Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales

• Medium Neutral Citation: PZ -v- NSW Trustee and Guardian [2014] NSWCATAD 91
• Decision date: 23 April 2014
• Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
• Before: Hon G Mullane, Senior member

Decision

1. The Application of PZ is refused and dismissed.

• Catchwords: NSW Trustee & Guardian appointed to manage Estate of PZ's father - refusal of NSW Trustee & Guardian to invest funds of father in the purchase of a residential property for father and PZ to occupy. Application by PZ for review of decision - decision confirmed.
• Legislation Cited: NSW Trustee and Guardianship Act 2009; Civil & Administrative Tribunal Act 2013; Administrative Decisions Review Act, 1997; Aged Care Act (C'th), 1997
• Category: Principal judgment
• Parties: PZ (Applicant ); NSW TRUSTEE & GUARDIAN (Respondent )
• Representation: Beazley Singleton Lawyers (Applicant); Ms J C Brouwer (Respondent)
• File Number(s): 1410134
• Publication restriction: S64 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, no details identifying applicant, her father or her brother to be published

reasons for decision

INTRODUCTION

1 On 31 July 2009 the Guardianship Tribunal made an order appointing the NSW Trustee & Guardian as financial manager for the Applicant's father. The Applicant had a Power of Attorney from her father. The application for the appointment was made by her brother. At that time the father was suffering from vascular dementia causing cognitive problems, particularly with memory and money-handling skills, which were "of sufficient severity to warrant the need for a guardian to be appointed to manage his financial affairs."

2 At the time, the father was 86 years of age and had a prior history of strokes. He had been residing at Vaucluse with his son. PZ wanted the father to live with her at Bilpin in rented premises and her brother wanted to have the father to continue living with him. There was serious conflict between PZ and her brother. The brother made allegations that PZ had forged her father's signature on documents and had stolen items from her father's home, including items belonging to her brother. He also alleged that the father did not have the capacity to appoint PZ as his attorney in December 2008, because he had already been diagnosed with dementia.

3 PZ also made allegations about him alleging impropriety by her brother. She alleged he had misappropriated rent from a property owned by the father over a period of 3 years.

4 PZ in 2013 made an application to the NSW Trustee & Guardian for funds of the father to be made available for the purchase of a real estate property for her father and herself to live in. On 11 October 2013 the NSW Trustee & Guardian refused the request. By that time, the father was 90 years and 5 months of age. The median life expectancy of a 90 year old is another 5 years.

5 At the request of PZ an internal review of the decision was conducted. The review decision was given on 6 February 2014 and confirmed the refusal.

6 The applicant on 18 March 2014 filed her application with the Tribunal for the Tribunal to review the decision of the NSW Trustee & Guardian.

THE EVIDENCE

7 The evidence comprised:

1) the Application filed 18/03/14;

2) the Notice of Representation with submissions attached;

3) Affidavit of PZ filed 26/03/14;

4) the bundle filed by the NSW Trustee & Guardian at the hearing;

5) the Notice of Representation by a legal practitioner filed 26/03/14; and

6) Exhibit R1 - budget report for the father.

RELEVANT LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

8 Section 62 of the NSW Trustee and Guardianship Act, 2009 ("the Act") provides that the Civil and Administrative Tribunal can review a decision of the NSW Trustee upon the application from an affected person. The section provides that the administrative review of the decision is under the Administrative Decisions Review Act, 1997.

9 "Affected person" is defined in ss 62(2) of the Act as including a person "whose interests are, in the opinion of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal, adversely affected by the decision".

10 PZ is the daughter of and carer for her father. She has sought a decision for property to be bought as an investment/accommodation for the father. The refusal adversely affects her interest in so far as she proposes to live in the property with her father and it the decision is a refusal to implement her wishes. The Respondent did not argue that the Applicant is not an affected person.

11 Section 63 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 provides:

(1) In determining an application for an administrative review under this Act of an administratively reviewable decision, the Tribunal is to decide what the correct and preferable decision is having regard to the material then before it, including the following:

(a) any relevant factual material,

(b) any applicable written or unwritten law.

(2) For this purpose, the Tribunal may exercise all of the functions that are conferred or imposed by any relevant legislation on the administrator who made the decision.

