Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Bailment / Applicant left vehicle in parking lot shared by several businesses for Respondent to provide quote for repair / Applicant left keys with Respondent / Vehicle was later stolen / Applicant claimed bailment relationship was created when he left vehicle and keys with Respondent and Respondent was responsible for costs relating to any loss or damage of vehicle / Held: in accepting and retaining keys, Respondent took exclusive possession of vehicle, creating bailment relationship between parties / Respondent did not take reasonable care as they made no provision for securing vehicle in protective manner / However, Applicant assumed risk for leaving vehicle in shared parking lot with no security or protection / Applicant made no attempt to ascertain what protection would be afforded to vehicle and was told that it would be left in shared parking lot / Applicant’s assumption of risk was full defence for Respondent’s failure to take reasonable care with vehicle / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant bought oven from Respondent / Oven door failed three times since purchase and Respondent refused to fix it again / Applicant claimed full refund of purchase price and installation costs and to reject the oven / Held: Applicant's witness evidence was credible / Oven failed shortly after purchase and not of acceptable quality / Applicant entitled to reject oven  and obtain full refund / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $1,531.56 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicants booked a guided river trip with Respondent / First trip was postponed due to illness, with Respondent’s consent / Second booking was cancelled by Respondent due to a storm / Third potential trip date did not proceed, after which Applicants indicated they could not attend the next proposed trip / Applicants asked Respondent to transfer their trip fee as a credit to some friends / Respondent advised Applicants they could not transfer or refund fee due to cancellation policy / Applicants claimed $2,534.34 refund / Held: river trip was postponed by both parties at different times / Applicants incurred full cost of trip but did not receive any benefit or advantage from payment / Respondent had the use of Applicants’ funds during relevant time period / Reasonable for Respondent to retain $500 of booking payment and refund remainder to Applicants / Respondent ordered to pay $2,034.34 / Claim allowed in part.

Tort / Negligence / Respondent reversed car into Applicant’s stationary car / Applicant, through their insurer, claimed $3,467.36 from Respondent / Held: Respondent was responsible for reversing into Applicant’s car without any warning / Applicant did not contribute to collision / Collision caused damage / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $3,467.36 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Applicant purchased motorbike from Respondent, who was 16 years old / Bike suffered mechanical issues after being ridden by Applicant for 30 minutes / Applicant claimed Respondent misrepresented bike / Applicant claimed $4,000 towards mechanical repairs / Held: it was for the Applicant to ensure bike was of the quality he wanted to purchase, as it was not sold with a guarantee that it would be reasonably durable or of acceptable quality / Applicant therefore failed to show he was induced to enter into contract because the bike was misrepresented to him / CCLA provides that a contract cannot be enforced against a minor unless the court considers it fair to do so / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Applicant sent parcel to its customer / Parcel was scanned into First Respondent’s facility and remained there for some time / Parcel was scanned multiple times until eventually it was scanned no more and was not located in the facility / Applicant filed a loss claim with First Respondent / First Respondent accepted claim with a “pre-approved value 8000” and paid Applicant $2,000.00, in accordance with CCLA liability limitation / Later, First Respondent explained that the “pre-approved value 8000” was a mistake / Applicant claimed parcel was worth $10,000.00 and had been stolen / Applicant’s receipt for item was for $8,709.58 / Held: fate of parcel remains unknown / Applicant’s claim of theft not proven / Contract was at owner’s risk / First Respondent had no liability for loss or damage unless loss or damage was intentional / No evidence of intentional loss / First Respondent not liable for loss / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant leased premises from Respondent / After issues with roof leaking, parties inserted Special Condition relating to weathertightness into lease / Premises had ongoing leak issues / Respondent had tradesmen attend for repairs, but leaks were unresolved / Applicant stopped paying rent for 10 months before lease ended / Applicant claimed for a declaration of non-liability for rent arrears, damages for loss of profit and damage to stock / Respondent counterclaimed for rent arrears / Held: Special Condition allowed Applicant to suspend rent when notice of leak had been given and not remedied / Requirements for suspension of rent met for total period of 33 weeks / Applicant liable to pay remaining 9 weeks and 4 days unpaid rent / Insufficient evidence for lost profit and damaged stock claims / Applicant ordered to pay Respondent $8,323.74 / Claim allowed in part.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants contracted Respondent to paint home for $25,600.00 / Applicants became concerned about quality and time the job was taking / Applicants hired a painter to repaint part of the property for $4,600.00 / Applicants requested Respondent finish repainting gutters and leave property / Parties agreed remaining $5,000.00 owing to contract price would be used for completion and remedial work / Respondent confirmed agreement was settled / Applicants lodged claim with insurer for damage and received a $28,944.31 cash settlement / Applicant’s insurer sought $30,000.00 from Respondent including $400 excess / Held: Applicants and insurer barred from claiming remedial work / Matter had already been settled / Respondent not provided opportunity to complete remedial work / Claim dismissed.

Trespass and Contract law / Third party parked car owned by Applicant on street / Respondent issued breach notice to third party but third party moved countries and did not receive notice / Respondent contacted Applicant for original fine and late fees / Applicant claims they are not liable to pay the amount sough of $500 in relation to late fees and debt collection fees / Held: Applicant has trespassed onto third party’s land / No contract was formed between parties for parking on third party’s land, therefore no agreement to pay late fees or debt collection fees / Claim allowed, Applicant to pay respondent $95 being original breach amount but not liable to pay other amounts being late fees or debt collection fees.

Property / Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) / Respondent moved into small room in Applicant's property before moving into large room / Respondent paid rent of $280.00 per week inconsistently over a period / Applicant claimed $4,790.00 for unpaid rent and $140.00 for music festival ticket / Held: Tribunal had jurisdiction / RTA did not apply to tenancy as Applicant continued to use premises principally as place of residence / Evidence of quasi-contractual agreement that rent of $150.00 per week was to be paid during time in small room / Evidence of agreement to pay rent of $280.00 per week during time in larger room / Respondent not liable to pay rent for entire period claimed / Respondent did not dispute ticket / Respondent ordered to pay $1,910.00 / Claim allowed in part.

Insurance law / Applicant bought a unit in 2016 / Applicant entered into agreement with Respondent for house insurance / Following inquiries by Respondent in 2023, insurance was cancelled as Applicant’s unit was a “stacked” unit / Applicant claimed $9,172.95, refund of premium payments over the years / Held: Respondents took reasonable steps when deciding to provide insurance / Applicant did not prove Respondent should have realised problem earlier / Respondent entitled to cancel policy / Evidence showed Respondent would have honoured policy during insured period / Applicant not entitled to a refund / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) / Applicant owned property / Respondent moved into room at property and was to pay rent of $280.00 per week / Respondent paid $280.00 once / Respondent later paid a further $600.00 / Applicant claimed $6,160.00 for unpaid rent / Held: RTA did not apply to agreement between parties / Applicant was owner of property and used property as his principal place of residence, therefore tenancy was outside jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal and claim could be heard by Disputes Tribunal / Parties agreed Respondent would pay $280.00 per week while living at property / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $5,560.00 being the actual amount of unpaid rent / Claim partially allowed.

Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased second hand baler from Respondent / Respondent stated baler was in good working condition / Applicant took baler to get checked by mechanic who found it needed repairs /  Applicant claimed Respondent misrepresented machine which induced him to buy it / Applicant claimed $6,659.79 plus GST / Held: misrepresentation was proven / Applicant suffered additional costs of transporting baler to the mechanic / Applicant entitled to damages / Respondent much pay Applicant $7,388.75, purchase price of baler, transportation costs and GST / Claim granted.