Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant parked his car in the Respondent's paid carpark / Upon return Applicant found his car had been stolen / Applicant claimed $12,000.00 from his insurer but did not get the $16,000.00 he paid for his car / Applicant claimed the difference / Applicant claimed Respondent breached a term in the parking agreement to keep his car secure / Respondent claimed they took responsible care by their actions in securing the car park / Held: vehicles parked in the car park at the owner's risk / Applicant could not prove Respondent failed to show reasonable care and skill that would be expected of a car park owner / Claim dismissed.

Tort / Respondent’s bike collided and damaged front wheel of Applicant’s bike /  Applicant claimed $365.00 made up of $230.00 to replace the front wheel of his bike and $135.00 medical costs / Held: Respondent had not taken reasonable care to ride bike in a manner that did not cause harm to other users of the cycleway /  Second Respondent is not vicariously liable for the Respondent / Applicant’s medical costs are covered by Accident Compensation Act / Claim granted, Respondent to pay Applicant $100.00.  

Consumer Law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 / Applicant acquired the services of the Respondent (an arborist) about tree work to be done on property / Applicant claims that the Respondent did not complete work as instructed and without reasonable care and skill / Applicant claims for Respondent to pay the all or any of the costs / Respondent claims for invoice to be paid / Respondent claims for Applicant to pay the legal fees / Held: respondent removed more trees than instructed and without the Applicant's authority or consent / Respondent performed the work with reasonable care and skill under s 28 of the CGA / Respondent breached the contract and is liable to pay compensation for damages / Applicant is liable to pay the incoive under the terms agreed as the quality of workmanship itself do not render costs unpayable / The contract did not include liability for the Respondent to pay legal costs incurred / Section 43 of the Disputes Tribunal prevents …

Manager's duties / Applicant company provided catering services to the Respondent and charged a monthly bill of $500 / Representative of the Applicant company was also the manager of the Respondent company / Representative handed in her resignation as manager to the Respondent finishing on 30 June / Representative and her children contracted Covid and isolated / Representative returned to work on 29 June to hand back keys / Applicant sought $500.00 for the June monthly fee / Respondent claimed representative failed to perform her duties as a manager / Held: Respondent could not prove the representative failed to perform her duties as manager / Applicant's representative cannot reasonably be expected to perform her usual tasks while sick and isolating / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $500.00 / Claim granted.

Contract / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant obtained vet services from the Respondent / Respondent's vet discussed the possibility of euthanasia / Applicant unhappy with the vet’s assessment and sought a second opinion / Applicant withheld payment for the vet’s bill, $402.00 / Applicant claimed Respondent misrepresented their provided services / Applicant also claimed the work by the Respondent’s vet was not up to the CGA standard / Respondent counterclaimed / Held: Respondent’s advertisement was not misleading regarding their expertise with horses / Duty of reasonable care and skill under the CGA was adhered to / Applicant did not had insufficient evidence to prove standard was not met / Respondents did not provide Applicant with their interest terms and conditions / Interest cannot be charged / Claim and counterclaim dismissed.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant saw online advertisement for car / Applicant purchased car from Respondents / Car broke down / Applicant sent car for mechanical report / Applicant claims engine and clutch needed to be replaced, sound system was not premium as advertised and it had dents in boot area / Applicant claims compensation as car was not of acceptable quality and fit for its intended purposes and Respondents had misrepresented it / Held: First Respondent was acting as the Second Respondent’s agent to sell the car / First Respondent was not a registered motor vehicle dealer but is still considered to be in the business of selling vehicles / First Respondent has breached the statutory guarantee to the Applicant that the vehicle was of acceptable quality / First Respondent has misrepresented the odometer reading and condition of the vehicle / Total amount of compensation for damages suffered by Applicant is $42,407.56 but Disputes Tribunal is limited to award a…

Contract / Applicant placed motherboard for sale online / Respondent placed winning bid of $290 but did not complete purchase / Applicant relisted motherboard and it was sold for $160/ Applicant claims payment of $130 from Respondent / Held: As per website’s terms of service, placing winning bid creates legal contract between bidder and seller / Applicant entitled to damages for breach of contract / amount Applicant is entitled to is the difference between contract price and sale price made in the subsequent sale / Respondent is to pay the applicant $130 / claim upheld.

