Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant purchased washing machine from First Respondent / Washing machine broke down within short period / Applicant approached First Respondent who put them in contact with Second Respondent / Second Respondent took away washing machine and refunded some of purchase price / Refund delayed for some time / Applicant was without a washing machine and had to make numerous trips to laundrette / During Covid-19 restrictions Applicant was unable to access laundrette / Applicant went to First Respondent numerous times for resolution / Applicant claimed breach of guarantee of acceptable quality under CGA / Applicant claimed damages for refund or replacement, consequential financial losses and consequential losses in form of emotional harm / Applicant claimed $30,000 to be paid equally by the Respondents / Held: breach of guarantee of acceptable quality / First Respondent to pay Applicant $119.00 refund / Emotional harm damages cannot be claimed…
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
-
AJ v IO Ltd & TF Ltd [2021] NZDT 1692 (10 December 2021) [PDF, 126 KB] -
NH & ND v U Ltd [2021] NZDT 1681 (7 December 2021) [PDF, 98 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicants hired Respondent to replace their roof / Respondent started work but failed to turn up subsequently / A roofing expert was engaged to look at the work / Work found to be defective / Applicants sought full refund of money paid to Respondent / Held: Respondent breached obligations under CGA and did not carry out work to acceptable industry standards / Roofing was not fit for purpose / Respondent had been given reasonable opportunity to remedy / Applicants entitled to full refund of $17,160 / Claim granted.
-
LC v TL and UB Ltd t-a HE [2021] NZDT 1668 (22 October 2021) [PDF, 150 KB] Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Respondent provided immediate and conventional denture to Applicant / Applicant claims neither denture of acceptable quality or fit for purpose / Applicant claims reimbursement of $2,502.00 / Was immediate denture of acceptable quality? / Was conventional denture of acceptable quality? / If not, is Applicant entitled to reimbursement / Held: immediate denture was of acceptable quality per s 7 CGA / Held: conventional denture not of acceptable quality / Held: Applicant not entitled to refund for immediate denture; entitled to refund of $650.00 for conventional denture plus mileage costs / Respondents ordered to pay Applicant $662.00 / Claim allowed in part.
-
BD & NL v CM Ltd t-a HD [2021] NZDT 1669 (14 October 2021) [PDF, 277 KB] Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicants purchased cooker from Respondent / Applicants’ had issues with cooker, no replacement parts available and have replaced cooker / Applicants’ claim damages of $9,097.87 from Respondent for costs of refund and replacement of cooker / Is cooker not of acceptable quality and/or not fit for purpose? / Is Respondent Manufacturer of Cooker; if so, did Respondent faile to take reasonable action to ensure facilities for repair of cooker and supply parts were available? / Did Respondent engage in conduct misleading or deceptive? / If so, are Applicants entitled to remedy and is remedy claimed proved and reasonable? / Held: cooker not of acceptable quality or reasonably fit for purpose / Evidence shows issue with cooker and no evidence that Applicants’ did not care appropriately for the cooker / Held: Respondent manufacturer of cooker under s 12 of CGA / Held: Respondent in capacity of manufacturer of cooker failed to comply with s 12 of CGA / Appli…
-
SJ & NY v XT Ltd [2021] NZDT 1644 (6 October 2021) [PDF, 206 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Respondent relocated water meter on Applicants rental property, a leak developed / Respondent agreed to fix leak and provide leak allowance for lost water / Applicants reported further leak, Respondent carried out repairs / Respondent provided further leak allowances and partially paid for water use invoices and charged Applicants for remaining cost / Applicants claim amount charged for estimated water usage excessive / Applicants claim $5,000 for declaration of non-liability on outstanding invoice of $1,056.80 plus damages for distress and time spent resolving matter / Held: Applicant not liable to pay Respondent $289.80 / Respondent overestimated usage / Insufficient evidence of quantifiable loss to award damages / Claim allowed
-
