Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Contract /Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Respondent engaged Applicant to design structural engineering requirements for extension to home / Applicant provided written agreement with estimated prices to Respondent which later increased due to design changes / Applicant issued two invoices which Respondent disputed as they were only willing to pay for work originally quoted / Applicant claimed payment of invoices plus interest / Held: Respondent changed scope of work which increased structural design work / The initial estimate was not fixed price contract until project requirements were more firmly established / Insufficient evidence Applicant breached contract by failing to provide services within reasonable time / Respondent never raised delay concerns with Applicant / CGA not breached as Applicant never briefed to design most cost effective solution but to incorporate Respondent’s preferences / Applicant did not breach agreement so Respond…

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) / Second Respondent owned a camper van and engaged First Respondent to sell it for a fee of $1,000 / First Respondent advertised the van and Applicant purchased it for $9,500 / Subsequently, the van suffered an engine failure / Mechanic quoted $3,315.76 for repairs / Applicant claimed van was not of acceptable quality and sough to reject the vehicle and receive a refund of $9,500 / Held: First Respondent was “in trade” and the sale was subject to the CGA and FTA / Van was not of acceptable quality / First Respondent was only an agent and never owned the van / Applicant cannot reject van and revest ownership to First Respondent / Applicant entitled to reasonable cost of repairs and diagnosis / First Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $3,405.76 / Claim allowed in part.    

Contract / Fair Trading act 1986 (FTA) / Applicant is a gym member of Respondent's gym / Applicant claimed Respondent breached the FTA and that the lifetime membership purchased by Applicant was legally binding and legitimate / Applicant claimed $995 and declaratory costs / Held: Applicant's lifetime membership is valid / By a narrow margin on the balance of probabilities, Respondent entitled to terminate Applicant's membership / Applicant is still entitled to remedy less termination fee / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $622.27 / Claim allowed in part.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant took a silk top to the Respondent to remove mould spots / If it was likely the cleaning process could further damage the top, Applicant asked that she be contacted first / When the Applicant went to collect the top, the colour and texture had changed / Applicant was not advised that damage was likely / Applicant claimed for compensation to replace the top / Held: Respondent’s failure to discuss the potential of damage to the top was a failure to provide a service with reasonable care and skill / Damage that resulted was a normal possible outcome when attempting to clean mould off a silk garment / Applicant’s garment was four years old, and likely unwearable due to the extent of mould on it / Any monetary value to be attributed to the top itself was questionable / Respondent offered Applicant $100 in compensation / Offered compensation amount was reasonable sum to acknowledge Respondent’s failure to provide that part of the service…

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant engaged Respondent to wash her roof / Afterwards, Applicant noticed white specks on windows / Respondent came back and tried to clean windows with no success / A month later roof leaked / Applicant and their insurer claimed damages / Held: Applicant unable to prove wash damaged windows and roof / Onus on Applicant to prove claim / Tribunal unable to make decisions based on hearsay without supporting evidence / Insufficient evidence Respondent caused specks / Insurer’s roofer advised leak due to wind lifted tiles / No evidence Respondent lifted tiles up / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant parked vehicle on private property and was charged by Respondent with parking enforcement fees / Applicant paid $95 fee / Applicant claimed non-liability for $415.59 amount sought by Respondent / Held: no contract formed between the parties / No offer was made through Respondent's sign which in effect prohibits parking and terms were uncertain / Driver is trespassing where a private parking space is clearly signposted with a warning about the consequences of unauthorised parking and yet a driver still chooses to park there / $95 reasonable penalty payment / Other charges are not reasonable / Applicant not liable to pay $415.59 to Respondent / Claim allowed.

