Contract / Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Caveat Emptor / Respondent purchased 7 lots at auction from Applicant / Lots 1 through 6 were purchased and delivered for $6,229.20 / Lot 7 yet to be paid / Respondent had lots 1-6 tested and found that they were fake / Respondent believes lot 7 probably fake / Respondent refuses to pay $1,638 for lot 7 and courier fees / Held: Caveat Emptor rule applies / Applicant not responsible for quality of goods unless misrepresented / No misrepresentation found under CGA and FTA / No reason for lot 7 to be presumed fake by Respondent / Respondent to pay applicant $1,638 for lot 7 / Applicant to deliver lot 7 items to Respondent / Respondent’s counterclaim dismissed / Applicant's claim allowed.
You can search by selecting a jurisdiction, a keyword (for example a name) or browse by year. Identifying details have been removed.
Some decisions in this section have had minor editorial changes applied, that have no effect on the outcome.
139 items matching your search terms
-
M Ltd v KC [2023] NZDT 26 (2 February 2023) [PDF, 145 KB] -
KS v T Ltd [2023] NZDT 28 (11 January 2023) [PDF, 225 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant took vintage vehicle to Respondent for work / Respondent agreed to undertake the work / Respondent left Applicant’s vehicle in rain after sandblasting / Applicant claims Respondent did not show the care and skill required under CGA / Applicant claims $6,500.00 in compensation / Held: respondent did not undertake work with due care and skill / Respondent to pay applicant $6,500.00 / Claim upheld.
-
SU v WC [2022] NZDT 215 (21 November 2022) [PDF, 110 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant contracted Respondent to perform construction work / Applicant claims work done by Respondent was not undertaken with due care and skill, as laid out in the CGA, and claims $2,755.32 in compensation / Held: Respondent did not undertake work with requisite care and skill / evidence that tools were not suitable for the work / Respondent to pay Applicant compensation of $2,755.32 / Claim granted.
-
KJ v OU Ltd [2022] NZDT 216 (16 November 2022) [PDF, 115 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act (CGA) / Respondent manufactured and fitted towbar to Applicant's motorhome / Applicant subsequently used towbar for trailer and bike rack that came lose while driving causing damage / Applicant claims Respondent did not fit towbar with reasonable care and skill and it was not fit for purpose, CGA ss 28, 29 / Held: towbar was not fitted with reasonable care and skill and was not fit for purpose / Respondent to pay Applicant $1,364.00 compensation for damage / Claim granted.
-
HC v T Ltd [2022] NZDT 214 (14 November 2022) [PDF, 106 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant purchased smart watch from Respondent / After 3 or more years applicant noticed part of the watch had fallen off / Watch could not be worn or used for swimming due to missing part / Applicant claims watch was not fit for purpose under section 7 of the CGA / Applicant claims watch was also non-compliant with sections 6 and 8 of the CGA / Respondent claims goods were fit for purpose for the warrantable period (2 years) / Held: watch was fit for purpose / reasonable consumer would not expect a smart watch to retain all characteristics and functionality after 3 years / Claim dismissed.
-
D Ltd v JD & WD [2022] NZDT 174 (3 November 2022) [PDF, 154 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantee Act 1993 (CGA) / Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) / Respondents ordered carpet for house from Applicant / Two years later Respondents ordered same carpet from Applicant / Applicant sent invoice for $4053 of which Respondents paid $1965 / Upon laying of carpet, Respondents realised new carpet varied in colour from original / Applicants claim remaining amount from invoice / Respondents claim Applicant breached CGA and FTA / Held: there can be no claim under FTA for conduct of manufacturer / Applicant failed guarantee of fitness for particular purpose of Respondents / Respondents to pay Applicants remaining amount of invoice minus 20% discount for breaches under the CGA / Claim partially granted.
