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…

Negligence / Applicant and Respondent were involved in car accident / Applicant drove straight through intersection / Respondent turned right from side street with give way sign and collided with Applicant / Respondent claimed intersection was blocked and Applicant was speeding / Applicant claimed $3482.55 for damage caused / Held: Respondent failed to give way and entered intersection without ensuring turn could be completed safely / Tribunal found Respondent’s maneuver unreasonable given vehicle size and traffic conditions / Tribunal rejected Respondent’s claims that Applicant was speeding or should have stopped due to insufficient evidence and conflicting accounts / No proof Applicant’s driving contributed to collision / Respondent and insurer ordered to pay Applicant and insurer $3482.55 / Claim allowed.

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.

Negligence / Applicant parked her car on the street / When the Applicant came back to her vehicle, there was new damage to her car / Respondent was standing by the Applicant’s car, having just parked in the park next to her / Applicant said he told her he had scraped her car while parking and they exchanged details / Applicant submitted a claim to her insurer afterwards / Applicant and her insurer claimed $2,364.34 from Respondent for repairs to the vehicle /  Respondent denied liability on the basis that it was not him who caused the damage to the Applicant’s car / Respondent said there was no evidence that he had caused the damage, that he had never accepted liability and that Applicant’s insurer was just trying to extract money out of him / Held: more likely than not that the Respondent caused the damage to the Applicant’s car / Reasonable to infer that the Respondent accepted liability at the time / Claimed repairs costs of $2,364.34 were reasonable / Respondent ordered to pay $2,3…

Contract / Building Act 2004 / Applicants contracted for the supply and installation of a gazebo at their new home under construction / Final agreed price was $38,842.40 but the contract was not written in a form compliant with residential building work requirements / Applicants paid a $15,000.00 deposit / Terms of the contract excluded any cost for a PS1 / Respondent stated one was not needed due to the gazebo's size/ However, the gazebo had been incorporated into the design for which the Council had issued consent so a PS1 was required / Respondent then sent invoice for PS1 of $2070.00 which the Applicants reluctantly paid / Gazebo was installed and multiple faults were identified immediately / Applicants had to get the manufacturer to remedy the faults and complete construction, as the Respondent would not do it / Applicants claimed refund of $2070 plus costs incurred to remedy the construction defects and complete the construction of the gazebo / Held: Respondent was not entitled t…

Consumer law / In 2021, Applicant purchased three tickets for her family for a 2022 concert / Concert was cancelled due to Covid restrictions /  Ticket holders could get refund or have tickets rolled over to 2023 concert / Applicant elected to roll tickets over / Children under 12 could attend for free if with an adult who had adult ticket / Applicant’s son turned 13 before 2023 concert / Applicant contacted Respondent to ensure son was included in rollover tickets / Applicant told she would need to purchase ticket for son / Applicant purchased ticket for additional cost of $465.31 / Applicant claimed for refund of additional cost / Whether Applicant entitled to have son included in rollover tickets / Held: reasonable consumer would conclude 2022 concert ticket would remain valid for 2023 concert / By offering option to roll over tickets, Respondent represented that tickets for 2022 concert would be honoured for 2023 event / Reasonable for Applicant to accept the offer assuming her son…

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 / Carriage of goods / Applicants purchased tractor and engaged Respondent to deliver it / Tractor failed to start on delivery and later required new starter motor / Applicants alleged Respondent’s driver caused damage by repeatedly attempting to start tractor / Applicants claimed for cost of new stater motor and for related costs incurred while tractor was fixed / Held: onus of proof to show Respondents had caused damage to tractor was not discharged by Applicants  / Tractor had worked when driven onto truck for delivery / Insufficient evidence to prove driver caused damage or acted without reasonable care during or immediately after delivery / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant and Respondent were friends / Parties agreed that the Applicant would train Respondent for a body building competition / Applicant said Respondent agreed to be sponsored athlete and receive discounted rates in exchange for promoting Applicant as her trainer and allowing use of her photos / Respondent accepted she was sponsored athlete receiving reduced rate, but felt she had not been adequately informed about her obligations / Applicant invoiced Respondent of $735.00, of which $635.00 was paid / Applicant claimed $1,025.00, and associated Tribunal fees, as non-discounted rate for her services because she had no promotional benefit from arrangement / Held: contract existed between parties / Parties intended to create a legal relationship rather than simply an arrangement between friends / Respondent breached contract by not allowing her photos to be used for promotional purposes / Applicant did not receive benefit of promotional photos exchanged for discounted rates…