NU v KD Ltd & QJ Ltd & GE Ltd [2021] NZDT 1550 (9 September 2021) [PDF, 194 KB] Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Guarantee of acceptable quality / Rejection of goods / Damages / Applicant purchased car from Respondent in January 2019 / Mechanical breakdown insurance was taken out in relation to the car with the Second Respondent / In March 2020 the car’s engine was replaced by the Third Respondent / Applicant states replacement engine has failed and claims refund of purchase price and repair costs / Held: Applicant not entitled to reject car and receive refund from Respondent / Lost right to reject goods as not done within reasonable time per s 20 CGA / Held: Applicant entitled to damages of $1844.12 from Respondent / Car not of acceptable quality per s 18 CGA / Claim allowed in part / Claim against Second and Third Respondents dismissed
-
SH v CO & D Ltd & C Ltd & N Ltd [2021] NZDT 1615 (9 August 2021) [PDF, 237 KB] Contract / The Building Act 2004 / Consumers Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased house from Second Respondent / Respondent Director of Second Respondent / House built and warranty issued by Third Respondent / Applicant claims for defective painting and defective sewer pump / What were terms of contract / Whether the CGA applies to the build / Whether sewer pump fit for purpose / Whether reasonable care and skill exercised in painting and was it fit for purpose / Whether failure to transfer warranty on time / Whether Respondent personally liable / Whether defects covered by warranty / Whether Appellant entitled to relief / Held: both the Builder under the Project Management contract and the developer are liable for any breach of implied statutory warranty under the Building Act concerning any failure to exercise reasonable care and skill in providing painting service / Held: sewer pump is a good under the CGA / Must be of acceptable quality and fit for purpose under ss 6 and 8 CGA…
-
BX v PN Ltd & NN Ltd [2021] NZDT 1575 (5 August 2021) [PDF, 215 KB] Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Guarantee goods of acceptable quality / Applicant purchased boat from Respondent / Applicant experienced issues with boat emailing Respondent describing the problem and claiming a refund under the CGA as he had lost confidence in saftey of boat / Respondent inspected boat and found nothing wrong with factory workmanship, advised manufacturer would supply replacement boat / Applicant claims refund of purchase price of boat plus freight costs and compensation for loss of use of boat / Held: problem with boat more likely than not a manufacturing issue / Held: problem does not render boat unsafe, not a substantial failue that renders boat unfit for purpose / Claim dismissed
-
KT & OX & SX v P Ltd [2021] NZDT 1614 (4 August 2021) [PDF, 164 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants engaged Respondent to carry out electrical work for water pump on new water bore in 2017 / Applicants had ongoing problems with pump which burnt out in 2020 / Applicants claimed Respondents made various mistakes in electrical work resulting in the pump failing / Applicants claimed damages of $6,200.80 from Respondents / Whether subcontractors damaged the pipes / Whether Applicants were charged for incorrect cable and correct cable, if so should some or all costs be refunded / Whether Respondent used wrong type of flex to extend pump lead / Whether Respondent did not carry out services with reasonable care and skill and/or whether the services/product reasonably fit for purpose under ss 28, 29 CGA / Whether Applicants entitled to remedy / Respondent agreed subcontractors damaged pipe / Held: Respondent should have replaced incorrectly installed cable without charge / Incorrect flex used / Respondent failed to carry out services with r…
-
BC v KG [2021] NZDT 1592 (4 August 2021) [PDF, 178 KB] Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant had Respondent lay concrete for him but was unhappy with result / Respondent undertook repairs including grinding back contract and applying tinted sealer to surface / Applicant is still unhappy with work and claims $19,658.15 from Respondent which is the cost that has been quoted to remove and re-lay the concrete / Held: concrete work not undertaken with reasonable care and skill, not acceptable and fit for purpose under CGA / Held: appropriate remedy is a full refund of the amount paid for the work / Claim allowed / Respondent ordered to pay $7,463.69 to Applicant
-
