Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Contract / Respondent provided software services to Applicant / Agreement stated Respondent’s charges subject to change on 7-days’ notice / Respondent increased charges in August but did not notify Applicant until September / Respondent informed Applicant of increase by email, apologised for not notifying in advance / Applicant claimed email was apology only and did not constitute notice as given retrospectively / Applicant charged higher price for five months before cancelling agreement / Applicant claimed $600 refund / Held: email constituted notice of increase / Increase could not apply to charges before notice given / Respondent agreed to refund first month of increased charges / Applicant not entitled to refund for charges after notice period / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicant intended booking business class flights from Respondent / Applicant informed flight unavailable after confirming booking / Price increased significantly after attempting to rebook / Applicant claimed Respondent breached the Fair Trading Act / Held: no breach by Respondent / Uncertainty about availability where flight involves a partner airline is made known to people before confirming booking / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant supplied Respondent with electricity / Applicant discovered electricity meters were not working properly / Electricity usage had not been measured properly / Applicant billed Respondent and Respondent did not pay / Applicant claimed $19,662.67 for unpaid bills / Held: failure by Respondent to pay amount is a breach of the terms of contract with Applicant / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $19,662.67 / Claim allowed.

Consumer law / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicants purchased house / Applicants obtained building report from Respondent before purchase / Respondent’s building report noted issue with floor levels, but said it was of ‘no concern’ / Applicants later tried to sell house but had to relevel floor before sale could proceed / Applicants claimed Respondent’s building report was misleading, sought compensation for relevelling / Held: building report was not misleading / Respondent not liable to compensate Applicants for cost of levelling the floors / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant had income protection insurance with Respondent / Applicant injured foot at work, saw podiatrist but continued working / Injury did not improve, impaired Applicant’s performance / Applicant’s employment eventually terminated / Applicant started claim process with Respondent 11 months after termination, began receiving payments after 90-day policy waiting period / Applicant claimed Respondent should have backdated cover to when income first lost / Applicant sought $29,684.39 / Held: Applicant did not meet policy criteria to have cover backdated / Respondent not in breach of contract / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicants entered into an agreement with Respondent for their wedding reception / Applicants dissatisfied with service provided and sought $4,979.75 in damages /  Damages sought for loss of flowers, excessive charge on alcohol, refund due to inadequate service, extra photographers cost and compensation for emotional harm / Held: implied term that Applicants would get flowers after wedding reception / Flowers were put in the rubbish / $249.83 for loss of flowers and loss of opportunity as memorabilia / Service for reception adequate in the circumstances / Unable to establish photographer’s services were more expensive than anticipated / Damages for emotional harm and loss of reputation outside of Tribunal’s jurisdiction / Order made for $247 refund of champagne and $249.83 loss of flowers / Respondent ordered to pay $496.83 / Claim granted.

Fencing / Fencing Act 1978 / Applicants undertook fence repairs on their boundary with Respondent / Respondent states that damage to the fence had not resulted by her actions or property / Respondent was not notified of intended repairs / Applicants claim $775.23 for the cost of repairs / Neighbour owes duty of care to ensure their property is maintained so no loss is caused to neighbours / Respondent’s tree had caused minor damage to the fence / Damage needed to be repaired immediately / Claim allowed / Respondent to pay Applicant $637.23.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased a boat from Respondent | Applicant claimed Respondent breached sale and purchase agreement / Applicant claimed Respondent misrepresented state of the boat / Applicant sought $13,833.09 for work required to the boat / Respondent counterclaimed due to selling vessel at a lower price due to its condition / Held: Applicant agreed to purchase vessel in current condition / Outlined refit details were not covered in agreement / Respondent did not breach agreement / No misrepresentation of condition of vessel / Applicant relied upon her own judgement in purchasing vessel / Claim for reconnecting the chartplotter accepted, $47.22/ No legal basis for counterclaim / Claim granted in part and counterclaim dismissed.

Contract / Respondent purchased vehicle from Applicant / Vehicle damaged in collision and Applicant agreed to purchase vehicle from Respondent to go through repair process with insurer / Vehicle has structural damage and is uneconomic to repair / Applicant claimed $30,000 compensation / Held: Respondent entered contract with Applicant on understanding that Applicant would purchase damaged vehicle to receive benefit of insurance claim / Respondent breached contract / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $30,000 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased ute from Respondent / Applicant later informed vehicle required repairs due to extensive corrosion / Applicant claimed $20,000 / Held: Respondent misrepresented condition of ute / Misrepresentation induced Applicant to purchase vehicle / Applicant entitled to estimated repair costs / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $14,472.75 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Applicant travelled on one of the Respondent’s regional flights to connect with an ongoing international flight / Respondent’s flight arrived seven minutes late / Applicant missed international flight / Applicant sought compensation for costs of new tickets, accommodation and transfers / Held: Applicant’s flight arrived only seven minutes late / If the Applicant’s flight had arrived on time he would have had insufficient time to make transfer to international flight / No breach by Respondent found / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Jurisdiction / Applicant travelled to New Zealand with Respondent airline / Respondent charged additional baggage fee for Applicant’s air rifle / Applicant claimed additional charge contradicted Respondent’s baggage policy / Held: matter was a contract dispute / Contract between parties was formed outside New Zealand / Tribunal did not have extra-territorial jurisdiction / No jurisdiction to determine dispute / Claim struck out.

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant rented Respondent's short-term accommodation / Applicant not satisfied with certain aspects of property and moved out to another accommodation / Applicant claimed full refund of $1,660 / Held: Applicant did not receive what she had contracted to receive / Applicant validly cancelled contract due to Respondent's breach / Respondent ordered to pay $1,367.50 to Applicant / Claim allowed.