Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased candles online from Respondent / Applicant stated candles were smudged and flattened near the bottom and not of the quality she expected / Applicant sought to return the candles and receive compensation of $127.00 / Respondent stood by the quality of the candles saying they were produced in beeswax and were formed within a mold / Respondent said she offered to exchange the candles but the offer was not accepted / Held: candles were of acceptable quality and fit for purpose / Clear to any buyer that that the candles were not hand-carved / No breach of guarantee / No right to refund / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Tort / Conversion / Parties bought 4 cows and a bull / Parties intended to co-own bull but Respondent primarily looked after it / Parties agreed one cow to be delivered to First Applicant but Respondent did not deliver cow /  Applicant texted Respondent to offer resolving dispute by Respondent paying Applicant $150 / Three years later Respondent paid $150 to Applicant / Second Applicant had cow which Respondent sold to freezing works / Applicant claims $6150 for value of cow Respondent didn't deliver / Second Applicant claims $942.08 for cow Respondent sold to freezing works / Respondent counterclaims against Applicant $5598.10 / Held: Parties had agreed each would own two cows with cow in dispute owned by Applicant / Respondent took steps to prevent Applicant from collecting cow amounting to conversion irrespective of whether cow is still alive / Applicant entitled to $1000 compensation for cow and $1250 for its calves /  Respondent refused Applicant access to bull in breac…

Contract law / Applicant paid Second Respondent $45,600 between 2019 and 2023 / 2nd Respondent repaid $27,100 / Applicant claimed balance of $18500 as loans / 2nd Respondent said only part was loan and counterclaimed $7900 for assistance and accommodation provided to / Held: $10,600 payment in 2019 was reimbursement for immigration support provided by Applicant to Respondent and was not a loan / $20,000 and $15,000 payments in 2023 found to be loans / No evidence of joint venture or agreement to deduct costs / Second Respondent failed to prove entitlement to offset or counterclaim based on support to or agreements with Applicant / No evidence Applicant had agreed payment for assistance or accommodation / Respondent not involved in payments and is not liable / Second Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $7,900 / Claim allowed in part / Counterclaim dismissed.  

Consumer Law / Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Respondent agreed to make Applicant a dress for her birthday party for $280.00 / Applicant paid $170.00 toward materials / Dress was not completed / Applicant sought a refund of $170.00 paid / Respondent claimed there was no contract as the dress was offered as a gift  / Held: no evidence the Respondent offered to make the dress as a birthday gift / Therefore, there was a contract between the parties / Respondent breached and cancelled the contract when they failed to finish the dress / Applicant is to collect the fabric from Respondent / Financial award not appropriate  / Claim dismissed .

Contract law / Applicant owned two rental properties managed by Respondent / Respondent purchased business previous property manager / Respondent deducted fees in accordance with its standard contract / Applicant disputed deductions and believed Respondent had underpaid amount owing / Applicant claimed $1423.99 for underpayment / Held: Respondent’s standard contract did not apply as Applicants had never seen or agreed to it / Despite this, Respondents had paid all rent due under original contract between Applicants and original property managers / Respondent entitled to deduct termination and Tenancy Tribunal fees following tenant’s departure / Respondents overcharged Tribunal fee allowed in contract by $100 / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased a water distiller from the Respondent / Applicant noticed rust forming inside the wall of the distiller’s stainless steel boiling chamber / Efforts to clean the rust were unsuccessful / Applicant sought a refund of the purchase price and reimbursement of the Tribunal filing fee / Respondent said the rust the Applicant referred to would have been the result of her inappropriate use of an abrasive agent / Held: the extensive rust referred to by the Applicant was not normal and not such as should be reasonably acceptable to a reasonable consumer / No causal link between the use of an abrasive agent and the rust appearing / Device’s failure to meet the relative, and applicable, guarantee was substantial / Respondent was to provide a full refund of the purchase price of $599.00 / Tribunal had no power to award the Tribunal filing fee / Claim allowed in part.

Contract law / Applicant leased commercial unit to Respondents for period of one year / Respondent gave notice to terminate lease with 4 months remaining on lease / Respondent cited protection order and issues with the way landlord billed for electricity usage as reason for termination / Applicant claimed for outstanding four months rent plus interest / Applicant claimed unjustified termination as cancellation of lease for protection order is only available in residential tenancies / Held: Respondent entitled to terminate lease / Protection order not valid ground for termination / Electricity billing arrangement was undisclosed to Respondent prior to entering lease and was unreasonable / Billing arrangement meant Respondent liable for bills of other tenants without clear mechanism for reimbursement / Ongoing confusion and financial pressure on Respondent interfered with quiet enjoyment and business viability for Respondent entitling them to cancel lease / Claim dismissed.