OX v SN [2021] NZDT 1581 (3 August 2021) [PDF, 153 KB] Consumers Guarantees Act 1983 (CGA) / Guarantee of acceptable quality / Applicant purchased jet ski from Respondent / Applicant discovered jet ski had issues after using and claims refund of purchase price and cost of repairs, WOF on trailer and mileage for travel to jet ski dealer / Held: CGA applies to sale, Respondent as supplier in trade has obligations under CGA / Held: jet ski not of acceptable quality, not free from minor defects, not durable and not fit for a purpose a reasonable consumer would find acceptable / Held: failure of a substantial character, Applicant entitled to reject jet ski and entitled to refund / Held: Applicant entitled to compensation for cost of repair, trailer WOF and transport of jet ski. Claim allowed / Respondent ordered to pay $17,056.23 to Applicant / Respondent to arrange collection of jet ski
-
EO v BD Ltd [2021] NZDT 1599 (30 July 2021) [PDF, 198 KB] Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant ordered vinyl planks with woodgrain effect from Respondent based on sample plank / After floor laid Applicant noticed ‘cross-marks’ which she believed were a fault / Applicant raised issue with Respondent who contacted supplier / Respondent confirmed with supplier that ‘cross-marks’ not a flaw and declined liability / Applicant claims $750.00 as reduction in value / Held: vinyl planks supplied did not correspond with sample in quality / Held: claimed amount of 50% reduction in value reasonable compensation for failure / Section 18(3) of CGA gives consumer right to reject goods and obtain compensation for reduction in value / Claim allowed / Respondent ordered to pay $750 to Applicant
-
TS v LD TI & EX& W Inc [2021] NZDT 1598 (23 July 2021) [PDF, 200 KB] Negligence / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Remedy / Applicant purchased horse from Respondent and Second Respondent / Applicant engaged Third Respondent to provide pre purchase examination which did not record any concerns / after purchase horse diagnosed with several issues and given poor prognosis for athletic performance and long term pleasure riding / Applicant euthanised horse and claims full reimbursement of purchase price of $28,750.00 from Respondents / Held: Third Respondent was not negligent in exercising duty of care when carrying out pre purchase exam of horse / Held: Respondent and Second Respondent acted “in trade” when sold horse to Applicant / Guarantees in CGA apply to sale / Held: horse did not comply with guarantees of acceptable quality and fitness for purpose per ss 7 and 8 of CGA / Held: failure of substantial character per s 21 of CGA / Applicant entitled to compensation of $19,165.00 / Claim allowed
-
UO & NO v HS Ltd & JI & HM [2021] NZDT 1587 (21 July 2021) [PDF, 270 KB] Building Act 2004 / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Implied warranty / Guarantee of reasonable care and skill / Breach / Applicants purchased property from Second and Third Respondent / Applicant discovered several defects with newly built house which was built by Respondent / Applicants claim $30,000 for cost of remedial work / Held: there is an implied warranty under the Building Act / Applicants are able to file claim against respondents for breach / Held: Consumer Guarantees Act applies in claim / Held: Respondent breached implied warranty under the Building Act and CGA ss 28 and 29 / Respondent as builder responsible to ensure work done with reasonable skill and was compliant / Failure of substantial character and defects rendered new building not fit for purpose / Claim allowed / Respondent to pay Applicant $22,674.47 for remedial work
-
HN v FH Ltd [2021] NZDT 1576 (16 July 2021) [PDF, 243 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Promissory Estoppel / Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) / Applicant booked 3 tickets on a spectator boat during the America’s Cup for 13 March / Applicant arrived after check in time and missed departure of vessel / Applicant claims refund of ticket costs, accommodation costs, filing fee and legal costs/damages / Respondent does not agree to refunding ticket price as purchase honoured by providing Applicant alternative trip / Held: Respondent did not breach contract as Applicant did not adhere to conditions of agreement / Held: promissory estoppel does not apply in these circumstances as no detriment to Applicant, he has not suffered any loss as alternative trip offered / Held: Applicant complied with terms and conditions, did not breach FTA / Claim dismissed
