Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased candles online from Respondent / Applicant stated candles were smudged and flattened near the bottom and not of the quality she expected / Applicant sought to return the candles and receive compensation of $127.00 / Respondent stood by the quality of the candles saying they were produced in beeswax and were formed within a mold / Respondent said she offered to exchange the candles but the offer was not accepted / Held: candles were of acceptable quality and fit for purpose / Clear to any buyer that that the candles were not hand-carved / No breach of guarantee / No right to refund / Claim dismissed.

Fencing law / Fencing Act 1978 / Parties are neighbours and had obtained interim Fencing Act order for building a boundary fence / Decision finalises the interim order with some amendments where necessary / The parties sought an updated quote from builder to allow variations to fence not included in interim order / Order sets out matters relating to how fence is to be constructed, payment of costs, and the timeline for when parties should complete acts they have been ordered to / Order records discussion at hearing of issues with as-built plans affecting plumbing to assist parties to continue with as-built plans and make corrections to plan where necessary / Order records 2nd Applicant's agreement to use best endeavors to investigate matters relating to plumbing in as-built plans and to lodge corrected plans with local council as soon as practicable.

Tort / Applicant alleged Respondent damaged Applicant's car while it was parked / Applicant and Respondent were colleagues who did not get on well / Applicant viewed security camera footage overlooking car from neighbouring business immediately after discovering damage and saw Respondent walking around car / Respondent said they were walking around car to inspect and feel scratches already on car / Applicant and insurer claim for costs of repairs / Held: Respondent caused damage to Applicant's car as Respondent was only person around car on relevant day, Respondent's behaviour inconsistent with just looking at car, behaviour consistent with damage caused, clearly carrying something more than just items Respondent said in evidence they were carrying / Damage to car repaired for cost of $4684 / Applicant liable to pay full cost / Claim allowed.

Negligence / Property / Respondent lived as a boarder in the Applicant’s house / Respondent was required to move out after damage by carpet moths was found in his room / Applicant sought recovery of costs associated with the infestation / Held:  evidence indicated that the carpet moth damage was the result of the Respondent’s lack of care / Respondent failed to keep his room in a condition that prevented or limited the moths’ growth / Reasonable boarder would have noticed the carpet damage and the moths and would have brought that to the Applicant’s attention / Evidence indicated that the carpet was beyond repair / Costs cannot be awarded for printing photos for the Applicant’s claim / Respondent ordered to pay $1,597.50 for carpet damage and associated costs / Claim allowed in part.

Jurisdiction / Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) / Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 (DTA) / Claim and Counterclaim related to fixed-term agreement for Respondents to live in guest wing of Applicants' house / Guest wing was separate unit with separate entrance with kitchen, living room, and two ensuites / Held: Disputes Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the claim / Section 77 RTA provides Tenancy Tribunal with jurisdiction over disputes between landlords and tenants in tenancies to which the RTA applies / Section 5(1)(n) RTA provides that RTA does not apply where the premises are used "principally as a place of residence by landlord or owner of premises or any member of the landlord's or owner's family" / Issues around whether Respondents lived in same premises as Applicants or whether guest wing was separate from Applicants' premises / Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine whether RTA applies to a tenancy / Section 82 RTA provides Tenancy Tribunal's jurisdiction is excl…

Fencing / Fencing Act 1978 / Parties own neighbouring properties with hedge separating the properties / Respondents had planted hedge in 2015 / Parties believed hedge was on boundary but had discovered it was actually on Applicants' land / Applicants sought to replace hedge with fence as hedge not adequate / Respondents believed parties had agreed to hedge being planted in its position in 2015 / Applicants said their lack of knowledge where boundary was invalidated their consent to hedge being planted / Applicants claimed $11,290 for removal of fence and replacement of hedge / Held: hedge (as a live fence) was an adequate fence / Hedge did encroach on Applicants' land but did so because Applicants' consented to it being planted there / Parties more than likely believed at time hedge was planted that hedge was on boundary and so Applicants' consent was valid / Hedge was an adequate fence as it was healthy and attractive and provided adequate visual protection and was a non-invasive spec…

Contract / Respondent engaged Applicant to do plastering work / Applicant sought payment of $18,268.00 / Respondent’s bank account frozen rendering Respondent unable to pay / Respondent acknowledged debt / Order made for payment of debt / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $18,268.00 / Claim allowed.