(3) In determining an application for the administrative review of an administratively reviewable decision, the Tribunal may decide:

(a) to affirm the administratively reviewable decision, or

(b) to vary the administratively reviewable decision, or

(c) to set aside the administratively reviewable decision and make a decision in substitution for the administratively reviewable decision it set aside, or

(d) to set aside the administratively reviewable decision and remit the matter for reconsideration by the administrator in accordance with any directions or recommendations of the Tribunal.

12 The role of the Tribunal then, is to decide what the correct and preferable decision is having regard to the material before the Tribunal.

13 Paragraph 16(1)(g) of the Act gives the NSW Trustee power to buy and sell real estate when acting as Trustee of the estate of a person.

14 Division 1 of Part 4.5 of the NSW Trustee and Guardian Act, 2009 deals with management of estates by the NSW Trustee. Section 59 gives the Trustee power to apply money of the estate of a managed person towards various purposes. It provides:

59 The NSW Trustee may apply money of the estate of a managed person towards any one or more of the following purposes:

(a) the payment of the debts and engagements of the person and the repayment of expenses chargeable to the estate of the person,

(b) in the event of the death of the person, the person's funeral expenses,

(c) the maintenance of the spouse of the person or any child, parent or other person dependent upon the person, or for whose maintenance the person provided when not a managed person or would be expected to provide,

(d) the payment of all proper costs incurred in or about the care, protection, recovery, sale, mortgage, leasing, disposal and management of the estate of the person,

(e) the preservation and improvement of the estate of the person,

(f) the taking up of rights to issues of new shares, or options for new shares, to which the person may become entitled by virtue of any shareholdings,

(g) the maintenance (including future maintenance), clothing, medicine and care, past and present, of the person.

15 There is no submission that PZ is dependent upon her father or that he provided for her maintenance before he became a managed person, or would be expected to provide her maintenance.

16 It appears that if the Trustee has power to invest the funds of the father by purchase of real estate then it is provided by paragraph 59(e): "the preservation and improvement of the estate of the person".

17 Section 39 of the Act provides:

39 It is the duty of everyone exercising functions under this Chapter with respect to protected persons or patients to observe the following principles:

(a) the welfare and interests of such persons should be given paramount consideration,

(b) the freedom of decision and freedom of action of such persons should be restricted as little as possible,

(c) such persons should be encouraged, as far as possible, to live a normal life in the community,

(d) the views of such persons in relation to the exercise of those functions should be taken into consideration,

(e) the importance of preserving the family relationships and the cultural and linguistic environments of such persons should be recognised,

(f) such persons should be encouraged, as far as possible, to be self-reliant in matters relating to their personal, domestic and financial affairs,

(g) such persons should be protected from neglect, abuse and exploitation.

WHAT IS THE FATHER'S COGNITIVE STATE ?

18 As at April 2009 the Guardianship Tribunal, with the benefit of medical reports and after speaking with the father alone, concluded that he "clearly has a dementing illness causing some difficulties with planning and memory. His cognitive impairment might be described as mild to moderate at present. However, he did not demonstrate any real understanding of the issues before the Tribunal, and this would make it particularly difficult for him to give clear, coherent and consistent instructions in the matter."

19 In May 2009 Dr Reid, a neuropsychologist assessed the father as suffering a level of impairment in the "moderate to severe range". He said the father had problems with orientation, mental control and short term memory. He found the father's verbal abstract reasoning skills to be "reasonably preserved" but "he was markedly impaired in his ability to do mental arithmetic, visuo-spacial and constructional skills and nonverbal reasoning. He also had deficits in new learning and verbal fluency." He found the father could give some basic information about his financial affairs, but little detail. Dr Reid concluded that the father had "major cognitive problems particularly with memory and money handling skills and needed a guardian appointed to manage his financial affairs.

20 Dr Chew, a geriatrician who assessed the father, said that he "was not capable of answering many of the questions relating to his personal details and events. For example, he could not say where he lives or his address, and could give little information regarding his social and medical history. He believes he is capable of living by himself. He believed he was living by himself, and [PZ] was coming in to help." Dr Chew in May 2009 concluded that the father's short term memory and long term memory were already impaired, and he was disoriented. He confused his son, believing him to be his brother. Dr Chew concluded that he had "a moderate degree of dementia with impaired insight into his functional abilities".

21 By 30 December 2013 it was recorded by the Trustee & Guardian that the father's state of dementia was such that he: "is unable to express a view".