-
CF v EX [2021] NZDT 1623 (13 July 2021) [PDF, 194 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant wanted outboard motor put on boat / Applicant met Respondent through social media advertisement about motor project / Applicant agreed to have Respondent do the work and install motor / Applicant paid Respondent $900.00 for materials and $1200.00 for labour / Respondent completed most work but experienced issues delaying completion / Applicant had someone else complete work and install motor / Whether there was a legally binding contract between parties and did they intend to create legal relations / Whether the Respondent breached the contract / Whether the CGA applies / If breach, what damages payable or remedies available to Applicant / Held: parties did intend a legally binding agreement / Held: Respondent failed to complete work and had sufficient opportunity in circumstances to complete it / Held: extra $1050.00 Applicant had to pay is value of bargain lost / Claim allowed / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $1050.00
-
NB & TL v UQ Ltd [2021] NZDT 1657 (13 July 2021) [PDF, 191 KB] Contract / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants entered contract with Respondent for repairs to flood damage to property / Contract included 25% deposit of total sum / Work commenced on site in September 2021 but Respondent did not return until Applicant’s insurer paid deposit / Applicant cancelled contract in October 2021 and claims for return of deposit and payment for damage caused by Respondent / Respondent counter claims losses due to cancellation of contract / Whether Respondent claimed to be a certified, qualified or licensed builder in breach of FTA; if so were Applicants entitled to cancel contract; was work carried out with reasonable care and skill and fit for purpose per CGA; if not, what is the remedy; are Applicants entitled to return of deposit; were Applicants entitled to cancel contract; did Applicants breach contract; if so, what is the remedy / Held: more likely than not Respondent engaged in misleading conduct stating he was a qualified …
-
NQ v OW Ltd [2021] NZDT 1604 (28 June 2021) [PDF, 237 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993/ Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Carrier of Goods / Applicant engaged the Respondent to uplift and transport her items to a different region / Applicant paid $10,953 15 to Respondent for the service including $998.00 for the insurance / Many of the items were damaged on arrival and some were missing / Items were either repaired or a cash settlement was made by the insurance company / Applicant sought a refund of the amount paid for the service and an additional $14,000.00 for distress and inconvenience / The total amount sought was $25,000.00 / Did the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) apply / If so, did the Respondent breach the CGA by failing to provide its services with reasonable care and skill / If the CGA applied was the Applicant entitled to a refund of the amount paid for the service of $10,953.15 / If the CGA did not apply, was the Applicant entitled to compensation under the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Is the A…
-
EI v CT [2021] NZDT 1703 (24 June 2021) [PDF, 104 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant provided structural engineering services to Respondents / Respondents did not want to pay remaining balance invoice / Respondent claimed they did not receive satisfactory or timely services / Held: Applicant breached the contract as the plan provided was not prepared with reasonable care and skill / Respondents breached the contract as they failed to follow the remedies available under s 32 of the CGA / Respondents obliged to pay Applicant $452.81 / Claim granted.
-
FW v KQ Ltd [2021] NZDT 1701 (2 June 2021) [PDF, 197 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant purchased automatic watch from Respondent / Applicant sought refund as unhappy with watch functionality / Respondent refused refund / Applicant claimed watch was not of acceptable quality or fit for communicated purpose ss 6 and 7 CGA / Applicant claimed $899.00 refund / Held: watch not fit for communicated purpose / Respondent did not clearly alert Applicant to characteristics that might make automatic watch unsuited to Applicant’s purposes / Applicant entitled to reject the watch and receive a full refund / Respondent to refund Applicant $899.00 / Claim granted.
