Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicants hired rental car from Respondent using online booking platform / Car was damaged by third party / Applicants returned vehicle and provided third party’s details to Respondent / Respondent charged Applicants $5,022.50 for insurance excess, indicated refund available if Applicants contacted booking platform / Booking platform advised insurance policy was with Respondent, Respondent should be contacted for refund / Applicants made numerous attempts to follow up but Respondent had not refunded excess / Applicants claimed $6,322.50 for the excess, credit card surcharge and costs related to resolving dispute / Held: rental contract provided basic insurance coverage with $4900 excess, refundable if hirer not at fault or third party admitted liability / Respondent breached CGA by failing to make reasonable effort to resolve matter in reasonable time / Respondent breached contract by failing to follow up with third party / Filing fee or…

Parking / Contract / Applicant's daughter parked vehicle seven minutes beyond the 180-minute parking limit / Respondent issued Applicant a breach notice / Applicant claimed refund of parking breach and filing fee / Held: Applicant's daughter authorised to park and was not a trespasser / Driver entitled some leeway to enter and exit building / Applicant entitled to refund / Filing fee cannot be recovered by Applicant as exceptional circumstances did not apply / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $65 / Claim allowed.

Trespass / Contract / Land Transport Act 1998 / Vehicle registered in Applicant's name parked in private carpark without authority / Respondent sent Applicant a breach notice which Applicant disputed and asked for evidence proving breach / Respondent said registered owner of vehicle liable per New Zealand Transport Authority and provided one photo that did not evidence illegal parking / Applicant said lack of contract with Respondent meant Applicant had no liability / Respondent lodged debt for collection with debt collection agency and Applicant filed claim with Tribunal / Applicant claimed for order that she is not liable to pay Respondent for breach notice, collection costs and sought reimbursement of filing fee / Respondent counterclaimed for payment of breach notice, collection costs and interest / Held: Applicant is not liable for breach fee as she was not driving vehicle at the time / No provisions applicable in tort that mean a registered owner can be liable for another's tresp…

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Fair Trading Act 1986 /  Two families made a booking to stay at a property owned by the Respondent / On arrival they were unhappy with the state of the premises, including cleanliness and safety / Respondent offered to send people to remedy the issues, but the families decided not to stay / Families asked for a full refund, which was refused / Applicant, on behalf of the parties, claimed $1,642.50 from Respondent, representing a full refund together with $100.00 for travel expenses and $59.00 for filing fee / Held: property was not reasonably fit for a short holiday / Failure was of a substantial nature and could not easily be remedied within a reasonable time period / Offer to send contractors to remedy the issues was not acceptable given the purpose was for a three-day holiday / Applicant entitled to cancel without providing an opportunity to the supplier to remedy the problems / Since the families left the accommodation within a short ti…

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicants engaged Respondent as a maternity matron / Respondent was to care for newborn, prepare food, and support the mother / Fee was $380 per day / Agreement required 24/7 service / Due to a family death, the Respondent informed Applicants they could not work night shifts or start on the agreed date / Applicants claimed Respondent breached the contract and sought refund of bond, postpartum meal costs, and filing fee / Held: Applicants entitled to bond refund / Postpartum meal costs were not a consequential loss caused by the Respondent / Loss mitigated by hiring another matron / Filing fee could not be awarded in the circumstances / Respondent ordered to pay Applicants’ $2,660.00 / Claim allowed in part.

Contract / Respondents advertised a tractor for sale on a website / Initially, the tractor was listed for $9000 / Subsequently, the price was amended to "$9,500 or nearest offer excluding GST" / Applicant purchased the tractor and paid $10,350, which included the buy now price plus GST / Applicant subsequently noticed the website terms and conditions provided all must be GST inclusive / Applicant sought $1,395 (GST paid and filing fee) from the Respondents / Held: the website terms and conditions did not affect the agreement between the parties, as it was their agreement and the website was not a party to it / Applicant had agreed with the Respondent to purchase the tractor for $9000 plus GST / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicants purchased a house from Respondent / Spa pool was part of purchase / When the Applicants attempted to use the spa it caused the electricity board to trip and cut power to the house / Spa pool drew more electricity than the house was supplied with / Applicant claimed $27,147.27 from Respondent, comprising of $449.22 to diagnose issue; $25,193.05 to install an additional electrical cable; $1,000.00 in legal fees; $325.00 physio costs and $180.00 for filing fee / Respondent denied liability on the basis that the spa worked when she lived at the property / Held: there was misrepresentation about the spa pool / Evidence accepted that electrical supply to the house was insufficient to run the spa /  Applicants induced into contract by misrepresentation / Spa was 15 years old so replacement value assessed to be $15,000 / Legal fees were reasonable / Applicants not awarded claimed $325.00 for physio costs for being…