Negligence / Land Transport Act 1998 / Applicant claimed he was about to exit a roundabout at an intersection when the Respondent entered the intersection colliding with his vehicle / Respondent admitted the collision occurred but denied liability claiming she did not see the Applicant, probably because he did not have his headlights on / Applicant claimed the cost of repair of $2,303.57 / Held: collision occurred at dawn at a well-lit roundabout / Even if the Applicant did not have his lights on, the Respondent should have been able to see him / Damage was consistent with the description of the collision / Cost claimed for the repairs was reasonable / Respondent ordered to pay $2,303.57 to the Applicant’s insurer / Claim allowed.

Negligence / Compensation / First Respondent involved in a collision with a car driven by the Applicant / Collision caused $3,348.51 worth of damage to Applicant’s vehicle / First Respondent did not dispute liability / First Respondent was driving a vehicle that belonged to the Second Respondent, her partner at the time / First Respondent agreed to pay Applicant $3,000.00 in instalments / Transpired that First Respondent paid Second Respondent $500 towards his insurance excess for his vehicle / First Respondent paid that amount believing it would remove any further liability on her to compensate Applicant / That did not occur / First Respondent no longer in contact with Second Respondent / First Respondent claimed a refund of $500 paid to Second Respondent / Held:  $500 was paid to Second Respondent as compensation towards repair cost of Applicant’s vehicle / Evidence suggested that sum was not used for that purpose / Second Respondent ordered to pay First Respondent $500 / Claim allow…

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant paid $6.90 for Respondent to deliver rented eftpos machine back to its owner / Parcel tracking number showed delivery was delayed / Two months later parcel had not arrived / Applicant charged $1,380.00 by eftpos supplier for not returning machine / Respondent told Applicant parcel was lost / Respondent said too late for Applicant to claim for not delivering parcel / Applicant filed compensation claim but Respondent declined to pay compensation / Applicant sought damages of $1,500.00 for lost eftpos machine and fees / Held: more likely than not that Respondent lost parcel / Applicant provided evidence of $1,380.00 charge for failing to return eftpos machine / Evidence showed Applicant suffered loss because Respondent lost parcel / Applicant filed compensation claim in reasonable time / Respondent to pay Applicant $1,380.00 damages / No right for refund of fees / Claim allowed in part.

Contract / Building Act 2004 (BA) / Applicant purchased newbuild from Respondent / Dispute over remedial work arose / Fault with kitchen tap caused water damage to flooring / Respondent delayed in repairing leaking shower hose / Applicant had items stolen allegedly due to improper security design and lighting / Applicant claims $23,992 for kitchen repairs, anxiety and stress, keys, replacement shower house, value of stolen items, plus work order to further secure property / Respondent counterclaimed $3815.56 / Held: Respondent breached contract by failing to remedy leaking kitchen tap in reasonable time and failing to provide Applicant with keys and Applicant breached contract by failing to pay balance of purchase price on settlement date / 16 day delay in arranging plumber for kitchen issues was unreasonable and Respondent liable for damaged flooring as consequential loss of leaking tap / Respondent not liable for shower hose as Respondent attempted to remedy issue / Compensation for …

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant bought a vehicle from the Respondent / Vehicle advertisement included statements that road user charges were in credit and injectors had been replaced / Applicant was advised of outstanding charges on vehicle when he went to purchase additional road user charges / Respondent unable to provide proof that road user charges were up to date / Respondent provided evidence for a different vehicle instead / Respondent only provided invoices for an online purchase of an injector seal kit / Respondent later denied that he ever said he had replaced injectors / Applicant claimed vehicle was misrepresented / Applicant sought compensation of $3,502.94, cost of replacement injectors and outstanding road user charges / Held: Respondent misrepresented the vehicle in relation to injectors and road user charges / Applicant stated he would not have purchased vehicle if he had known about condition of the injectors / Misrepresentations induced th…

Contract law / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant contracted with Respondent for two-year video advertising package / Respondent cancelled contract on two months later alleging misrepresentation of ad quality / Applicant claimed $3260.48 for services provided and 20% early termination fee per contract / Held: no misrepresentation established and contract valid / Respondent approved adverts despite misgivings / Draft adverts were consistent with Respondent’s stated expectations and other adverts by Applicant / Further advertisement production was underway and cancellation occurred before process completed / Respondent liable for fees to date of cancellation and 20% of remaining contract value / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $3260.48 / Claim allowed.