Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Building / Building Act 2004 / Respondent manufactured and installed double-glazed doors in Applicant’s house / Eleven years later, Applicant claimed moisture issues and cracks had appeared / Applicant sought an order that the Respondent was liable to pay $4,999.00 / Held: claim barred since building work occurred more than ten years prior to filing of the claim / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Sale of Goods / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Motor Vehicle Sales Act 2003 / Applicant purchased vehicle from Respondent for $4,760 / Vehicle exhibited issues after a few days / Applicant claimed refund / Held: Respondent not a car dealer or sold car in trade / Respondent not selling vehicles for the primary purpose of gain / Defect not known to Respondent leading to an incorrect advertisement / Applicant to hold vehicle for 14 days until advised by Respondent that Respondent will refund purchase price / If Respondent does not advise after 14 days, Applicant may dispose of the vehicle and Respondent is ordered to pay Applicant $3,960 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Dispute over work done by Applicant for Respondent / Applicant sought $990.00 for work / Respondent claimed no agreement to do any work and that no money was owed / No written evidence of agreement / Held: no agreement as to price / Job done for a friend whilst socialising / Applicant not entitled to charge a trade mark-up for materials or labour / Applicant entitled to paid for materials obtained for the work / Invoice for materials for an wholesaler / Implausible that Applicant would have ordered parts without believing there was an agreement that he would carry out work / Crimp tool listed on the invoice not a part provided for Respondent / Applicant entitled to $470.00 for materials, invoice minus the crimp tool / Claim allowed in part.

Contract / Agency / Applicant contracted by Respondent for forestry services / Applicant would sell logs, deduct sub-contractors’ invoices, before passing balance of revenue to Respondent / Final lot of logs was sold during period when sub-contracting work could not be completed / Instead of following usual process, Applicant passed final payment on to Respondent then invoiced Respondent for sub-contracting work at later date / Respondent refused to pay invoice / Applicant had already paid sub-contractor / Applicant claimed invoiced amount of $6781.55 plus legal fees / Held: Applicant was Respondent’s agent / Applicant had actual authority (implied) to contract sub-contractor and receive payment from Respondent for work / Limited circumstances for Tribunal to award legal fees not met / Respondent ordered to pay $6781.55 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Money Claims Act 2016 / Applicant engaged Respondent to supply metal windows and matching double door / Applicant paid 50% deposit / Building delay / Price increase due to inflation and availability changes / Applicant claimed Respondent obliged to perform contract at quoted price / Respondent declined to proceed / Applicant proposed repayment of deposit plus sum for damages / Held: Respondent's terms and conditions applied / No repudiation of contract by Respondent / Respondent not entitled to protect Applicant from price increase / Applicant not entitled to claim damages in form of interest or otherwise / Reasonable for Respondent to pay interest based on failure to repay original deposit money immediately upon agreeing refund was payable / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $274.49 / Claim allowed in part.

Motor vehicle collision / Respondent discharged himself out of hospital / Respondent may have been having seizure during time of collision / Respondent drove into Applicant’s car / Applicant claimed damages of $20,493.59 / Held: Respondent was responsible for collision / Cost claimed are justified and reasonable / Claim allowed / Respondent to pay Applicant $20,493.59.

Tort / Negligence / Applicant lent dining table to Respondent / Applicant recovered dining table from Respondent / Applicant had table refinished for $1,995 and claimed for damages / Held: Applicant had not proven Respondent was negligent and caused damage to table / Respondent not liable for betterment of table / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Consumer Law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Respondents engaged Applicant’s architectural services / Applicant worked on project for around 15 months before Respondents cancelled contract / Applicant claimed $17,934.54 for unpaid invoices / Respondents counter-claimed $24,263.71 refund of invoices paid / Held: agreement was that Applicant would charge no more than $28,750 plus 20% for core services, additional services to be charged at hourly rate with approval / Applicant breached contract by not completing agreed work within agreed price / Applicant also breached CGA by not providing services with reasonable care and skill / Applicant did not deliberately underquote, was not in breach of FTA / Applicant’s work still of some value to Respondents, Respondents not entitled to full refund / Applicant ordered to pay Respondents $5,863.31 / Claim dismissed, counterclaim allowed in part.  

Negligence / Contributory Negligence Act 1947 / Land Transport Act 1988 / Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 / Parties involved in three-car collision / Applicant driving first car, stopped short of another collision ahead / Second car, driven by Third Respondent, shunted into Applicant’s car by third car, driven by First Respondent in course of employment for Second Respondent / Applicant and insurer claimed $2975.95 for insured losses from First and Second Respondents / Third Respondent and insurer claimed $25,597.26 for repairs and rental car from First and Second Respondents / Second Respondent claimed $19,000 from Applicant and Third Respondent for repairs to car driven by First Respondent / Held: First Respondent failed to allow enough time to stop, was responsible for collision / Second Respondent vicariously liable / First and Second Respondents ordered to pay Applicant and Third Respondent’s insurer total of $28,573.21 / Claim allowed.

Loan / Interest on Money Claims Act 2016 (IMCA) / Applicants advanced Respondent $13,609.00 / Applicants claimed advance was personal loan and should be repaid / Applicants claimed interest of 6.25% applied to loan / Held: evidence proved advance was personal loan / No evidence that 6.25% interest was term of agreement / Interest of 5% to apply from date of demand letter in accordance with IMCA / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $14,073.19 / Claim granted in part.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant engaged Respondent to engrave two antique watches / Both watches were damaged during engraving / Applicant claimed compensation for cost of repairing watches / Held: Respondent failed to use reasonable care and skill / Respondent was given reasonable opportunity to remediate defect, but no remediation was offered / Applicant entitled to have defect remediated elsewhere / Respondent liable for repair cost / Respondent still entitled to engraving fee / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $625 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Applicants purchased a house from Respondent / After settlement, Applicants discovered toilet did not work properly /  Plumber found drain was blocked by tree roots / Applicants asked Respondent to pay for repairs / Respondent did not pay / Applicants claimed toilet repair costs of $607.89 and filing fee / / Held: more likely than not that Respondent was responsible for repair cost / Pipes had tree roots interfering with them which had to be removed before pipes could be repaired / Suggested problem with the toilet was imminent and not in reasonable working order / Respondent breached their obligation by not paying for repairs / Tribunal unable to award costs for filing fee / Respondent ordered to pay Applicants $607.89 / Claim granted.

Negligence / Respondent drove into parked cars while driving Applicant’s car/ Respondent advised afterwards that he did not have a driver’s licence /Applicant’s car was not drivable and had to be towed away / Car was written off / Applicant’s car was insured for $5,000.00 / Insurance company would not accept claim as damage occurred when car was driven by an unlicensed driver / Respondent accepted liability for damage and agreed to pay for it at a sum of $85.00 per week / Respondent paid $425.00 before payments stopped / Applicant claimed $5,500.00 for loss of insured value of car, $280 for towing fee and $180 Tribunal filing fee / Held: Respondent failed to take reasonable care whilst driving / Car insured for $5,000.00 which was reasonable estimate of value of car / Towing should be deducted from amount owing as offset by amount of selling car wreck / Amount paid by Respondent should be deducted too / Filing fee cost cannot be claimed in the circumstances / Respondent ordered to pay …