Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased a sofa for $550.00 from Respondent / After sofa was delivered, Applicant noticed there was a gap between the sofa cushions / Applicant asked Respondent to replace the sofa or rectify the problem / Respondent considered the gap was natural rather than defective / Applicant sought a refund of $550.00 / Held: unable to establish that the sofa failed to match the display model in quality / Reasonable consumer would not find the gap to be a defect, or to be unacceptable in appearance / Gap was a natural result of the design of the sofa / Although the Applicant considered the sofa was ugly that was a matter of personal preference rather than an aesthetic flaw / Claim dismissed.

Misrepresentation / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant bought a new caravan from First Respondents / Caravan had a heater as a chattel / Respondent told Applicant the heater was adequate / Applicant claimed for losses because the heater could not sufficiently heat the caravan / Held: Applicants failed to prove that the heater was misrepresented nor that it was not fit for purpose / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased heat pump unit manufactured by Respondent / Applicant quickly experienced issues with unit / Different installation company assessed unit and found it was installed incorrectly /  Applicant claimed for cost of remedial work from both respondents / Liquidator for Second Respondent did not consent to proceedings continuing against Second Respondent so Applicant continued claim against Respondent only / Held: failure of unit was result of installation work carried out by a person other the manufacturer / Respondents not liable for failed installation that caused issues / Claim dismissed. 

Contract / Respondent engaged Applicant to carry out landscaping / Applicant carried out work from 2022, receiving instructions and payments from the Respondent / Two years later, dispute arose between the parties /  Applicant offered three options / Respondent chose one of those options, which included termination of the agreement and a payment of $26,636.92 / Respondent requested Applicant signed an acknowledgement document before payment was made / Applicant signed document and added a payment date / Respondent then stated it did not consider that any further payments were owing / Applicant claimed $26,636.92 / Held: parties reached a binding agreement / Respondent confirmed it would take the option to terminate the Applicant’s agreement in return for payment of $23.162.54 / Agreement was a clear acceptance of one of the offers / Once the offer was accepted the Applicant was not entitled to unilaterally add a fixed date for payment, or to declare the acknowledgement document would b…

Contract / First Respondent had a commercial subscription with Applicant / Third Respondent had a private subscription with Applicant / First Respondent was in arrears and had lost subscription / Applicant became aware First Respondent was providing Second Respondent’s services to others / Applicant claimed $3,586.68 against all three Respondents for unpaid subscriptions and investigation costs / Held: claim against First Respondent proven / It was in arrears, and cost to identify how it was able to obtain Applicant’s services were reasonable / Claims against Second and Third Respondents dismissed / First Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $3,586.68 / Claim allowed in part.

Contract / Applicants purchased vacant section from Respondents / Sale and purchase agreement required Respondents to ensure boundary markers correctly placed on boundaries / Respondents also warranted no notice was received from local, government, statutory authority affecting the property / Applicants found no boundary markers in place / Local Authority notified Applicants of intention to take part of Applicant's land for road widening and that Respondents had been aware of this / Applicants had to change building plans / Applicants claimed for costs of surveying and additional design and consent costs / Held - Respondents breached agreement by failing to place boundary markers and failing to inform Applicants of Council's intention to take part of property / Losses incurred by Applicants were foreseeable consequences of Respondents' breach / Claim allowed.

Contract Law / Franchise Law / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant entered into a franchise cleaning agreement with Respondent / Applicant subsequently cancelled the agreement and sought a refund for the money paid for the business because of lack of cleaning job opportunities / Applicant claimed a refund for the money paid for the franchise business due to misrepresentation by Respondent / Held: Respondent misrepresented the period for promised turnover and the effect of the turnover guarantee / Respondent ordered to pay applicant $18,000 by 25 July 2024.

Contract / Building / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Breach of contract / Applicants engaged Respondents to supply and install portable block of toilets at Applicant's Hotel / Applicants paid deposit and work started to obtain Council consents / Over a year later, consents had not been obtained and Applicants cancelled contract with Respondents as work not completed by agreed date / Respondents claimed for refund of deposit paid / Held: contract existed between Applicants and Respondent / Respondents had not breached contract by failing to complete works by expected date / Contract showed that expected completion date was an estimated date / Failure to finish by the estimated date would not necessarily breach contract / Applicants did not show that Respondents failed to exercise reasonable diligence / Outstanding paperwork required by Council for consent led to delay related to area outside of Respondent's knowledge or control / Contract stated deposit not refundable but Tribun…

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant engaged First Respondent to remove asbestos from property / Applicant claimed First Respondent's work was substandard with safety issues / Applicant claimed $30,000 loss / Held: First Respondent did not carry out removal and clearance of asbestos with reasonable care and skill / Third Respondent breached guarantee afforded by CGA by not conducting Four stage clearance assessment of Class A materials and visual clearance of planned and approved removal of Class B materials with reasonable care and skill / Applicant could not remedy failure / Failure of substantial character / Applicant entitled to refund of costs paid and consequential losses / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $26,320.25 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant booked return flights through Respondent / Applicant missed first flight / Applicant was told his “no show” for the first flight meant that all flights on the ticket were forfeited / Applicant booked new flights / Applicant claimed $1,885.82 for international flights, calls incurred sorting the issue, and accommodation / Applicant also sought an order that Respondent was liable to pay return flight costs / Held: Respondent did not breach contract / Terms of the contract were sufficiently clear when Applicant agreed to them / Fare rules included a term that a failure to make a flight on the ticket could result in remaining flights being cancelled / Respondent did breach the CGA because after sales service was not provided with reasonable care and skill /  Applicant had to make multiple international calls to try to resolve matter at his own expense / Respondent ordered to reimburse Applicant $144.21 for international calls / Claim allo…

Consumer law / Applicant selected vehicle in Respondent’s yard and paid deposit to secure it / Once Applicant’s loan was approved he returned to Respondent’s premises to uplift vehicle / Respondent advised vehicle had been sold and Applicant would have to select another vehicle / Applicant did not wish to select another vehicle was sought full refund of deposit / Respondent refused / Applicant claimed for refund of $2,050 deposit / Held: Applicant paid deposit on specific vehicle / Not open to Respondent to sell that vehicle and insist on deposit being used to purchase a different vehicle / Applicant entitled to full refund / Respondent ordered to pay $2,050 / Claim allowed.

Insurance law / Respondent hit the rear of Applicant’s vehicle at a pedestrian crossing / Applicant’s insurer paid for repair costs / Applicant claimed $6,420.80 from Respondent for cost of repairs / Held: Respondent liable for the damage to Applicant’s vehicle / Cost of repairs proven / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $6,420.80 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Consumers Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased shipping container from Second Respondent / Applicant contracted First Respondent to transport shipping container to property / Wrong container was collected that resulted in delay / First Respondent seeks $475 for wait time / Applicant claimed declaration of non-liability / Held: service provider must exercise reasonable care and skill / Waiting cost not to fall on Applicants / Second Respondent ordered to pay First Respondent $237.50 for waiting cost / Claim allowed in part.