Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Contract / Applicant leased premises from Respondent for two-year term, then on a month-by-month basis / Applicant gave notice to end lease on 10 August, on understanding required notice period was 20 days / Respondent replied that on a month-to-month basis, in line with original lease dates, rent would be due until end of August / On 7 August, parties did walk-through of property with incoming tenant, and all agreed that no make-good work was required / Three months later, new tenant changed its position and demanded remedial work / Respondent completed work and demanded payment from Applicant / Respondent used bank guarantee to recover $17,737.55 from tenant for rent to end of August and reinstatement costs / Applicant claimed return of $17,737.55 / Held: lease provided for termination at expiry of 20 days’ notice / Therefore tenancy terminated on 10 August, and rent and expenses were only payable to that date / Agreement on 7 August was a binding settlement agreement between Applica…

Contract / Applicant booked accommodation with Respondent through third-party website / Total cost was $475.00 for 21 to 26 January / Applicant did not arrive to check in on 21 January / Applicant received notification via third-party website / Applicant confirmed he had not checked in and entered message in text box stating he intended to check in on 23 January / Respondent did not receive that information / Respondent charged full booking cost to Applicant’s credit card / Applicant arrived to check in on 23 January but Respondent had resold room and no accommodation was available / Applicant claimed $380.00 for four nights’ unused accommodation / Held: Applicant did not cancel booking / Respondent’s cancellation policy did not make clear that a no-show on the first booked day would be treated as cancellation / Applicant entitled to refund for three nights’ accommodation / Respondent ordered to pay $285.00 / Claim allowed in part.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant booked international return flights for her mother through the Respondent / First flight departed at scheduled time but return flight left three hours early stranding the Applicant’s mother at the airport / Applicant was told that her mother had failed to reconfirm her flight 72 hours before departure, therefore Respondent could not help her / Applicant made a booking with another airline and her mother was able to fly home two days later / Applicant claimed compensation of $1,050.90, cost for extra return flight home / Held:  Respondent did not manage the flight with reasonable care and skill / Respondent was advised of flight change three months before scheduled departure / Significant flight change notifications were part of the agreed services provided by Respondent / Not reasonable for the Respondent to assume the airline would contact Applicant / Respondent refused to help Applicant book another flight, so she was left to he…

Contract / Building Act 2004 / Applicants purchased home from Respondents / After moving in, Applicants noticed water leaking from kitchen ceiling immediately below upstairs bathroom / On inspection it was discovered water was leaking from an improperly sealed drain, part of a shower installed by Respondents / Applicants spent $51,000 on remedial work / Applicants claimed $30,000 from Respondents for breach of warranty that all work done by Respondents was compliant with building consent / Held: not proven that Respondents knew of the leak at date of agreement / Bathroom renovation undertaken by Respondents required consenting, although Respondent was not aware of that  requirement / Consent not obtained / Respondents were in breach of warranty / Applicants renovated entire bathroom, but Respondents’ liability limited to shower issues / Respondents ordered to pay $15,846.45 / Claim allowed in part.

Contract / Respondent engaged Applicant for drainage inspection work at a client’s property / Applicant had done several jobs for Respondent previously / Applicant's usual practice was that if inspection identified damage, Applicant would submit claim to insurer / Applicant would then be engaged to do repair work, and be paid for both the inspection and the repair by insurer / If no damage was found, Applicant ordinarily did not charge Respondent, accepting cost of inspection itself / In this case, Applicant carried out inspection and identified repair needs / Respondent’s client then engaged another company to do repairs / Applicant claimed $1090.20 from Respondent for the inspection / Held: Respondent was not bound to give all or any repair work to Applicant / Respondent's client was entitled to engage another company for repairs / This did not constitute any breach of contract by Respondent / Respondent had reasonable belief, engendered by Applicant, that Applicant did not expect pa…