22 The strokes the father suffered may have caused lasting cognitive impairment. The Tribunal takes into account that sufferers of dementia suffer increasing impairment of memory, deterioration in personal care and hygiene, increasing disorientation, loss of reasoning ability, and personality changes. In her submissions to the Review the Applicant said, in reference to the possibility of the father going into residential aged care that the father "is too disruptive to other residences (sic) to have long term nursing home care".

23 In her Affidavit the Applicant argued: "Any nursing home would consider my father a high care patient which would require him to be locked up and would have no freedom or access to his animals which he loves".

24 It is noted from the evidence that the applicant in 2012 and 2013 incurred on the father's behalf extensive expense for the father to attend respite and day care regularly.

25 The Tribunal concludes that in all likelihood there has been significant deterioration in the father's cognitive capacity since 2009 and his dementia is now severe.

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THE FATHER IN TERMS OF HIS MOBILITY, DEXTERITY AND PHYSICAL CAPACITY?

26 The father has been suffering from dementia for more than 6 years now and it appears his cognitive capacity has seriously deteriorated. Such deterioration is likely to have also adversely affected the father's mobility, dexterity and other physical capacities.

27 The father turned 91 on 5 May 2014 and the median life expectancy for a 91 year old is about 4 years. However, those figures are actuarial figures for the group and do not take into account the father's health condition including the history of strokes more than 6 years ago and the fact that that he has suffered vascular dementia for more than 6 years. On the balance of probabilities his life expectancy is less than 4 years.

28 Although the Applicant did not provide any evidence as to the state of health of her father, it was clear that the father's mobility has deteriorated. The Applicant submitted to the internal review that if a home were purchased it would need handrails and bathroom modifications. His Chemist supplies in 2012 and 2013 include incontinence supplies. He is incontinent.

29 Also, given the purchase of a walker for the father in 2013, any home purchased may also need installation of a ramp or ramps.

30 The Applicant says in her application that her father requires access to services which include a general practitioner, specialist doctors, a day care centre, service providers, "availability of EACHD package", a hospital and x-ray and pathology providers.

31 In September 2013 the Applicant was reimbursed for the purchase of a hospital bed and walker for the father.

32 Although the Applicant did not provide any medical evidence in relation to her father's current health and his care needs, it is noted that the following amounts were spent for the father:

Date	Item	Amount
31/07/12	"respite and day centre"	$5,411.80
29/08/12	respite	$ 128.00
12/10/12	overnight respite	$ 50.00
Jan 2013	incontinence supplies	$ 51.94
07/02/13	incontinence supplies	$ 93.75
12/03/13	incontinence supplies	$ 135.80
05/04/13	respite	$ 50.00
10/05/13	incontinence supplies	$ 135.80
17/06/13	day care	$ 88.00
03/09/13	day care	$ 104.00
25/09/13	reimbursement for aids	$ 556.70
30/09/13	hospital bed and walker	$2,419.00
03/10/13	day care	$ 112.00
25/10/13	incontinence supplies	$ 129.22
28/10/13	respite charges	$ 220.95
21/01/14	respite charges by benevolent society	$ 167.50
23/01/14	respite charges	$ 256.76
28/01/14	respite charges	$ 48.10
19/02/14	respite charges	$ 256.76
27/02/14	day care	$ 24.00
27/02/14	medical equipment	$ 116.42
12/03/14	day care expenses	$ 24.00
24/03/14	respite charges	$ 256.76

33 There is also an Exhibit R1, the budget report, showing budgeted figures for the period 31 July 2013 to 30 July 2014, and actual expenses for the period 31 July 2013 to 23 April 2014.

34 Other evidence shows that the expenditure for respite periods and day care for the year to date is approximately $7,200.00. The expenditure for medical equipment is $3,092.12 and was not budgeted for.

35 Pharmaceutical expenses budgeted for the year to date were $182.69, and for the full year $250.00. But the actual expenditure for the year to date was $593.89.

36 On all the evidence the Tribunal is comfortably satisfied that the father is suffering from severe dementia and the symptoms include incontinence, general lack of mobility and dexterity, disorientation, serious loss of short and long term memory, disorientation, serious loss of speech, almost total loss of reasoning ability, and behaviour problems.