-
IT & NH v UN Ltd [2022] NZDT 163 (25 October 2022) [PDF, 257 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicants contracted with respondents to make a 3D model of their newborn baby / Respondents agreed and many camera shots were taken in order to create the model of the baby in exchange for $2,4800.00 / Applicants had several complaints about the model and claim they should not have to pay the remaining $1,240.00 / Applicants claim that the model does not meet the standard in the CGA section 6 / Respondents claim that all due care and skill was taken in light of the available technology / Held: The applicants are to pay the respondents the remaining $1,240.00 / The 3D printed baby was made with all due care and skill given the available technology / Claim dismissed
-
KQ v FH [2022] NZDT 185 (25 October 2022) [PDF, 98 KB] Consumer law / Consumers Guarantee Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant hired a mechanical bull from Respondent / Mechanical bull did not work / Applicant given a partial refund from Respondent / Respondent retained some costs for the delivery of the bull / Applicant claimed $350.00 for outstanding refund / Held: mechanical bull did not provide the service needed on the night / Different reasons why the bull could have failed / Respondent breached his obligations under the CGA / Failure was of a substantial character / Applicant entitled to a refund for remainder of the amount / Respondent ordered to pay $350.00 / Claim allowed.
-
FD, GN, LN, UT, NE, & NP v BQ Ltd [2022] NZDT 165 (18 October 2022) [PDF, 162 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicants purchased tickets to do a mountain walk form the respondents / The Department of Conservation (DOC) had restrictions on where these mountain walks could go / Tickets purchased by the applicants were non-refundable / Parties claim they are entitled to a refund of the tickets / Applicants claim that the DOC restrictions were unknown at the time they purchased the tickets / Respondents claim that the DOC restrictions were common knowledge / Respondents claim that they have discharged their duty under CGA / Held: Insufficient evidence to show that the applicants knew of the restrictions / Tickets are ordered refunded / Booking fee not refunded / Claim partially upheld
-
NP v KT [2021] NZDT 1706 (12 October 2021) [PDF, 243 KB] Consumer Law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 / Applicant acquired the services of the Respondent (an arborist) about tree work to be done on property / Applicant claims that the Respondent did not complete work as instructed and without reasonable care and skill / Applicant claims for Respondent to pay the all or any of the costs / Respondent claims for invoice to be paid / Respondent claims for Applicant to pay the legal fees / Held: respondent removed more trees than instructed and without the Applicant's authority or consent / Respondent performed the work with reasonable care and skill under s 28 of the CGA / Respondent breached the contract and is liable to pay compensation for damages / Applicant is liable to pay the incoive under the terms agreed as the quality of workmanship itself do not render costs unpayable / The contract did not include liability for the Respondent to pay legal costs incurred / Section 43 of the Disputes Tribunal prevents …
-
KK v OW Ltd [2022] NZDT 179 (6 October 2022) [PDF, 128 KB] Contract / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant obtained vet services from the Respondent / Respondent's vet discussed the possibility of euthanasia / Applicant unhappy with the vet’s assessment and sought a second opinion / Applicant withheld payment for the vet’s bill, $402.00 / Applicant claimed Respondent misrepresented their provided services / Applicant also claimed the work by the Respondent’s vet was not up to the CGA standard / Respondent counterclaimed / Held: Respondent’s advertisement was not misleading regarding their expertise with horses / Duty of reasonable care and skill under the CGA was adhered to / Applicant did not had insufficient evidence to prove standard was not met / Respondents did not provide Applicant with their interest terms and conditions / Interest cannot be charged / Claim and counterclaim dismissed.
-
TG v NNI [2022] NZDT 139 (15 September 2022) [PDF, 229 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Accident Compensation Act 2001 (ACA) / Applicant engaged the services of the respondent to colour her hair / Respondent coloured the hair of the applicant / Applicant claims that this colouring caused damage to their hair and a burnt scalp as the work was not undertaken with a reasonable care and skill / Respondent claims that this transaction was not covered under the CGA as it was a “one between friends” / Applicant claims $660.50 in compensation / Held: The colouring caused chemical damage to the applicant’s hair and scalp / Held: The transaction was professional in nature, and not one between friends / Held: Respondent must pay the applicant a total of $550.50 in compensation, including a refund and other expenses that were not covered by the ACA / Claim partially upheld
-
SH v TS [2022] NZDT 110 (2 September 2022) [PDF, 123 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Respondent advertised car via online platform / Applicant viewed and test drove car at car yard which was Respondent’s place of work / Respondent sold car to Applicant / head gasket blown after three days of use by Applicant / Applicant claims goods were not of “acceptable quality” or fit for purpose under s 7 of the CGA / Respondent claims car was sold privately and not subject to the CGA / Held: car was sold in trade and is covered by the CGA / Respondent to pay Applicant $2,500.00, being purchase price of car / car is to be made available for Respondent to collect / Claim allowed.
