Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Contract / Applicant had insurance with his bank, underwritten by the Respondent / Applicant believed he had roadside assistance cover / Applicant called roadside assist when his campervan wouldn’t start / Applicant was advised that because the campervan was over 3000kg it would not be covered by the policy / Applicant arranged a tow at his own expense costing $700 / Applicant believed he had been sold a policy that was wrong for his vehicle and could not be used / Applicant claimed $700 / Held: No evidence was presented by Applicant to suggest he had been sold a policy that included Roadside Assist, or that he had been charged premiums that included Roadside Assist / As Applicant did not take out an insurance policy with Roadside Assist cover for this vehicle, and as he did not pay premiums for Roadside Assist, Respondent has no obligation under the contract of insurance to pay for the cost of the tow / Claim dismissed.

Disputes-Tribunal-Advertisement-Nelson.pdf

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant engaged Respondent to make dentures / Applicant was unhappy with the result / Applicant claimed $4000.00 as she believed the dentures were not fit for purpose / Applicant took her complaint to the Dental Council who concluded that the practitioner followed appropriate procedures and gave appropriate care / Applicant failed to engage with follow up care appointments / Respondent stated they should have been given the opportunity to try and alter the dentures to make them fit / Held: services provided by Respondent were carried out with reasonable care and skill / Dentures were reasonably fit for purpose / Claim dismissed.

Insurance / Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 / Applicant purchased travel insurance from Respondent / Applicant lost hearing aid on overseas trip / Applicant's claim for replacement value of hearing aid was initially declined although later accepted for amount lower than Applicant claimed / Applicant accepted policy document limits hearing aid claim amount / Applicant asked Tribunal to decide if Respondent should make further payment as he had relied on table earlier in policy document that does not indicate limit / Held: threshold not reached to show it is more than likely justice of case warrants intervention under Disputes Tribunal Act / Applicant bears consequences of not taking more time to have policy explained or how cover and limits applied / Claim dismissed.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     …

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Applicant contracted Respondent to move her household goods for $1,710.00 / On the day of the move, a dispute arose regarding the manner in which the Applicant’s goods were handled / Police attempted to mediate the situation, and it was suggested that the Applicant pay only half of the contract price as a settlement / Respondent subsequently invoiced the Applicant for $850.00, which the Applicant paid / Applicant sought $18,642.00 from the Respondent for damages caused to the goods / Held: Respondent complied with the requirements set out in the Act / Claim was threfore statutorily barred / Applicant failed to prove her claim / Matter was settled with accepted discount / Substantive evidence was not obtained until months after the removal / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Building / Respondents contracted Applicant to build to two houses on Respondent's property / Disagreements at completion of building led to settlement agreement which required Respondents to pay $17,000.00 to Applicant to settle all claims / Respondents refused to pay agreed sum / Applicant claimed $17,000.00 for breach of contract / Respondents counterclaimed $25,000.00 for disagreements with Applicant and building work, delays in build / Respondents said they were blackmailed by Applicant's lawyer to sign agreement and it was not legally binding / Held: agreement was legally binding and required Respondents to pay $17,000.00 to Applicant / Respondents breached contract by refusing to pay agreed sum / Respondents ordered to pay $17,000.00 to Applicants / Agreement was full and final settlement so Respondents cannot claim against Applicants / Claim allowed and counterclaim dismissed.  

Contract / Loan / Applicant’ son was in a long-term relationship with Respondent  / Couple separated in 2022 / In 2020, Applicant spoke with her son about lending money for his family home / Applicant loaned $40,000 in total, first loan of $10,000 and second of $30,000 / Applicant’s son made regular repayments to the Applicant until September 2022, when he left the family home and could no longer afford repayments / $7920 had been repaid, and since the separation, Applicant’s son had repaid a further $16,040.00 / Applicant sought remaining balance from Respondent, $16,040.00 / Held: Tribunal can only consider family loans in the context of contract law and not relationship property issues / Available facts point to Respondent not being a party to the agreement /  Respondent was not involved in any conversations with the Applicant about the loan / Loan amounts were paid by bank transfer to the Applicant’s son account /  Insufficient evidence to support Respondent being party to loan agr…