THE FATHER'S CARE NEEDS

37 On the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied that the father is already severely demented and his health and care needs would be better provided for in a residential aged care facility because he would have the benefit of professional nursing care, carers and other staff trained in caring for people with dementia, premises, services and facilities specifically designed for aged people with dementia, stability of residence (rather than the risk of a further change of residence initiated by PZ or a landlord or a later change to residential aged care), and better access to the medical services PZ says he needs.

THE APPLICANT'S CASE

38 Much of the contents of the Applicant's Affidavit is submissions rather than evidence.

39 The Applicant argues that the investment in a property would provide more stability for the father because when he lived with her in rented premises at Grose Vale, the lease was terminated by the landlord and then when they moved to their present address at Wildes Meadow, they were there for only 12 months when the landlord gave notice to terminate the lease. However, the evidence provided does not establish the reasons why the landlords of the two properties terminated the lease. There is some evidence that the landlord of the Grose Vale property claimed compensation from the father in respect of damage or other issues under the lease.

40 Without adequate evidence to establish why the leases were terminated, the Tribunal is not prepared to conclude that neither of the leases were terminated as a result of any breach of the lease by the tenant. The Applicant seeks to argue that because of the determination of the two leases, it is likely that any subsequent lease of the home for herself and the father would not be long term and would be terminated and subject the father to further change/instability. The Tribunal does not have evidence before it to establish such a general proposition. That argument fails.

41 However, the father's poor health and his need for residential dementia care, is likely to compel his admission to such care within a year.

42 When she swore her Affidavit on 26 March 2014 she was proposing a property at Young, on which she had made a tentative offer of $350,000.00. However, at the time of the hearing on 23 April 2014 it appears that the particular property was no longer available.

43 In her Affidavit the Applicant said that if the property at Young is sold before an order could be made, she had identified "a number of other properties available" for her father to purchase. She listed properties at Canowindra, Stockinblingle, Blayney, and Cowra. In 2012 the Applicant sought to have the Trustee purchase a property at Taralga. The Trustee refused. She then sought to have the Trustee purchase a property at Murringo, but that property was sold to another purchaser.

44 It appears that in considering most of the properties she has considered the Applicant gave little or no consideration to the need for the father to have contact with his son, and grandchildren and his need to live where the medical services she described as needed are reasonably accessible.

45 In submissions the solicitor for Applicant raised the fact that according to Exhibit R1 the year to date expenditures for 2013/2014 amount to $153,069.69, but of this $89,501.61 is for legal costs in litigation that has now been concluded. Accordingly, the actual total expenditure for the year to date, disregarding the legal costs, is $63,568.08. But that is for a period of less than 9 months, so that the annual actual costs excluding legal costs can be predicted to be in excess of $84,000.00.

46 It was submitted by the solicitor for the Applicant that the purchase of a property would avoid the current rental which for the year to date amount of $25,735.77. But figure and Exhibit R1 is not just for rental, but for all expenses of the accommodation.

47 Also attempts to calculate savings of living in a property of his own rather than renting would have to take into account the substantial costs of the purchase, including stamp duty and legal costs and the new expenses that the father would incur as owner of a property. These would include insurance premiums for building insurance, council and water rates, and repairs and maintenance. They might also include expenses for widening doorways for his walker of for wheelchair access and provision of ramps, hand rails and other aids and protections for the father. Given the limited life expectancy of the father the calculation would also need to take into account the likely substantial costs of selling the property including costs of preparing the property for sale, maintaining it until a buyer is located, contracts exchanged and the sale completed, agent's commission and legal costs.

48 The submission for the Applicant was that although the Applicant does not contribute to payment of the rent or pay any board to her father: "She carries a lot of expenses herself". But there was no evidence as to what expenses, if any, the Applicant has paid during the period she has lived the father and he has paid the rent.

49 In her submissions, the solicitor for the Applicant proposed that if the father owned a residence in which he resided, that would result in an increase in his means tested pension to $21,502 p.a. She said that with the increased pension and the Applicant's income of $900.00 per fortnight as his carer they would have income from their pensions of more than $44,000.00 p.a. and this would be sufficient to meet their outgoings. However, this calculation made no allowance for expenses in respect of the property purchased including, insurance, rates, repairs, maintenance, and installation of ramps, hand-rails and other assistance for the father.

50 At page 33 of the bundle there is a calculation by the Trustee in respect of these proposals which allows an amount of approximately $6,200.00 per annum in respect of such outgoings on the property.