-
FV v UE Ltd [2022] NZDT 140 (1 September 2022) [PDF, 179 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant purchased a tumble dryer (dryer 1) for their rental property / Dryer 1 developed a heating fault / The applicant contacted the respondent for repair or replacement / The respondent was unsure as to whether or not the applicant had purchased dryer 1 from them / The respondent replaced the dryer with a second one (dryer 2) / Dryer 2 developed problems with overheating / Applicant complained to respondent / Respondent arranged for dryer 2 to be repaired / Applicant claims dryer 1 was purchased from the respondent / Applicant claims $6,000.00 in compensation / Held: On the balance of evidence the applicant was unable to prove that dryer 1 was purchased from the respondents / Held: dryer 2 was covered by the CGA, but as dryer 1 could not be proved to be purchased from the respondent then the applicant had effectively received a dryer free of charge / Claim Dismissed
-
SC v CX [2022] NZDT 116 (2 August 2022) [PDF, 204 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant rented holiday home from Respondent / Applicant was unhappy with the cleanliness of the property / Applicant advised the Respondent of the issues / Respondent organised a cleaner to remedy the problem / Applicant claimed $1560.00, a 50% reduction in the holiday home rental / Held: evidence was inconsistent and did not fully support the claim / Respondent provided a remedy within a reasonable amount of time / Holiday home found to be reasonably clean / Respondent was not in breach of the contract or of the CGA / Claim dismissed.
-
MZ v GU Ltd [2022] NZDT 56 (5 May 2022) [PDF, 143 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant purchased DIY electric gate motor from Respondent for $676 / Motor supplied pre-wired for battery power with installation instructions and manual showing two different power supply options / Applicant connected motor to AC power supply not battery / Gate did not move and motor smoked when checked / Applicant returned motor / Respondent did not find any problems with motor and returned it / Applicant hired electrician who found motor supplied without cable needed to connect to AC instead of battery / Applicant claims replacement motor, refund of $105 shipping fee and payment for $300 electrician fees / Held: motor supplied acceptable quality under CGA / problems were because it was connected to AC power when wired for battery power / Held: Respondent did not make false or misleading representations when advertising motor / nothing untrue in the advertising / described as DIY product and came with thorough instructions / Claim di…
-
KM v BE [2022] NZDT 25 (29 April 2022) [PDF, 196 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant purchased TV unit from Respondent for $300 / TV unit defective / Applicant filed Disputes Tribunal claim / Applicant requested $345.00 refund to cover costs / Respondent refused / Applicant retained TV unit for 9 months / Applicant claims refund under CGA / Respondent claims Applicant forfeited right to refund due to retaining TV unit for 9 months section 20 of the CGA / Held: Applicant was entitled to refund / Held: Applicant forfeited right to refund / Applicant had sufficient time to return unit and obtain refund / claim dismissed.
-
EL v FO [2022] NZDT 8 (28 April 2022) [PDF, 228 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant contracted Respondent to make a 21st birthday cake / Applicant provided details for the cake design including a request for marbled filling/ Cake was not marbled and Applicant was disappointed with cake provided / Applicant was offered a refund but chose to take the cake / Whether Respondent iced the cake with reasonable care and skill in accordance with the agreement / Whether Applicant was entitled to a refund / Held: lack of marbling does not justify a refund nor does it devalue the cake / Cake was iced in accordance with instructions / Not satisfied that the Respondent breached her obligations under the contract or the CGA / Applicant deemed to have accepted the cake by taking possession of it after being offered a refund / No refund justified / Claim dismissed.
-
NQ v HN [2022] NZDT 38 (6 April 2022) [PDF, 183 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant purchased working dog from Respondent for $2,000 / Dog suffered prolapse within a few months and Applicant had it put down / Applicant claims refund of $2,000 purchase price / Held: Applicant does not satisfy requirements of CGA / Working dogs are not ordinarily purchased for domestic needs / Insufficient evidence to prove dog sold with defect / Claim dismissed.
