday tasks, and include (for example) personal assistance, nursing, home maintenance and domestic services”. 

She says “everyday” does not mean the task must be done every day, and she finds that “caring for (including walking of) dogs is an inherent part of this claimant’s domestic situation for which he may require assistance”. 

QBE argued the claimant had provided no evidence it was his job to walk the family dog before the accident. 

Ms Cassidy says this may feed into a separate review on the “reasonableness of the cost”. 

But she added: “It may be that dog walking was not something the claimant did before the accident but something his wife or his family members may have done. 

“It may also be that the claimant’s wife and family have no time to walk the dogs now because his wife is busy with their children ... or she and the family are busy with all the other things they are doing for the claimant.” 

The matter was returned to the commission for medical assessments to determine if the dog walking services are reasonable and necessary, and any cost review. 

See the decision here.