Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Negligence / Applicant and Respondent were drinking at a mutual friend’s house / Applicant went home and left his vehicle and its key at the friend’s house / Respondent later advised Applicant he had driven the vehicle and damaged it / Applicant claimed for repair costs / Held: evidence indicated Respondent damaged Applicant’s vehicle / Respondent breached his duty of care by causing the damage / Applicant entitled to compensation for the reasonably foreseeable loss incurred as a result of Respondent’s breach / Valuation showed vehicle was worth $7,000.00 before the damage occurred / Cost of repairs quoted as $5,539.78 / Applicant sold vehicle in its damaged state for $1,500 / Deducting the sale price from the vehicle’s valuation meant Applicant incurred a loss of $5,500.00 / Applicant claimed to be compensated $4,999.95, that amount was less than the reasonably foreseeable loss incurred / Respondent ordered to pay $4,999.95 / Claim allowed.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants purchased a kitset cabin to be installed on their property / Applicants stated cabin was not sealed sufficiently to be weather tight / Applicants sought compensation on basis cabin was not of appropriate quality / Held: cabin was of acceptable quality / Assembly instructions were detailed and provided appropriate guidance on how the cabin should be installed / On evidence provided, more likely than not that there were assembly issues rather than an issue with the product / Insufficient evidence that the kitset being wet at delivery was reason for the weathertightness issues / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant borrowed Third Respondent's vehicle from Second Respondent / Vehicle not insured / Applicant involved in car crash and was found liable for damages to other vehicle involved / Applicant claimed reimbursement for damages paid / Held: First and Third Respondent had no contract with Applicant / Applicant could have enquired about insurance cover and made her own insurance arrangements / Respondent did not breach any duty owed to Applicant / Loss resulted from Applicant's negligent driving / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant purchased commercial truck recommended to have custom-build deck and toolboxes / Original contractor unable to complete work / Respondent arranged to take on job and sent Applicant quotation which was accepted / Dispute arose regarding pricing and specification of toolboxes / Applicant claimed work completed by Respondent did not match their specifications / Applicant claimed for remedial work costs, various costs and exemplary damages / Held: no settlement agreement reached between parties / Applicant have not proven on balance of probabilities that Respondent breached contract / Respondent clearly communicated design alterations to Applicant / Applicant could not prove noise issue with PTO was outside standard tolerance or that Respondent had caused it / Respondent liable for Applicant's travel and legal costs and amount awarded adjusted to reflect this / Applicant ordered to pay Respondent / Counterclaim allowed in part / Claim allowed in part.

Negligence / First Respondent crashed into back of Applicant's car after Applicant stopped at traffic lights / First Respondent apologised to Applicant after crash, said brakes weren't working and that he was going to get them checked / Applicants claimed $7161.58 for repairs / Held: Respondent's driving was most likely cause of collision / Respondent could not safely stop which suggested Respondent did not proceed with sufficient caution / Reasonable driver concerned about their brakes would have pulled over and had car checked before driving further / Reasonable driver would have proceeded with utmost caution including ensuring abundance of stopping room between cars ahead / Second Respondent said it identified no issue with First Respondent's brakes / Evidence was insufficient to find issue with brakes or that any issue had been caused by Second Respondent's negligence / Costs claimed were reasonable / Respondent liable to pay $7161.58 to Applicant's insurer / Claim against First Re…

Negligence / Respondents leased commercial wheelie bin to company operating from block of units / Wheelie bin was stored outside unit / Applicant's car parked in unit carpark and wind blew bin across carpark causing it to hit and damage Applicant's car / Applicant's claimed $1766.40 for cost of repairing car damage / People in surrounding units gave evidence that bin's brakes were broken and it had been caught in wind several times before / Company who hired bin had told Respondents they wanted Respondents to swap bin for smaller one but made no mention of problems with current bin / Employee of Respondent swapped bins and found brakes working well / Held: insufficient evidence that Respondent failed to take reasonable care in relation to bin / Respondents were not made aware of problems with bin or its brakes / Delay in Respondents swapping bin was reasonable in the circumstances / Unclear from evidence whether there was issue with bin's brakes / No evidence these bins were intrinsica…

