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.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant booked international flights through Respondent in 2024 for his family to travel abroad / They were unable to board their outbound flight due to transit visa issues arising from the type of travel documents they held / Applicant then made urgent alternative travel arrangements at additional cost / Applicant claimed $6,456 from Respondent, alleging Respondent failed to provide flight booking services with reasonable care and skill by not identifying or advising on transit visa requirements / Held: Applicant did not prove, on the balance of probabilities, that Respondent failed to exercise reasonable care and skill  / Evidence did not establish that Respondent undertook, or was asked to provide, visa advice / Respondent had clearly stated it could not advise on visa requirements for the travellers’ passports / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Bailment / Applicant agreed, through its director, that some of their cows would be temporarily kept on paddocks used by Respondent / Applicant later went into receivership while the cows were still on Respondent's land / Receivers requested return of the cows / Cows were not collected and subsequently disappeared from Respondent’s property / Respondent denied responsibility for their loss / Applicant alleged breach of contract and/or failure to meet duties as a bailee / Applicant claimed $28,650 from Respondent, estimated value of the cows / Held: no contract existed / No evidence of reciprocal promises or benefit to Respondent / Respondent was a bailee of the cows / Respondent had taken reasonable care and had not breached his duties as bailee / Insufficient evidence that Respondent authorised or facilitated the cows’ removal or failed to return them in breach of his obligations / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 / Applicants are trustees of trust that owns commercial premises which suffered water leak / Respondent is a statutory body that delivers water and wastewater / Respondent refused water rebate following leak because building was a commercial property / Applicant sought declaration of non-liability for water consumption costs for month of the leak  / Held: Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to hear claim as it constitutes a claim in respect of money due under an enactment / Claim struck out for lack of jurisdiction.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Administration Act 2010 / Applicant owned two lots of land / Applicant employed Respondent as architect to prepare drawings and obtain resource consent / City Council identified missing details such as drainage and building consent documentation / Architects Board found Respondent had breached code of ethics / Respondent passed away / Applicant claims $30,000 in breach of contract for inadequate professional services from Respondent’s Estate / Held: Respondent had breached contractual obligations / Claim was out of time as six year limitation period ended between 2021-2024 / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant quoted the price of staircase to Respondent who accepted / On delivery,  Respondent was unhappy with the quality and returned staircase / Applicants remediated staircase but Respondent denied liability for payment / Applicants sought payment of invoice for staircase and related costs / Held: staircase was of acceptable quality / Some of the Respondents concerns not specified under the initial contract and other concerns lacked evidentiary support / Applicant remediated staircase to address concerns and met standard for stair design and construction / Respondent was liable for cost of invoice / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $2,087.25 / Claim allowed. 

Standing / Applicant and Respondent had history of legal disputes also involving several other related parties / Applicant sought compensation on behalf of ex-husband for installation and gardening work at a property jointly owned by Respondent and related company / Property also operated as companies registered office / Applicant claimed standing to bring claim on behalf of ex-husband due to lending money for work / Evidence of payment from company for gardening work existed /  Agreement predominately discussed between Applicant's ex-husband and Respondent's husband with an arrangement to repay amount at a later time / Held: Applicant lacked standing to bring claim for purported debt to ex-husband / Unclear regardless whether Respondent or company actually owed debt claimed / Circumstances of arrangement were not proven / Evidence of interconnected debts, potential gifts and other involved parties / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicant purchased last-minute holiday package from Respondent / Applicant mistakenly thought package included transfers, was for stay at a different resort, included an ocean front room and was refundable / Applicant sought refund of $3,498 claiming Respondent misrepresented package offered and pressured acceptance / Held: no breach of contract / Correspondence aligned with what Respondents offered / Pressure on Applicant to purchase package resulted from usual time pressures in booking a last minute holiday / Respondent did not misrepresent package / Applicants mistaken beliefs resulted from their own assumptions / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Applicant booked accommodation with Respondent online through website and pre-paid $360 / On arrival Applicant discovered there was an adjoining self-contained and self-secured unit that was tenanted and felt unsafe / Applicant choose to move to alternative accommodation at additional cost /  Door connecting the adjoining unit can be seen in advertisement photos / Applicant sought refund of costs paid / Held: Insufficient evidence to show there has been misleading or deceptive conduct regarding the circumstances of the apartment under FTA / Also no misrepresentation as to adjoining unit in advertisement of property for purposes of CCLA / Claim dismissed. 

Negligence / Applicant and Respondent involved in a road accident / Applicant was riding a motorbike on a motorway / Respondent was driving a car in a lane ahead of Applicant / Applicant went to pass Respondent when the Respondent suddenly changed lanes and collided with Applicant / Applicant and his insurer claimed for losses incurred in the accident / Held: accident was due to failure of Respondent to see oncoming bike when changing lanes / Respondent had a duty to ensure he changed lanes safely / Respondent liable for losses incurred in the accident / Respondent ordered to pay $6059.30 / claim allowed.

License / Applicant given permission by Respondent to occupy property to plant and grow experimental plants / Parties disagreed as to use and state of the land as well as ownership of plants / Respondent wanted Applicant to vacate property and remove all belongings, waste and structures / Applicant sought $30,000 for destruction of his plant research and development project / Respondents counter-claimed for $25,995 in compensation for loss of professional fees, site clean-up, stress and loss of use of land / Held: arrangement between the parties was a Bare License as permission to use land was given without consideration by Applicant as licensee / Applicant as licensee had no right to compensation or to remain on the land after license was revoked by Respondent / Applicant allowed time to remove and sell plants / Applicant to complete work order and vacate property within specified timeframe / If work order remained incomplete, Applicant ordered to pay Respondent $3,500 /  Claim dismis…

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993/ Applicant booked taxi with Respondent for airport transport that could accommodate their  wheelchair and bags / Initially Respondent sent a car that was not fit for this purpose / Upon notice Respondent immediately sent van replacement  / Applicant suffered injury to hand when entering van / Applicant sought $23,500 in compensation/ Held: Respondent failed to provide service with reasonable care and skill  / However, appropriate remedy of refund has already occurred / Applicant not entitled to cost that arise directly or indirectly from injury due to ACC law and regardless such costs are not a result of Respondents failure / Claim dismissed.

Property / Contract / Applicants entered into an agreement to purchase a property from the Respondent / Applicants completed pre-settlement inspection and the property was settlement /  Applicants noticed a strong smell of urine when they moved into the property / Carpet cleaning company noted that there was urine contamination in all rooms / Applicants claimed $16,165.00 for costs of replacing carpet throughout the house / Held: unable to establish that the urine saturation occurred after agreement date / Applicants did not notice anything when viewing the property before purchase nor at the pre-settlement inspection and settlement itself / Considered unlikely that the Respondent deliberating concealed the saturation and misrepresented the property  / Ordinary occurrence for a house to be aired when being presented for sale / Claim dismissed.