Consumer law / Applicant purchased transportable dwelling from Respondents / Applicant found 30mm hole in bedroom wall which Respondents covered with plastic plate / Respondents gave Applicant $200 credit to account for hole / Applicant requested laundry customisation but was unhappy bench over washing machine would cover architrave and standard washing machine would not fit / Applicant claimed $10,000 to remedy problems / Held: Respondents fulfilled obligation in respect of laundry / $200 credit was not binding settlement of hole issue but Applicant did not suffer loss as hole was minor and plate was consistent with others in home / Applicant awarded $500 to reflect bench not received, incorrectly installed taps, associated costs and that Respondents did not consult Applicant on laundry space compromise / Respondent ordered to replace dented rangehood or pay Applicant $650 if not completed by set date / Claim allowed in part.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants purchased a composting toilet system from Respondent / Applicants raised concerns about capacity issues / Respondents agreed to supply them with two additional composting bins / Applicants claimed new bins were different from original models and not fit for purpose / Applicants notified Respondent of defects and asked them to provide bins of acceptable quality, which they claimed Respondent failed to do so / Applicants sought compensation totalling $4,700 / Held: bins were found to be of acceptable quality / Respondent attempted to supply bins of the same model, but no stock was available / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicant purchased a car from the Respondent for $88,490 / Month later, Respondent reduced the price on the same model to $81,900 / Applicant claimed the salesperson told him the price would not drop, and that it could in fact increase / Applicant believed he was misled by the salesperson and sought compensation / Held:  no evidence that the Respondent engaged in conduct that may have misled or deceived the Applicant / Applicant may have misunderstood information provided to him / Claim dismissed.

Towing / Applicant had his car towed from the Respondent’s carpark / Applicant said he worked for a business in the building next to the carpark / Applicant also said there was no signage in his parking space indicating that it was not a public carpark nor any signage he would be towed / Respondent stated that a private carpark did not need signage but provided photos of the parking area showing no parking signs / No signage specifically painted in the space Applicant had parked in / Applicant sought a declaration that he was not liable for the towing fee of $396.55 / Held: carpark was not open and available to the public / Private carpark spaces do not require no parking signs / Clear that the parking spaces serviced a commercial buildings, so a reasonable person would be aware the spaces were not for the general public / $396.55 was a consistent rate compared to other towing companies / Applicant did not discharge the burden of proving his car should not have been towed or that the t…

Contract / Fencing Act 1978 / Applicants own property neighbouring Respondent / Respondent's father told Appellants of concerns about condition of shared boundary fence / Appellants discussed fence repairs and division of costs / Applicants claimed $4999 from Respondent as contribution to fence costs / Held: no enforceable agreement about fence costs was created / Respondent not liable to pay / Contractual elements of agreement and certainity in respect of Respondent's liability for fence costs not present between parties / Necessary notice procedure not followed / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicants purchased house from Respondent and found toilet drainage issues upon moving in / Applicants' plumber said drain was damaged for a long time / Respondent's plumber unaware of any issues with toilet / Six week period where house unoccupied after settlement / Respondent experienced no issues while living in property up to settlement date / Applicants claimed $4753.41 as compensation for plumbing and drainlaying costs / Held: insufficient evidence that toilet not in reasonable working at settlement date, so no breach of contract / Respondent had no issues with toilet / In-pipe camera showed tree root had broken pipe but insufficient to show problem was apparent on settlement date / Period that house was unoccupied after settlement may have exacerbated previously unknown issues / No evidence to establish misrepresentation claim / No legal basis for compensation claim / Claim dismissed.