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant joined Respondent's membership scheme and paid $500 towards her account / Applicant wished to refund balance of credit account / Request refused by Respondent on the basis there was no refund policy / Applicant claimed credit balance and tribunal fee / Held: Respondent not legally obliged to refund credit balance/  Applicant can use credit balance and make purchases in Respondent's shop / Applicant not entitled to refund of tribunal fee / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicants booked international flights with Second Respondent airline / First leg of return journey was with First Respondent airline / Applicants were charged excess baggage fee on return flights in line with Second Respondent’s rates / Applicants claimed baggage rules were not part of contract for carriage, or that contract relating to baggage was amended during in-person visit to airport where First Respondent allegedly told them lower excess baggage fee / Applicants claimed difference between quoted rate and rate paid for excess baggage / Totalled $1,625.00 excess exchange fee, non-economic losses for wasted vacation time, aggravation, false imprisonment and extortion, and $20,000.00 exemplary damages / Held: contract between Applicants and Second Respondent included baggage conditions, which Applicants could have ascertained by way of links provided during booking process / Phone call evidence between Applicants and Second Respondent left no doubt that Applicants were …

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant contracted Respondent to install ventilation system at her house / Applicant's house covered in condensation and her power bills were higher than usual / Applicant informed ventilation system installed wrongly / Applicant claimed full refund / Held: faulty controller prevented ventilation system from working properly / System installed by Respondent not fit for purpose / Respondent unable to remedy within reasonable time / Applicant entitled to cancel contract / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $2,032.57 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased second-hand car from Respondent for $54,000 / Car received with only one set of keys / Applicant claimed for value of second set of keys / On basis that all cars assumed to have two sets of keys and Respondent had obligation to tell him if it had only one set / Applicant claimed he would not have purchased car if he had known it only had one set / Held: no express or implied term of contract that two sets of keys would be provided / As purchaser of second-hand vehicle, Applicant needed to check whether car came with all accessories that were important to him / Respondent’s silence regarding number of sets of keys did not amount to misrepresentation / That it would be more convenient for Applicant to have a second set of keys did not mean car was not of acceptable quality / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Respondent advertised a commercial dishwasher for sale online for $2,000.00 / Applicant offered $1,300.00 and Respondent accepted price / Applicant paid in instalments / Applicant then came to collect dishwasher, but refused to take it as allegedly it was in poor condition and too big / Applicant claimed $1,300.00 / Held: contract for sale and purchase of dishwasher was formed when Respondent accepted offer of $1,300 / No evidence that advertisement was incorrect / Later discussion between parties about condition and size of dishwasher occurred after contract had been formed / No evidence of any misrepresentation before contract was entered into / Claim dismissed.

Negligence / Respondent’s vehicle struck Applicant’s vehicle while attempting to change lanes / Respondent claimed Applicant’s vehicle suddenly stopped when he was changing lanes, causing him to collide into it / Applicant disputed Respondent's account and said she was still travelling ahead when collision occurred / Applicant and insurer claimed $20,100.46 for cost of repairs / Held: Respondent was not driving at a safe distance from Applicant’s car / Respondent was negligent whether or not the Applicant braked suddenly / Respondent liable for reasonable costs for the damage to Applicant’s car / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant’s insurer $20,100.46 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Property / Applicants purchased a home from Respondents / Both parties confirmed that the Agreement for Sale and Purchase included the spa pool as a chattel with warranty that it be in working order at time of sale / Parties agreed that the list of chattels did not include a loose gate / Spa pool was empty at settlement date / Spa pool later found to have significant leaks / Applicants claimed spa pool was not in working order at settlement date and sought $2,129.00 compensation for repair / Applicants also claimed for return of the gate / Held: insufficient evidence that the spa was not working on settlement date / Likely spa developed a leak after settlement date / By not filling pool until five weeks after settlement date, Applicants compromised ability to prove it leaked at settlement date / No agreement between the parties regarding the gate / No contract entered into between the parties regarding the gate / Claim dismissed.