CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 470 APPLICANT TC RESPONDENT CC The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In 2023 TC bought a house from CC. Shortly after moving into the house she discovered black mould under the stairwell. TC was aware prior to purchasing the house that the stairwell had been relined after a leak had caused damage. 2. TC und...
...merchant card services to L Ltd, which allows L Ltd’s customers to pay for goods with credit cards and so forth. L Ltd runs a “click and collect” online purchase service for customers, who can pay online by entering their card details. In about May 2023, a person using the service fraudulently paid for the groceries they had ordered with a credit card that did not belong to them, and picked the groceries up from L Ltd’s store. The customer whose card was used notified their bank wh...
...a refund of invoice 4368 issued by UQ Ltd is dismissed. B. There is a Declaration under section 10(1)(b) of the Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 that SN is not required to pay invoices 4369 and 4448 issued by UQ Ltd. Reasons 1. In about July 2023, SN sought advice from UQ Ltd about the trouble she was having with the transmission in her car. DT of UQ Ltd was unable to assist at that time beyond a brief inspection because he was about to go on holiday. SN then sought advice from tran...
...with previous similar claims involving unauthorised parking under the law of tort (trespass) and has rejected the notion that a contract is created. The issue was comprehensively discussed in the cases of USM v Q Ltd [2022] NZDT 291 and KM v Q Ltd [2023] NZDT 324. Q Ltd’s warning sign not to park does not constitute an offer, as nothing of value is being offered. On the contrary, the intended purpose of the sign is to act as a disincentive to unauthorised parking. The breach fee...
...cleaned between bookings which led to two bookings being cancelled. 4. TS owns a property in [suburb], which has two separate units – a 3 bedroom unit and a one bedroom unit. TS runs the property as holiday accommodation through Airbnb. In January 2023 TS entered into a property management agreement with A LTD in respect of both dwellings at the property. The agreement provided for A LTD to manage the Airbnb (and sometimes direct) letting of the property. The arrangement came to an...
...(Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 283 APPLICANT BX APPLICANT JD RESPONDENT ML The Tribunal orders: 1. ML is to pay $9,000.00 to JD on or before 23 January 2023. Reasons: 2. This matter had previously been part heard and adjourned for ML to seek legal advice. 3. On 19 August 2022 at approximately 6.30pm JD was driving his Toyota truck along [Road] when he struck a cattle beast which was on...
...of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 286 APPLICANT EN RESPONDENT B Ltd The Tribunal orders: B Ltd is to pay $1,980.00 to EN on or before 11 April 2023. REASONS Brief Details of Claim 1. In June 2022, EN booked flights from [City 1] to [Country 1] through a travel agent, NU. EN was to leave [City 1] to fly to [City 2] on a B Ltd flight. After arriving in [City 2], EN would fly o...
...[2024] NZDT 390 APPLICANT BC RESPONDENT BQ The Tribunal orders: 1. BQ is to pay BC the total sum of $12,000.00 on or before Wednesday 26 June 2024. 2. The counter-claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. On 9 January 2023 BC paid a $12,000.00 deposit to secure the purchase of the horse named [the horse] from BQ. The horse was for BC’s 12 year old daughter. The horse remained with BQ for her use including for [event] apart from the period it was then leased t...
...concrete for the bottom half supplied by BD. 3. UC Ltd wants a refund of the price it paid BD for the concrete ($5,146.22) plus interest (6% current bank rate at the time). 4. BD Limited says it supplied the concrete in 2 loads on 23 February 2023 and one load was for 5.6m3 and the other 5.5m3. They say they were not told the concrete ordered needed to match with the concrete already there (which was supplied by TU). HT says had they known they wanted to match the colour they woul...
...[2024] NZDT 17 APPLICANT ZH RESPONDENT C Ltd The Tribunal orders: C Ltd is to pay to ZH the amount of $2,400.00. Payment is to be made on or before 4 March 2024. Reasons 1. ZH rented a car from C Ltd on October 21, 2023. A bond and rental fee was paid for a two day hire period. The return date was a public holiday whereby C Ltd were closed. ZH was given instructions to return the rental car to the carpark outside the [petrol station] on [road], which is in...