Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

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…

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1988 / Respondent’s legal services were engaged for the execution of an Enduring Power of Attorney (EPA) for Applicant’s father / Applicant claimed Respondent failed to provide satisfactory advice to him about the EPA, resulting in Applicant’s expenditure from his father’s estate that the Family Court ordered him to refund / Applicant claimed $30,000 loss arising from Respondent’s incorrect advice / Held: Respondent failed to provide satisfactory EPA services, as EPA instrument was ineffective / Failure demonstrated a lack of reasonable care and skill and failure to provide services fit for purpose / However, money ordered to be repaid by the Family Court was not a consequential loss arising from Respondent’s inadequate EPA process, but a consequence of Applicant’s decision to spend his father’s money without a legal basis for doing so / That decision pre-dated the EPA instrument executed by Re…

Contract / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Interest on Money Claims Act 2016 / Applicant booked accommodation run by Respondent / Respondent later cancelled booking / Applicant had to find alternative accommodation / Applicant claimed $29,302.90 for additional accommodation and travel expenses, hearing costs, interest and $23,000.00 for stress and inconvenience / Respondent counterclaimed $1,960.00 for time responding to claim / Held: mistake on Respondent’s part when he accepted booking / Respondent did not intend to mislead or deceive / Respondent failed to take reasonable care and skill / Applicant’s additional accommodation ($155.70) and travel ($309.70) costs were reasonably foreseeable consequential losses / Applicant suffered loss of enjoyment of not having holiday in intended location / $1,000.00 awarded for loss of enjoyment / Claims for costs not available / Interest not awarded / Respondent ordered to pay $1,465.40 / Claim allowed in part / Counterclai…

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant engaged Respondent to work on her bathroom renovation / Applicant claimed work was of poor quality / Applicant claimed $3700.00 refund, $1000.00 for remedial work, $72.08 for rubbish disposal, and $24.90 Tribunal costs / Held: three independent contractors gave damning statements about standard of Respondent’s work / There were failures of consumer guarantees of reasonable care and skill and of fitness for purpose by Respondent, and failures were of substantial character / No value in Respondent’s work, so Applicant entitled to refund of money paid / Applicant entitled to refund of payments totaling $3400.00, but insufficient evidence to support additional $300.00 / Applicant entitled to consequential losses of $1000 for stripping back job and $72.08 rubbish removal / Costs unable to be awarded / Respondent ordered to pay $4472.08 / Claim allowed in part.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant booked a return bus trip with Respondent/ Applicant got off the bus to go to the toilet and the bus departed without her / Applicant was then rebooked on the next bus, but she did not arrive until 6.00 am the following day / Applicant claimed $4999.00 for stress, clothes, backpackers fee and a meal, but primarily claimed to penalise the driver and the company / Held: Respondent failed to exercise reasonable care and skill / Driver had a responsibility to take reasonable steps to check Applicant was on board before departing  / Applicant entitled to compensation for reasonably foreseeable consequential loss / Respondent paid $170 in good will which would sufficiently address Applicant’s expenses / Applicant entitled to further $150.00 compensation for distress and inconvenience and as a punitive measure / Respondent ordered to pay $150 / Claim allowed in part.

Contract law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant bought washing machine from Respondent / Washing machine’s depth was 720mm, different from online description 650mm / Applicant sought to return machine but Respondent declined request / Applicant claimed purchase price $1394.35 plus $270 consequential losses / Held: Machine inaccurately described by Respondent / Applicant entitled to reject goods and receive refund / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $1664.35 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant took car to Respondent’s car wash / Soap suds were sprayed on car then carwash stopped working / Employee of Respondent washed off some suds / Applicant drove home and tried to hose off remaining suds / Sud marks left on car / Applicant claims for consequential damage caused by malfunction of the carwash / Held: damage caused by carwash malfunction / Applicant entitled to compensation / Respondent liable to pay $3,653.53 for cost of remedying damage, claim allowed

Consumer law / Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant bought an automotive car item from Respondent / Item did not run correctly once installed in the car / Respondent gave a refund / Applicant claims the cost of the item, mechanic fees and time spent in preparation for hearing / Held: CGA applies / Respondent had the opportunity to inspect the item before providing a refund / Due to the circumstances, it could not be determined whether the item was faulty / Applicant can claim for reasonable consequential losses / Disputes Tribunal cannot award costs for hearing preparations / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $107.61 / Claim partly allowed.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993/ Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Carrier of Goods / Applicant engaged the Respondent to uplift and transport her items to a different region / Applicant paid $10,953 15 to Respondent for the service including $998.00 for the insurance / Many of the items were damaged on arrival and some were missing / Items were either repaired or a cash settlement was made by the insurance company / Applicant sought a refund of the amount paid for the service and an additional $14,000.00 for distress and inconvenience / The total amount sought was $25,000.00 / Did the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) apply / If so, did the Respondent breach the CGA by failing to provide its services with reasonable care and skill / If the CGA applied was the Applicant entitled to a refund of the amount paid for the service of $10,953.15 / If the CGA did not apply, was the Applicant entitled to compensation under the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Is the A…

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Guarantee of services completed within a reasonable time and reasonable price / Guarantee of services carried out with reasonable care and skill / Respondent hired Applicant to carry out landscaping works around their pool / Agreement was varied to include additional work / Respondents were unhappy with time and cost to carry out the work / Respondents ended agreement and did not pay full sum invoiced by Applicant / Applicant claims $25,533.74 in relation to unpaid invoices / Respondents counterclaim $8,000 in relation to the service carried out and costs of reinstatement / Held: guarantees under ss 30 and 31 of the CGA relating to services completed in a reasonable time and at a reasonable cost do not apply / Contract determined end date for work and cost estimate for work / Held: service not carried out with reasonable care and skill per guarantee in s 28 of the CGA / Failure to property document project in writing or pictures relating to des…

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant engaged Respondent to carry out a pre-purchase building inspection on a house / Report highlighted a few minor issues but nothing of major concern / Applicant purchased house and discovered the tile flooring in bathroom was uneven/sunken / Applicant claimed $15,000.00 from Respondent towards the cost of remedial work / Held: Respondent did not carry out its service with reasonable skill and care / Respondent to pay Applicant the sum of $10,000.00 as damages for foreseeable consequential loss / claim allowed.

Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant carried out roofing work on building owned by Respondent / Respondent sought compensation for poor workmanship and damage to building / Applicant counterclaimed for amount outstanding / whether roofing work carried out with reasonable care and skill under s28 / whether failures substantial & if so, how much was owed under contract / Held: work did not comply with s28 as it was undertaken in a storm & was not completed to an adequate standard / failures substantial & resonable consumer test met / Respondent entitled to refund of labour & contribution to consequential loss / Applicant enitled to payment towards sums expended on material / Respondent ordered to pay $6,504.12 to Applicant / claim allowed

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased truck cab and chassis from respondent / Purchase included mechanical breakdown insurance / Respondent not authorised by Second Respondent to issue mechanical breakdown insurance for vehicles over 6,000kg / Vehicle’s ABS control unit failed and replaced at cost of $3,474.60 / Applicant claims $1,479.60 against Respondent and Second Respondent for breach of the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Held: the Respondent through their agent the Second Respondent failed to take adequate care / No consequential loss / Claim dismissed