Someone from the company, whose name was redacted from the decision, approached the couple asking if they wanted their trees trimmed and provided a verbal quote of $50,000 for several days’ work before offering a discount of $15,000.
The couple accepted the price and the company started work immediately. However, at the end of the first day the couple say staff “stood over” them and demanded they be paid $10,000 immediately.
Feeling intimidated they paid the fee and the arborists came back over the next few days to finish the job and then the remaining $25,000 was paid to them.
It wasn’t until the couple told their adult children how much they had paid for the work that they began to question whether they had got their value for money.
They sought quotes from other arborists who estimated the whole job would have cost a maximum of $5000. They then filed a claim to the Disputes Tribunal for a refund of $30,000.
Tribunal referee Kaye Edwards, who is based on the North Shore, said the couple were approached in their home by the company which constituted an uninvited direct sales agreement.
“They were not provided with a quote. An invoice was sent to them after works commenced, after the first payment had been made,” Edwards said in her ruling.
“The invoice did not contain any information about their rights to cancel the contract at any time, nor were they advised orally of their rights.”
Edwards said that despite the company’s evidence that it had provided verbal advice about the cancellation policy and the couple’s rights, she doubted that it had actually occurred.
The company did not provide any evidence to justify the quote except to say it was a lot of manual work and required 10 people working on site however none of them were qualified arborists. The price also included providing accommodation for staff and their families to stay at a nearby motel for several nights.
By contrast, the couple provided quotes to the tribunal from three other arborists with the average quote coming out at $5000. The comments on those quotes noted that $35,000 was unjustified and that a team of just three or four qualified arborists would do the job more efficiently and in less time.
Edwards said that the couple were not advised of their rights as work began on their trees immediately without giving them time to consider the contract.
“I find they have been materially prejudiced,” she said in her ruling, before awarding a refund of $30,000 which would make the cost of the job in keeping with other quotes and what the tribunal deemed a reasonable price for the work done at the property.
Jeremy Wilkinson is an Open Justice reporter based in Manawatū covering courts and justice issues with an interest in tribunals. He has been a journalist for nearly a decade and has worked for NZME since 2022.