51 The calculation then arrives at a budget deficit of about $37,000.00 p.a. assuming that only $300,000.00 is used to meet the total costs of the purchase of a property. The Applicant, however, has mostly been considering properties for more than $300,000.00. For example, the property at Young had a purchase price of $350,000.00. The costs and expenses of the purchase, including stamp duty and legal costs, and the initial insurance premium would be substantial and additional to the purchase price.

52 The calculation using $300,000.00 as the total costs of the purchase of a property results in a projection that the whole of the investment funds of the father would be depleted in approximately 2 years and the property would therefore be required to be sold in approximately 12 months after purchase.

53 The Applicant's proposal is that the outgoings on a home purchased for the father would be paid partly from her income. But the evidence does not disclose that she has previously voluntarily contributed to the payment of any rental of previous homes leased for the father. In addition the Trustee does not have any power under the Act to compel PZ to contribute to such payments and nor does the Tribunal under the Act or the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997. PZ might say that she will contribute to payment of the outgoings on the father's property, but there is no way that the Tribunal can protect the Father by ensuring that she does. Given that she hasn't contributed to the rental payments in the past, the Tribunal cannot be confident that she will voluntarily contribute to payments of outgoings on a home purchased by the father.

54 The Applicant in her Affidavit proposes:

"My only consideration that is in my father's best interests is that he have permanent long term accommodation that suits his needs which secure without the threat of being told by a third party to vacate the accommodation on a yearly basis."

55 The evidence does not establish that renting a residence of itself involves any likelihood that the landlord would terminate the lease at the end of the first year.

56 The Applicant also said in her Affidavit:

"In the event that he needs nursing home care (which I will do everything I can to ensure that this is not necessary) then the house will not be required to be sold to pay an accommodation bond. An Accommodation bond would be required if he had cash assets."

57 There are two aspects of this argument that are overlooked in her submission. The first is that although her solicitor submitted that the Applicant has "some nursing experience" and, "has counselling experience", the Applicant did not give any evidence of any nursing or counselling qualifications, training or experience. There is no such evidence before the Tribunal.

58 The second aspect is that the Applicant misrepresents the state of the legislation in relation residential aged care.

59 Under amendments to the Aged Care Act, 1997, from 1 July 2014 entry to any residential aged care will involve taking into account any assets of the proposed resident, including the value of all interests in real estate (including his home). The appropriate bond ("Refundable Accommodation Deposit" or "RAD") will be calculated. If, for example, the room price is $400,000.00 and the proposed resident has assets of $380,000.00 (including any real estate or investments), the then RAD might be calculated as $250,000.00.

60 The resident then has three options:

(1) Pay the full refundable accommodation deposit. (Subject to any other debts to the facility the full amount is refundable if he dies or leaves the facility.)

(2) Pay no part of the refundable accommodation deposit and instead pay a daily accommodation payment ("DAP") which is calculated as the RAD times the maximum permissible interest rate (currently 6.59%) divided by 365 days. This would calculate on a RAD of $250,000.00 as about $45.14 per day ($315.96 per week).

(3) Pay only part of RAD. For example, if the proposed resident paid $200,000.00 instead of the full $250,000.00, then the resident would also have to pay a DAP calculated as $50,000.00 times the maximum permissible interest rate (currently 6.59%) divided by 365 days. The DAP would be about $9.03 per day ($63.21 per week).

61 In addition, the resident would be liable to pay a daily care fee (85% of the base pension) of about $46.50 per day ($325.50 per week). Depending on the resident's income and assets may also be liable to pay an additional means tested care fee.

62 The current maximum permissible interest rate used to determine the DAP is a higher rate of return than the father is receiving from his funds invested by the Trustee, particularly after the fees of the Trustee are deducted. In the 2013/2014 year, the budget for the management fees of the Trustee are $3,516.00. Investment income is $12,780.00. After deduction of the management fees, the net return is $1,264.00 on funds of more than $320,000.00. That is a little less than 4%. Clearly, when the father is admitted to residential aged care it will be to his financial advantage to have his funds in liquid assets rather than investment in real estate.

63 Where a DAP is payable by a resident and a payment is not made, then the age care facility is able to deduct that amount from any RAD. That decreases the bond (RAD) held by the facility and therefore has the effect of increasing the DAP payable thereafter.

