Search Results

1. TQ & BC v B Transport [2023] NZDT 441 (30 August 2023) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...puncture and were unable to book a tow truck to attend before the closing hours of the carpark, so took an Uber home to [Suburb], with TQ returning the following day by train to meet the tow truck and have his car removed for repair. 4. TQ and BC claim $855.09, being $784.79 for the tyre repair and replacement kit, $55.69 for the Uber, $2.61 for the train fare and $12.00 for the parking fee, on the basis that B Transport failed to apply reasonable care and skill and/or was negligent in...

2. LCRO 168/2016 WT v MD (30 May 2018) [pdf, 269 KB]

   ...suggested that Mr NB QC be appointed to arbitrate the dispute and the appointment was made. The arbitration proceeded with an initial issue as to the arbitrator’s jurisdiction being addressed in August 2011. 3 [15] Mr WT prepared a draft statement of claim and this was provided to Mr MD for approval in November 2011. [16] After the claim was lodged, the landlord counterclaimed for the cost of damage to the building alleged to have been caused by the tenant. The landlord...

3. Kaupapa Inquiry Claimant reimbursement form editable v6 [pdf, 402 KB]

   1 Privacy Statement We collect personal information from you, including your name, contact and bank account details. We collect this so we have all the information we need to process your application. We will use this information only for the purpose of processing your claim for reimbursement. You have the right to ask for a copy of any personal information we hold about you, and to ask for it to be correc...

4. CO v B Ltd & Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 718 (16 September 2024) [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...he discovered there were dents and scratches on it. He contacted Q Ltd with photos of the dents and scratches and a quote for the cost of repair but Q Ltd refused to cover any of the cost on the basis that it was not a brand new vehicle. CO filed a claim in the Disputes Tribunal. 2. This is claim for damages for repairs required to a vehicle in the sum of $5,789. The agreement provides that because the vehicle was bought for business purposes, the Consumer Guarantees Act would not ap...

5. W v H [2015] NZIACDT 80 (10 August 2015) [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...$450 badly, and the email was far from acceptable. However, in all the circumstances, and particularly having regard to the complainant’s threats, the issues fell below the threshold for disciplinary action. The complaint [5] The Registrar’s Statement of Complaint put forward the following background as the basis for the complaint: [5.1] On 5 September 2013, the complainant entered into a written agreement with the adviser, who was to provide assistance with an application for a w...

6. Saul v Ramos [2014] NZIACDT 48 (09 April 2014) [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...unsatisfactory advice, and whether the failure to have a new written agreement and the diversion of funds for an unauthorised purpose breached the Code of Conduct. [9] The Tribunal is satisfied those three grounds of complaint have been made out. The Statement of Complaint [10] The Registrar filed an amended Statement of Complaint dated 28 February 2014. [11] It sets out that the complainant lodged the complaint on wider grounds, but the Registrar identified material supporting three...

7. Gill v Singh [2016] NZIACDT 36 (30 June 2016) [pdf, 155 KB]

   ...were: [25.1] In approximately September 2011 a payment of $5,000; [25.2] In May or June 2012 a payment of $4,000; and [25.3] In approximately November 2012 a final payment of $6,000. [26] The initial agreement is consistent with Mr Singh’s claim. It says he is “voluntarily working as an Immigration Advisor to the NZ Sikh Society Auckland (Charitable Trust)” … “There [are] no service fees to the clients …”. [27] Through his counsel, the complainant alleged that Mr Singh...

8. LCRO 119/2016 XY, ZW, QM, and ABC Lawyers v TQ (16 November 2018) [pdf, 466 KB]

   ...and mortgage documents. She contends the Committee disregarded her evidence to the contrary, 13 including “the source documents appended” to her 29 January 2016 statement to the Committee, without stating reasons for doing so. [37] She claims that by not giving her notice of the possibility of a finding that, by documenting the loans, she had played a part in “an attempt to circumvent the CCCFA”, the Committee had not adhered to the rules of natural justice. (c) A&a...

9. D Ltd v KC [2024] NZDT 117 (7 February 2024) [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...application filed in March 2023 and granted in May 2023, was on the basis that KC had new evidence that was not available at the first hearing on 1 March 2023. The new evidence, he submitted, proved that he had already paid the invoices and amount claimed by D Ltd. 4. The issue to be determined is: a. Should the Tribunal order a second re-hearing? Should the Tribunal order a second re-hearing? 5. Section 49(1A) of the Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 allows the Tribunal to order a further...

10. LCRO 8/2021 CK v SE (23 November 2021) [pdf, 284 KB]

    ...communications [28] Mr CK says the Committee did not consider his claim that Ms SE, knowing he had been represented by the trust’s lawyer, ought to have directed her response to his 28 July 2017 email to the trust’s lawyer, not to him. He claims by not doing that Ms SE contravened r 10.2. [29] He says because this aspect of his complaint concerned Ms SE’s 8 April 2013 letter to the trust’s lawyer, he “can’t see how [Ms SE] can argue she didn’t know” the trust’s...