Decisions from the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal – July 2024
2 recent decisions made by the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal relate to traders not complying with Consumer Guarantees Act. In both cases, the Tribunal ruled in the customer's favour. In one case the trader was ordered to pay and in the other the trader was required to repair the vehicle.
Complainant v Cargiant Limited
The complainant wanted to reject the 2021 Holden Barina they bought from Cargiant Limited. Upon driving the vehicle, the complainant had trouble with the vehicle’s performance and handling primarily in steering the vehicle around corners as well as a rattling noise coming from the front of the vehicle. The complainant complained to Cargiant Limited, and repairs were carried out by Cargiant Limited’ mechanic within a month of the complaint. Those repairs are later to be found to be partially successful but not totally successful. The Tribunal has found the vehicle’s defects is in breach of s7 of the CGA ‘guarantee of acceptable quality’ and found the further repairs required to remedy the performance and handling issue of the vehicle. The tribunal ruled that the complainant is not entitled to reject the vehicle and within ten working days of the date of the decision Cargiant Limited is to repair all defects of the vehicle found.
Read the full decision(external link) – New Zealand Legal Information Institute
Complainant v Mars Motors Limited TA One Motor Group
The complainant wanted to recover the mechanical breakdown insurance (MBI) policy premiums and the vehicle inspection costs after rejecting the 2013 Mercedes Benz A180 they had purchased from Mars Motors Limited trading as One Motor Group (OMG). The complainant immediately experienced problems with the vehicle and completed an independent vehicle inspection which found a number of defects and damages. OMG agreed to the rejection and refunded the complainant the purchase price of the vehicle and on road costs but refused to refund the complaint the MBI policy premium and vehicle inspection costs. Under s18(4) of the CGA, the complainant sustained a loss as a result from the failures of the vehicle and which was reasonably foreseeable to arise from the failure. The tribunal ruled in favor of the complainant and ordered OMG to pay the complainant $975.42 (MBI) and $292.10 (independent inspection).
Read the full decision(external link) – New Zealand Legal Information Institute