Contract / Respondent entered into an agreement with the Applicant for the long term hire of a caravan / Rent was paid sporadically by the Respondent but then ceased / Applicants tried to contact the Respondent / Applicants went to retrieve the caravan / Caravan was not there / Applicants reported caravan missing and made enquiries with Respondents family and police / Caravan and Respondent have not been found / Applicant claimed $13,500 for the caravan / Held: Term in contract specified that the Respondent was responsible for the security caravan / Respondent had a duty to take reasonable care of the caravan / Claim granted, Respondent ordered to pay $13,500 for caravan minus $82.86 bond credit.

Contract / Applicant entered into a contract with Respondent to provide live music at her party / Applicant paid non-refundable deposit of $500.00 to Respondent / Applicant then emailed asking Respondent to include ABBA on the playlist and other material the band did not normally play / Respondent replied saying it would be difficult to learn and rehearse new material / Respondent told Applicant he would endeavour to accommodate her needs / Weeks later, Applicant cancelled the contract on the basis that she was not going to get her choice of music /  Applicant requested her deposit back / Respondent agreed to return $250.00 / Applicant claimed for remainder of her deposit / Held: deposit was non-refundable / Respondent did try to accommodate Applicant’s music requests / Applicant not entitled to the remainder of deposit / Claim dismissed. 

Contract / Civil Aviation Act 1990 (CAA) / Applicants booked flights with Respondent / Applicants had to first fly with another carrier to connect with Respondent's flight / Connecting flight was delayed and later cancelled / Due to cancellation Applicants missed flight with Respondent / Applicant tried to contact Respondent / Applicant booked flight for next day / Applicant claims $1,298.20 for cost of rebooking new flight tickets / Held: Respondent is a contracting carrier under the Montreal Convention, schedule 6 of CAA / Respondent remained liable for the acts and omissions of carrier airline as its actions are deemed to be that of Respondents / Claim allowed, Respondent to pay Applicant $1,298.20.

Negligence / Car collision / Applicant and Respondent were both driving when their motor vehicles collided / Applicant’s vehicle was damaged / Neither party was insured / Applicant claimed for repair costs and associated costs / Held: Respondent breached their duty of care owed to Applicant in their use of a motor vehicle on the road / Respondent was driving the vehicle in the course of their employment / Respondent and Respondent's employer joint and severally liability for costs to Applicant / Repair costs more than value of car / Respondent and employer must pay Applicant for the replacement of the car, as well as the cost of using another car in the interim / Respondent and employer ordered to pay $2,600.00 / Claim granted in part.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant’s pet was taken in for surgery / The pet took a turn for the worse after surgery and had to be put down / Applicant claims that the respondent misrepresented the price of the surgery / Applicant claims the respondent did not use due care and skill during the surgery / Respondent claims that the bill was fairly represented / Respondent’s bill had words “time dependent” next to the quoted surgery amount of $1,500 / The respondent says because of this the higher bill is justified / Held: The respondent did use due care and skill in undertaking the surgery / There was nothing out of the ordinary with the surgery / Held: Respondent’s bill was reasonable / The respondent needed to take longer, thus incurring greater costs / Claim dismissed

Contract / Applicant and his ex-partner were preparing their house for sale / Respondent was Applicant’s builder / Applicant was quoted a price for the repair of the home and Applicant agreed to pay half / Applicant was unable to access the home at the time of the repair work so Applicant’s ex-partner liaised with the Respondent about repair work / Applicant claims that ex-partner authorised additional work that was not known at the time of the quotation / Respondent invoiced a greater amount than the initial quotation to reflect additional work undertaken / Applicant claimed $1916.50 for the repair work costs / Held: Respondent’s ex-partner entered into a contract with Applicant / Respondent was not a party to the contract / Respondent was not consulted and did not give authority to give authority to carry out additional work / Claim partially approved, respondent to pay half of initial quotation.