BF v QT [2023] NZDT 600 (30 October 2023) [pdf, 156 KB]
...Tribunal, as contribution towards the cost of a new pool, which she said was required due to QT’s actions. 7. Mr T for QT counterclaimed for $2,276.97, which was amended during the hearing to $2,217.80, for items he said he ordered for the BF’s pool job, but which he now could not use or resell, less the deposit paid by BF for the pool liner. Were the services provided with reasonable care and skill? 8. BF said initially Mr T’s maintenance of the pool was good, but it became ve...