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant contacted Respondent about buying her car / Parties negotiated price of $5,250.00 / Applicant observed unusual behaviour in the car ten days after purchase / Applicant got a mechanic’s report and contacted Respondent about issues identified / Respondent refused to refund Applicant or contribute to repair costs / Respondent had stated car had been “well looked after mechanically” / Applicant claimed $4,903.45 in damages, comprising $4,250.00 for loss in value, $287.50 for diagnosis, $57.95 for a fee to return parts purchased, $218.00 for other parts purchased, and $90.00 filing fee / Held: representation that car had been well looked after mechanically influenced Applicant’s decision to go ahead with the purchase without any pre-purchase inspection / Applicant was induced by the misrepresentation to enter into the contract / Applicant entitled to recover half cost of engine replacement and diagnosis, $2,022.70 / Claim allowed i…

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant paid $12,000.00 deposit to secure purchase of horse from Respondent / Horse remained with Respondent, apart from a period when it was leased to Applicant for a horse camp / When Respondent retrieved horse after camp, she claimed it was lame / Applicant decided not to proceed with purchase, requested refund / Applicant claimed $12,250.00 for purchase price and filing fee / Respondent counter-claimed $8,000.00 for reduced value of horse / Held: Applicant entitled to cancel contract and obtain full refund until final payment was made, according to agreement / Respondent failed to prove horse suffered laminitis caused during time she was under Applicant’s responsibility / Respondent breached agreement by failing to refund Applicant / Filing fee not recoverable / Respondent ordered to pay $12,000.00 / Claim allowed in part and counter-claim dismissed.

Contract / Interest / Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 (DTA) / Applicant engaged by Respondent as an independent contractor for data entry work / Applicant filed claim against Respondent for $360.84, unpaid sums of $45.40 and $20.44 plus interest, damages for time pursuing payment, and filing fee / Unpaid sums since been paid / Applicant now claimed $840.00 in compensation for late payment, including interest, time spent and filing fee / Held: no contractual provision for interest in circumstances / DTA provided for interest to be ordered at Tribunal’s discretion / DTA does not allow for interest where debt was paid before hearing / Circumstances not met for costs to be awarded / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 / Applicant purchased a phone from Respondent which came with a one year warranty / After 18 months Applicant started to experience problems with it / Applicant took phone to authorised repairer / Repairer declined to repair phone as it was defective / Applicant wanted Respondent to repair defective phone and pay filing fee / Held: phone no longer under warranty / Applicant entitled to remedy as phone was not of acceptable quality / Unable to award filing fee in the circumstances / Respondent liable for all repair costs / Claim granted in part.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased a second-hand fridge from Respondent for $600 / Applicant paid $30.00 for delivery / Months later, Applicant contacted Respondent stating the fridge was no longer cooling food /  Respondent repaired fridge at Applicant’s address / Shortly afterwards Applicant contacted Respondent to advise the problem did not appear to be fixed / Respondent advised that Applicant would have to bring the fridge in to be fixed / Applicant sought a refund for the fridge of $600.00 and $30.00 for delivery and $45.00 for the Tribunal filing fee / Held: Respondent did not succeeded in remedying the fault within a reasonable time frame / Applicant can reject the goods and get a $600 refund / Respondent failed to succeeded in remedying the fault / Applicant not entitled to a reimbursement of fridge delivery fee, $30 / Delivery was separate from the purchase and no fault with service / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $600 / Applicant ordered to r…

Contract / Respondent approached Applicant about having a billboard placed at its premises / Applicant provided Respondent with estimated costs for gaining resource consent / Respondent replied saying “yes please proceed the application” / Applicant claimed $8,790.17, being three unpaid invoices plus Tribunal filing fee / Respondent accepted owing 50% of one invoice, but disputed all other charges / Held: it was a term of the contract that Respondent would pay 100% of the costs of the resource consent / More likely than not that Respondent was to pay for the traffic and urban reports required for the consent application / Applicant was not responsible for advising Respondent it would need its landlord’s consent / Applicant entitled to all invoiced costs, but unable to claim Tribunal fee / Respondent ordered to pay $8,610.17 / Claim allowed.