Banking / Applicant went overseas for surgery and was assured by Respondent she will be able to pay for her medical expenses using bank card / Applicant's bank account blocked while overseas / Applicant claimed $10,000 for compensation / Held: Respondent bound by international banking regulations / Recipient overseas bank declined to accept payment until further information about the transaction was provided by Respondent / Respondent requested information from Applicant but Applicant failed to provide information within deadline / Respondent attempted to contact Applicant multiple times / Applicant forwarded required information and full banking access was restored / Application dismissed.

Contract law / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Applicant’s daughter engaged Respondent to transport truck / Part way through journey Respondent’s driver noticed stock crate missing / Applicant claimed $2,350 in damages / Held: Applicant and daughter failed to comply with implied warrant / Contract signed between daughter and Respondent but Applicant accepted as agent / Contract of carriage at owner’s risk cannot be inferred as waiver produced after contract signed / Respondent liable for damages / However CCLA has implied terms that Applicant must ensure goods fit to be transported and be packed appropriately / Crate sat solely by its own weight / Neither Applicant nor daughter tied crate down nor advised Respondent to do so / Main cause of crate loss due to inadequate securing / Implied warranty not complied with / Claim dismissed.  

Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Applicant purchased puppy from Respondent / Respondent advertised puppy as purebred puppies / Applicant claimed puppy not purebred as DNA tests showed it had 13.7% unresolved DNA and did not meet breed standards / Applicant claimed $2,320 / Held: misrepresentation under CCLA not proven by Applicant / Specialist from DNA testing company advised unresolved DNA represented diversity in purebred breed that is not yet reflected in their reference panel / They would not consider puppy’s result as mixed breed / Dog can be a purebred without meeting breed standards / Respondent made no representation puppy met breed standards / Claim dismissed.

Negligence / Applicant and Respondent were drivers involved in a collision on a rural highway / Police reporting indicated the Respondent was not travelling to the conditions and crossed the centre line / Respondent disputed liability / Applicant claimed $19,000.00, being the value of his vehicle, towing costs and loss of income / Held: Respondent liable in negligence for causing the collision/ Respondent would not have lost control and crossed the centre if she had been driving to the conditions / Compensation for vehicle price, towing, and loss income was reasonable  / Applicant was able to sell the wreck for $700 so that was deducted from the costs sought / Respondent ordered to pay $17,724.08 to Respondent / Claim allowed.

Consumer law / Education / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant is training organisation / Applicant entered into an agreement with Respondent to provide training course / Course fees were $2,547,53 / Applicant claimed Respondent failed to pay fees / Applicant stated training advisor advised that Respondent had to put course on hold as he was busy / Respondent had actually lost his job and failed to receive notifications from Applicant / Applicant sought order that Respondent was liable to pay $2,547,53 / Held: not satisfied that Applicant advised Respondent of all his options when he lost his job / Applicant failed to deliver its services with reasonable skill and care / Likely that Respondent could have withdrawn from course and reduced his liability if advised that was an option / Respondent’s obligation to pay any more than half of fees was a loss suffered as a result of the Applicant’s failure / Respondent ordered to pay $1,273.77 / Claim allowed in part.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant contracted Respondent for bathroom renovations / Applicant claimed poor project management and faulty workmanship / Project completed over 20 months after it began / Applicant claimed $22,000 compensation / Held: Respondent’s failures amounted to substantial breach of CGA / Respondent did not carry out renovations with reasonable care and skill / Wrong unit was ordered, installed poorly and persisted with ineffective fixes / Resulted in renovation not completed within reasonable time / Reduction in value of service appropriate compensation for the breach / Recognition given to Respondent for completing project despite issues / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $10,000 / Claim allowed in part.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased a cat from the Respondent for $700/ Cat had medical issues and had to be euthanised soon after purchase / Applicant sought price of the cat as well as related vet costs, submitted total was $1,000.00 / Held: established that the Respondent was trader / Cat was not of acceptable quality when supplied to the Applicant / Applicant entitled to a refund for the purchase price of the cat as well as compensation for all vet related costs / Respondent ordered to pay $1,000.00 to the Applicant / Claim allowed.