-
LK v H Ltd [2022] NZDT 28 (1 March 2022) [PDF, 181 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant booked swimming lessons for daughters / Due to a Covid-19 lockdown Respondent cancelled the lessons / Respondent offered the Applicant credit, but they declined this / Applicant claimed refund under CGA / Held: Respondent had no option but to cancel lessons following the Covid-19 pandemic lockdown / Cancellation reason was completely outside the control of the parties / Where there is a failure to comply with guarantees under CGA as a result of events outside the control of the supplier, the consumer has no right of redress against the supplier / Evidence did not establish a breach of guarantees under the CGA/ Claim dismissed.
-
FM v T Ltd [2022] NZDT 21 (28 February 2022) [PDF, 169 KB] Guarantee / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Earbuds / Applicant purchased earbuds from the Respondent / After six months the right earbud lost volume / When the Applicant contacted the Respondent he was given a cleaning guide / Applicant found that cleaning did not resolve the right earbud issue / Respondent declined to provide a replacement or a refund / Applicant claimed the sum of $470.81 for the cost of having the earbuds repaired / Were the earbuds of acceptable quality / If not, what remedy is the Applicant entitled to under the CGA / Held: earbuds were of acceptable quality / No breach of guarantee / Claim dismissed.
-
LN v JH Ltd [2022] NZDT 16 (18 February 2022) [PDF, 150 KB] Contract / Transport / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant travelled on long distance bus service / Applicant unhappy on grounds that service was late, poor driving, and lack of air-conditioning / Applicant claimed refund of $66 ticket price / Whether Respondent carried out services with reasonable care and skill / What sum, if any, Respondent must pay to Applicant / Held: bus delay outside Respondent's control / Applicant did not suffer loss due to 10 minute delay / Insufficient evidence that Respondent’s driver failed to exercise reasonable care and skill / Reasonable to expect air conditioning to be working on a long trip / Air conditioning issue a failure under s 28 of the CGA / Applicant chose to remain on bus rather than cancelling contract due to lack of air conditioning / Applicant still received value from trip since main purpose was to get to his intended destination / If a consumer purchased a ticket knowing the air conditioning was not working they might expect …
-
FQ & TZ v QM [2022] NZDT 77 (8 February 2022) [PDF, 105 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicants booked Respondent as photographer for their wedding / Applicant's wedding postponed because of COVID / Respondent refused to be vaccinated and suggested to proceed as planned or his contract to be either transferred to a vaccinated photographer or be cancelled with a 50% refund of paid amount / Respondent suggested to record the event using Google satellites / Applicants claim for full refund on the basis that proposed service is not reasonably fit for purpose under the CGA / Held: Applicants entitled to cancel contract as services provided by Respondent not fit for purpose / Applicant can obtain any loss or damage resulting from failure that was reasonably foreseeable / Respondent ordered to pay Applicants $599.00 on or before 8 March 2022 / Claim allowed.
-
XQ v T Ltd [2022] NZDT 85 (8 February 2022) [PDF, 214 KB] Consumer law / Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant bought an automotive car item from Respondent / Item did not run correctly once installed in the car / Respondent gave a refund / Applicant claims the cost of the item, mechanic fees and time spent in preparation for hearing / Held: CGA applies / Respondent had the opportunity to inspect the item before providing a refund / Due to the circumstances, it could not be determined whether the item was faulty / Applicant can claim for reasonable consequential losses / Disputes Tribunal cannot award costs for hearing preparations / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $107.61 / Claim partly allowed.
-
CP Ltd v ES [2022] NZDT 193 (20 September 2022) [PDF, 225 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant entered into contract with Respondent for supply and assembly of flat pack cabin / Respondent to pay deposit of 30% on ordering and 70% upon dispatch / Respondent only paid deposit / Applicant removed doors and windows as Respondent had not paid remaining 70% after completion of assembly / Respondent installed alternative joinery at their expense for weatherproofing purposes / Applicant claimed remainder of payment being $6849 / Respondent counter-claimed $12,927.07 for manufacture and installation of joinery by third party and various remedial costs / Held: Contract stated payment was due “upon dispatch” / Contract did not contain any lien clauses / Respondent was liable to pay Applicant remaining 70% / Applicant had no right to remove any part of cabin from Respondent’s property once assembled / Respondent had right to hire third party to install joinery / Cabin not fit for purpose and not of acceptable quality / Respondent no…