-
LX v GQ Ltd [2021] NZDT 1696 (31 May 2021) [PDF, 212 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant purchased washing machine from Respondent / washing machine failed when the tip of a drawstring on a pair of shorts was torn off and damaged inner plastic drum / Did washing machine meet guarantees of acceptable quality pursuant to CGA / Did Respondent comply with obligations pursuant to CGA / Is Applicant entitled to refund and damages for consequential losses / Held: washing machine does not comply with CGA guarantees of acceptable quality / no evidence Applicant misused washing machine / washing machines should be able to cope with common type of clothing / Held: Respondent failed to comply with CGA obligations / Respondent failed to address Applicant’s complaint sufficiently or timely / Respondent responded late and blamed Applicant for failure / Held: Respondent to pay Applicant $1,715.00 being refund of purchase price plus consequential damages / Held: Respondent to collect washing machine or pay Applicant additional $250.…
-
WQ Ltd v X Ltd & CG ta UQ [2021] NZDT 1429 (3 May 2021) [PDF, 218 KB] Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Guarantee of acceptable quality / Applicant purchased vehicle for business being sold by Second Respondent on behalf of First Respondent / Rust on vehicle hidden by vinyl covering on roof at time of sale / Applicant claims compensation from Respondents / Held: reasonable consumer would consider rust minor defect in vehicle of that age / Held: Applicant consumer under CGA / Business use does not exclude Applicant from being a consumer / Second Respondent claims not liable as supplier as selling on behalf / Held: Second Respondent supplier under s 2(1) of the CGA / Supplier includes agent / Supplier to be liable for repairs / First and Second Respondent claim not liable as not RMVTs / CGA not limited to RMVTs / Held: First and Second Respondent could be held liable under the CGA / Both party to sale / Claim allowed / Respondents ordered to pay $828.00 to Applicant
-
MN Ltd v QN & EN [2021] NZDT 1440 (27 April 2021) [PDF, 256 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Guarantee of services completed within a reasonable time and reasonable price / Guarantee of services carried out with reasonable care and skill / Respondent hired Applicant to carry out landscaping works around their pool / Agreement was varied to include additional work / Respondents were unhappy with time and cost to carry out the work / Respondents ended agreement and did not pay full sum invoiced by Applicant / Applicant claims $25,533.74 in relation to unpaid invoices / Respondents counterclaim $8,000 in relation to the service carried out and costs of reinstatement / Held: guarantees under ss 30 and 31 of the CGA relating to services completed in a reasonable time and at a reasonable cost do not apply / Contract determined end date for work and cost estimate for work / Held: service not carried out with reasonable care and skill per guarantee in s 28 of the CGA / Failure to property document project in writing or pictures relating to des…
-
UO Ltd v BE [2021] NZDT 1511 (22 February 2021) [PDF, 184 KB] Contract / Section 28 of the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Section 9 of the Fair Trading Act 1986 / Respondent contracted with Applicant cover band to play at their wedding / Song list was discussed shortly before wedding / Respondents were unhappy with the style of many songs and Applicant was unable to learn new songs under short notice / Respondents cancelled contract and refused to pay cancellation fee due to lack of communication about song list / Held: Applicant failed to communicate regarding song choice with reasonable care and skill, and misled the Respondents about limits of its ability to perform requested songs / Applicant’s failures of communication were not sufficiently serious to justify cancellation of the contract (s 43, FTA 1986) / Damages reflect shared responsibility for Respondent’s invalid cancellation of contract and Applicant’s breaches of the CGA and FTA / Claim allowed / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $900.00
-
TO Ltd v TX [2020] NZDT 1360 (11 December 2020) [PDF, 255 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Variation of contract / Reasonable price / Respondent engaged Applicant to provide landscaping services at his home / Applicant provided Respondent a written scope of works priced as a “provisional estimate” / A variation order was issued to reflect a change in materials for a path from concrete to stone / During project disputes arose over quality of work and amounts being invoiced / Applicant claims unpaid invoices of $18,306.22 / Respondent counter-claims $30,000 representing sums over-paid and remedial costs / Held: no meeting of the minds with respect to the variation of the total price for the stone path / Applicant’s variation order was not clear or consistent with other comparable pricing for paving with the same product / Respondent claims “remedial” work not carried out by Applicant but was charged in provisional estimate / Held: reduction for remedial work in the overall claim per terms of “reasonable price” under s 31 of the CGA / C…