64 Taking into account the high interest rate used for the unpaid part of a RAD, it appears that in fact keeping his funds in a liquid form in anticipation of the father having to have the care provided for residents with severe dementia in aged care facilities, it is likely to be of more benefit to him because, otherwise, there will be a delay between his placement in aged care and the sale of an investment property and during that time he would be liable for a DAP calculated on the maximum permissible interest rate.

DISADVANTAGES OF PURCHASING A PROPERTY

65 The father's son informed the internal review that he does not support the purchase of a residential or investment property for his father and said that his father does not have sufficient funds to buy a decent property in a location which would be close to services, including medical services. He also said that he believed that given his father's age and condition, he may have to move to an aged care facility in the future and would need funds for that. It appears that the son's opinion as to his father's condition and needs is not based on any recent knowledge of his father's condition.

66 The internal review concluded that it was undesirable to commit the father's money into one asset class, because he may require cash at short notice for accommodation and services should his circumstances change. It was considered that the purchase of real estate was a long term investment and that if the father died within 4 years in accordance with the median life expectancy for someone his age, upon the sale of the property, it was unlikely that after payment of all the costs of the purchase, including stamp duty and the costs of the sale, there would be any financial gain. That accords with the evidence before the Tribunal.

67 The internal review decision also noted that past annual budgets have been around $80,000-$90,000 per annum for board and keep of the father and this meant that in order to meet his needs sufficient assets needed to be kept in liquid form.

68 The internal decision maker also took into account that because of his age and health history, the father's care needs might increase substantially and "he may not be able to continue to live with his daughter". It was considered that his deteriorating condition might lead to him being placed in an aged care facility. That accords with the evidence before the Tribunal.

69 The internal review also concluded that because the request was to purchase a rural property, there could be a substantial delay in the sale of the property if attempts were made to sell it when funds were needed for the father. The delay in the sale might also lead to the property being sold at a lower price than the purchase price if it was resold in a short period such as 1-3 years. The Tribunal finds that these are valid considerations.

70 The interval review also took into account that any property purchased on behalf of the father may require modifications to meet his needs. The Applicant had made reference to the need for handrails and bathroom modifications. Such modifications would require further expenditure. In addition, as a home owner, the father would have ongoing property expenses for maintenance, rates, water services and insurance. The Tribunal finds that these are valid considerations.

71 Finally, the review also took into account that the client "would only be able to afford a low value property which may well result in ongoing property maintenance issues that could exacerbate the depletion issue". The Tribunal finds on the evidence that this is a valid concern.

CONCLUSIONS

72 The best option in terms of meeting the father's care and health needs is for him to live in a residential aged care facility that is close enough to his son's residence to ensure contact with his son and his family including the father's grandchildren. It seems that his deterioration will probably compel that change within 12 months if it hasn't occurred sooner.

73 The proposal for the father to purchase a property or to continue to lease a property are contrary to his care and health needs because they each subject him to care by someone without professional qualifications or training that is of a much lower standard than he would receive from professionals in an aged care residential facility and such a facility is also likely to provide better access to medical and other health care professionals.

74 A residential aged care facility in Sydney is likely to provide better access to the medical services the father needs and also his son and his son's family than living in a purchased home in a rural area.

75 The proposals of PZ for the father to purchase a property are about him living in rural locations where frequent contact by his son and family will be denied him because of distance.

76 The proposal for the purchase of a property for the father is contrary to his financial needs, given his limited life expectancy, the likelihood that he will soon need liquid funds to pay a RAD for Residential Aged Care, the high interest rate applied in calculation of a DAP until the sale of the property is completed and the RAD paid, the risk if the property is a rural property that there will be considerable delay in its sale, the outgoings he will incur when he owns the property and the substantial purchase and sale expenses that will be incurred in a very short period.

77 The Applicant has not established that the purchase of a property would be "preservation or improvement" of the father's estate.

78 In terms of his financial interests the best option for the father is to now enter residential aged care before his capacity to pay a RAD is eroded further. The second best option financially is to continue living in a rented home. The proposal that the father purchase a home is less in his financial interests than either of those 2 options.

ORDER

79 The Order of the Tribunal therefore is:

1) The Application of PZ is refused and dismissed.

I hereby certify that this is a true and accurate record of the reasons for decision of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

Registrar

**********

I hereby certify that this is a true and accurate record of the reasons for decision of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales.
Registrar

Decision last updated: 08 July 2014