Consumer / Consumer Guarantees Act / Applicant bought a headstone from company formerly operated by Respondent and now operated by 2nd respondent / Issues with plaque quality following delivery delays / Applicant raised issues with company who made attempts to remedy the plaque / Applicant claimed refund of plaque cost and costs associated with Applicant's attempts to remediate plaque themselves / Held - Respondent not liable as contract formed after headstone business had been sold to 2nd Respondent and plaque not reasonably fit for purpose due to lopsided writing and grave bed not stablised / Also failure by 2nd respondent to ensure work done in agreed timeframe / 2nd respondent's actions amounted to failure of substantial character for purpose of remedies under Consumer Guarantees Act / Claim allowed.   

Consumer law / Transport / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased number plate from Respondent / Plate did not meet New Zealand Transport Agency acceptability criteria nor Respondents own criteria / Applicant sought refund from Respondent / Applicant refused to provide information in form requested by Respondent to process refund / Respondents provided refund after some delay / Applicant claimed $586.65 for fees, time spent resolving matter, and emotional distress / Held: Respondent did not breach legislation as they refunded Applicant in reasonable time / Respondent required information from Applicant in certain form to comply with anti-money laundering law / Applicant caused delay by refusing to provide requested information in correct form / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant signed commercial lease for premises to run her business / Building applicant leased a room which was sold to 3rd Respondents / 3rd Respondents did not renew lease when it ended / Applicant said electricity was not provided to the leased room and that she had not been able to run a business as intended / Applicant said she had oral agreement with previous landlord that she could renew lease / Applicant claimed for lost visitor admissions to her business, some equipment, and time invested in setting business up / Held: 3rd Respondents had not terminated lease unfairly as they did so in line with lease agreement / Verbal agreement with old landlord was unenforceable against 3rd Respondents, but as electricity bond was required prior to lease commencing, 3rd Respondents had breached lease by not providing electricity supply to leased premises / Applicant could not show Respondents had not allowed her to run business so Respondents did not breach lease in this regard /…

Contract / Property / Property Law Act 2007 / Applicants paid Respondent $10,000 for Respondent's restaurant / Applicant did not proceed purchase after discovering the restaurant was leasehold property / Applicant claimed return of deposit / Held: no enforceable contract for disposition of land / Contract was not in writing and was not signed / No binding contract and failure of consideration / Applicants entitled to refund of deposit / Respondent ordered to pay Applicants $10,000 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Applicant moved into a flat rented by First Respondent / Applicant paid First Respondent a bond / When Applicant moved out, First Respondent retained an amount equivalent to one week’s rent from Applicant’s bond as Applicant had only given two weeks’ notice / Applicant brought claim for recovery of balance of bond / Applicant also claimed $45 additional rent he was asked to pay when another flatmate left, plus cost of filing claim / Held: notice period was not discussed when Applicant moved in / Three months later, First Respondent asked all flatmates to sign a flatmate sharing agreement containing a provision requiring four weeks’ notice to vacate / Applicant did not sign agreement / Applicant not bound by the agreement / Two weeks’ notice given by Applicant was reasonable / Applicant entitled to a refund of $215 balance of bond / Additional $45 was paid following agreement reached by all flatmates, not recoverable / Filing fee not recoverable in circumstances / First Respo…

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants purchased a second hand grandfather clock for $1100.00 from Respondent / Applicants alleged the clock was not able to be repaired and they wished to return the clock and receive a refund / Held: Respondent was not a specialist seller / Respondent was a charity that ran a shop selling second hand items, which would be obvious to any consumer / Clock was most likely marked as “as is” / Applicants were aware the clock was being sold not working because they engaged a clockmaker to fix it shortly after purchase / Guarantee that the clock was of acceptable quality did not apply / Applicants accepted the clock was not working and had no assurance it would work and they accepted the risk the clock may not able to be made to work / Claim dismissed.