Decisions from the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal – March 2024
Two recent decisions made by the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal relate to traders not complying with section 6 and section 7 of the Consumer Guarantee Act. In both cases, the tribunal ruled in the customer's favour and the trader was ordered to pay.
Complainant v Taj Car Imports Ltd
The complainant wanted to reject or repair the vehicle she bought from Taj Car Imports Ltd due to an oil leak and unusual engine noises. The complainant returned the vehicle after 4 months of purchase and Taj Car Imports Ltd declined to assist. The tribunal ruled in favour of the complainant, ruling that the vehicle did not meet the guarantee of acceptable quality. Taj Car Imports Ltd was ordered to remedy the significant oil leak from the engine and to pay the complainant $1,211.85 to compensate her for a portion of the financial costs incurred during this time because of this issue.
Read the full decision – New Zealand Legal Information Institute(external link)
Complainant v 2 Cheap Cars Ltd
The complainant wanted to reject the Nissan Juke he bought from 2 Cheap Cars Ltd. The complainant and 2 Cheap Cars both knew that the vehicle had a pre-existing transmission fault, and the complainant also purchased a 12-month mechanical breakdown policy. The complainant returned the vehicle to 2 Cheap Cars Ltd a week after purchase and diagnosis found a substantive internal failure within the transmission of the vehicle. This meant the vehicle would not be of ‘acceptable quality’ defined in s7 of the Consumer Guarantees Act. The complainant initially wanted the vehicle to be repaired and later changed his mind from repairing to rejecting the vehicle. Despite 2 Cheap Cars Ltd ultimately carrying out repairs to the transmission of the vehicle, the repairs were carried out well after the time the complainant had advised he wanted to reject the vehicle. The tribunal ruled in favour of the complainant, allowing him to reject the vehicle and ordering 2 Cheap Cars Ltd to pay him $13,854.
Read the full decision – New Zealand Legal Information Institute(external link)