Contract / Applicant sought to lease business premises from Respondent / Director of respondent company and Applicant negotiated over text message and Director appeared interested in lease proposal / Respondent later said owner did not want to proceed with lease / Applicant claimed compensation for inconvenience and loss of potential earnings / Held: messages between parties do not suggest intention to be immediately bound so Respondent free to withdraw from negotiations and no concluded agreement had been reached so Applicant cannot establish equitable estoppel / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Respondents advertised a tractor for sale on a website / Initially, the tractor was listed for $9000 / Subsequently, the price was amended to "$9,500 or nearest offer excluding GST" / Applicant purchased the tractor and paid $10,350, which included the buy now price plus GST / Applicant subsequently noticed the website terms and conditions provided all must be GST inclusive / Applicant sought $1,395 (GST paid and filing fee) from the Respondents / Held: the website terms and conditions did not affect the agreement between the parties, as it was their agreement and the website was not a party to it / Applicant had agreed with the Respondent to purchase the tractor for $9000 plus GST / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant’s mother passed away / Applicant and his brother were executors of their mother’s estate / Applicant’s brother entered into an agreement with Respondent to provide funeral services, including cremation / Applicant’s brother authorised their sister to collect ashes / Applicant initiated legal action to take possession of his mother’s ashes / Applicant claimed Respondent breached contract by releasing his mother’s ashes to his sister / Applicant claimed $1,723.00 in compensation for losses suffered as a result of initiating legal proceedings to retrieve the ashes / Held: Applicant did not enter into a contract with Respondent / Applicant’s name was not on the contract, and he did not sign the contract / Nothing in the contract to indicate other executors were parties to contract / Respondent did not breach contract by releasing the ashes to the Applicant’s sister / Respondent was authorised to release the ashes by the Applicant’s brother, who was a party to the contr…

Consumer law / Property / Applicant decided to sell her house by auction using the Respondent’s services / Respondent changed her mind about the auction an hour before it was planned to proceed / Respondent failed to pay invoice from Applicant / Applicant claimed $2,586.25 for marketing costs (including signage) and the auctioneer’s fee / Respondent did not dispute her obligation to pay the remainder of the charges, $1585.75 / Dispute limited to the cost of the signage being $195.50 and the auctioneer’s fee of $805.00 / Held: agreement between the parties referred to a standard sign only / No obligation to provide the Respondent with a brand new sign / Respondent unable to show any loss relating to the sign / Respondent required to pay $195.50 for the sign / Unlikely that the Respondent would advise a client that the auctioneer’s fee would not be required in the circumstances / Respondent ordered to pay $2,586.25 for marketing costs and auctioneer’s fee / Claim allowed.

Trespass / Parking / Applicant parked in carpark controlled by third party for seven minutes / Carpark had one sign indicating "No Parking" and another indicated "Customer Parking Only" / Respondent sent Applicant breach notice and three reminder notices / Applicant advised Respondent they thought park was for surrounding businesses / Applicant also stated that she had attended a third party business who controlled carpark / Applicant sought order that they were not liable to Respondent / Respondent claimed $320 for breach notice, reminder notices, and 2.5% monthly interest on unpaid notices / Held: Applicant did not trespass as Applicant could be customer of third party business / Signage indicated she was authorised to park there as a customer / Nothing to indicate appointment required or potential customers were not permitted to park / Applicant did not trespass so not liable to Respondent / Respondent's claim against Applicant dismissed.  

Contract / Respondent and Applicants were friends / Respondent had recently paid Applicant for some work done / Respondent asked Applicant to take plant to her house and if Applicant wanted to quote for plumbing work for Respondent / Respondent did not accept quote when Applicant gave it and did not pay Applicant for delivering plant and preparing quote / Applicant claimed $768.95 for work done and value of barbeque / Held: no contract between parties as no discussion that payment would be made / It would also be unusual to charge for time spent in preparing quote / Casual arrangements between parties were characteristic of favours between friends, not legal relationship / Not reasonable for Applicant to expect payment in the circumstances / Quasi-contract not established when clear Applicant agreed to do work as favour / Applicant gave barbeque as a gift to Respondent and was not entitled to its return / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Building Act 2004 / Applicant bought new-build property from Respondent which had a Code Compliance Certificate / Applicant noticed overflow relief gully had not been installed as per plans and council sign off / Respondent claimed they can complete work but Applicant will not allow it / Applicant discovered drainlayer who completed drainage work was not licensed / Document signed by a separate plumber verified they had completed work according to plans despite lack of overflow relief gully and fact that he had not done the work / Council passed inspection of property based on certified documents from the plumber / Applicant claimed $10,000 for another plumbing company to carry out necessary work / Held: work not carried out nor completed in accordance with plans / Work also not done in accordance with legal requirements as a non-LBP tradesperson had completed work and person certifying they did the work had not actually done it / Respondent liable for non-complaint work / A…