CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 586 APPLICANT O Ltd RESPONDENT U Ltd The Tribunal orders: U Ltd is to pay the sum of $28,527.68 to O Ltd by no later than 24 November 2023. Reasons: 1. O Ltd provided building services to U Ltd for a property at [address] from June 2022 until November 2022 in accordance with a quote. Progress payments were made however...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 633 APPLICANT BN RESPONDENT O Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. O Ltd is to pay BN $468.90 on or before the 27 November 2023. 2. The remainder of the claim is dismissed. Reasons Introduction 1. BN purchased a [sewing machine] and as part of the purchase price paid postage. When the sewing machine arrived, it was damaged. It was return...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 672 APPLICANT T Ltd RESPONDENT C Ltd The Tribunal orders: C Ltd must pay T Ltd $5,852.55 by 4pm on 13 December 2023. Reasons: 1. The applicant leased a commercial unit to the respondent from 2017. The rent was reviewed in 2019 and 2021. After a rent review in May 2023, the lease was terminated in September 2023. The applica...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 618 APPLICANT UW RESPONDENT B Ltd G The Tribunal orders: B Ltd is to pay UW the total sum of $2000.00 on or before Tuesday 19 December 2023. Reasons: 1. On 11 December 2023 UW arrived in Auckland from her flight from [City] flying G, operated by B Ltd. But her stroller which had been checked in did not arrive. Instead, she says it was...
...RESPONDENT QT Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. QT Ltd is to pay MU $95.00 on or before 4 April 2024 2. MU is not liable to pay QT Ltd $615.00 for infringement fees or additional costs relating to breach notices issued on 28 April 2023 or 3 May 2023. Reasons 1. MU’s son drives a [car] [registration number] which is owned and registered to MU. On 28 April 2023 and 3 May 2023 MU’s son parked within [address], [city]. There is a complex of six units at this comp...
...[International destination] return in September 2020. Due to Covid travel restrictions, the tickets were later converted to flight credits for future use. 2. In 2022, the applicants requested a refund via their travel agents but by early January 2023, the refund had not been processed, and when the applicants enquired, ZM says they were told to contact the airline directly. They did so and were advised that Air Pacific Ltd had no record of their refund request and it was recommended t...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 698 APPLICANT MU RESPONDENT OL The Tribunal orders: The claim by MU against OL is proved. OL is to pay MU the sum of $4,847.25 on or by 5:00 pm on 20 January 2024. Reasons 1. On 15 July 2023, in the [Suburb] shops carpark OL backed his car into the side of MU’s car causing damage. 2. Both MU and OL were sent a “notice of...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 449 APPLICANT IL RESPONDENT BG The Tribunal orders: 1. The Applicant, IL’s claim is dismissed. Reasons: 2. IL moved into a three-bedroom apartment on [Address] on 27th February 2023. She had a house sharing agreement with her flatmates which included the Respondent, and another couple that lived in the mast...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 2023 APPLICANT CL APPLICANT NN RESPONDENT BT SECOND RESPONDENT B Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed against both respondents. Reasons 1. In 2016, CL and NN engaged B Ltd to carry out a pre-purchase inspection for a house they were buying. A written report was provided and CL and NN proceede...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 279 APPLICANT TH RESPONDENT G Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. TH booked a holiday to [Destination country] through G Ltd. The package booked included flights with [Airline] and accommodation for a stopover in [Stopover city]. The [Airline] flight arrived in [Stopover city] at...