Victorian tribunal denies $480 refund for rocking desk after free adjustment offer
The tribunal accepted that the desk rocked, including on kitchen tiles, but found too little evidence about its severity or whether an adjustment would fix it.
Blog category
Legal Arena reports about consumer.
Most recent articles
The tribunal accepted that the desk rocked, including on kitchen tiles, but found too little evidence about its severity or whether an adjustment would fix it.
Erin Barlow sought the return of a $120 charge. The appointment text confirmed a visit but did not mention a price, while Caleb Finch said he had disclosed the fee by phone.
The parties disputed whether the chair’s owner agreed to a later repair date. The signed judgment found fraud but gave no reasons and did not address her refund request.
The seller accepted that the mixer failed early but said its cause and repairability were unknown. A question about repair time did not amount to accepting a repair.
A receipt proved the price, not the fault. The court accepted the buyer’s account of the kettle switching off and found that her message did not accept a replacement.
The seller suspected the blender had been overloaded but had not seen it used or tested it. The judge found it broke during reasonable use.
The buyer said dishes stayed wet after a hose repair. The seller said a later test passed, but acknowledged it was run empty and did not establish full-load drying.
A photo showed a gap at a joint, and messages supported the buyer's account of a wobble. Neither established the desk's condition when sold, the court found.
A work note and a message recorded the extra charge, but neither resolved whether the customer had agreed to it. The court said the evidence left the question uncertain.
A next-morning message established that the buyer promptly reported a problem, but the commission said it did not independently confirm a defect.
Liza Mercado said the cooker’s light came on but it did not heat on first use. Ernesto Villanueva offered a replacement, while disputing that the complaint alone proved a defect.
The parties disputed whether a phone call authorised motherboard work. The settlement requires repair notes and any recorded authorisation, but does not resolve that disagreement.