Nazmul Nisha Khan v Shinwoo Kang and Sung Ju Lee trading as SK Floor Sanding [2014] NSWCATCD 237

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Nazmul Nisha Khan v Shinwoo Kang and Sung Ju Lee trading as SK Floor Sanding [2014] NSWCATCD 237 Hearing dates: 18 November 2014 Decision date: 09 December 2014 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: D Goldstein, Senior Member Decision: For the reasons stated Shinwoo Kang and Sung Ju Lee must pay Nazmul Nisha Khan the sum of $4,400.00 with fourteen days of the date of this order. Any application for costs must be made within fourteen days of the date of this order. Catchwords: Defective work Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Fair Trading Act 1987, Home Building Act 1989 Cases Cited: Nguyen v Cosmopolitan Homes [2008] NSWCA 246 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Nazmul Nisha Khan (applicant) Shinwoo Kang and Sung Ju Lee (respondent) Representation: The parties were not legally represented File Number(s): HB 14/09386 Publication restriction: Unrestricted

reasons for decision 1. These proceedings were first heard in the Tribunal on 20 May 2014 when the application was dismissed. 2. The applicant appealed the Tribunal's decision. On 11 September 2014 the Appeal Panel of the Tribunal upheld the Appeal and set aside the order made by the Tribunal on 20 May 2014. The proceedings were remitted to the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Tribunal for rehearing. 3. These proceedings were re-heard in Parramatta on 18 November 2014. The parties were not legally represented. 4. The hearing was concluded at approximately 3.00 pm as the respondents had made arrangements to be elsewhere. 5. The applicant claims the sum of $3,600.00 from the respondents for alleged defective work carried out by them. In addition she claims the sum of $800.00 for timber excess timber purchased due to an allegedly inaccurate measurement she states was carried out by the respondents. The applicant also seeks an order that she does not have to pay the respondents $3,100.00. 6. On 6 August 2013 the respondents issued a quotation to the applicant for work to be carried out at 68 Spring Street Arncliffe (the 'residence'). 7. The quote was in relation to 183 square meters of flooring work to be performed. The respondents quoted labour to install battens, timber, coatings and to install timber to and coat 17 stairs. The amount quoted was $9,760.00. I accept that included in the work the respondents were to perform was sanding the timber flooring installed by them. 8. I am satisfied on the evidence, and it is not in dispute, that the applicant accepted the respondents' quotation thereby creating a contract between them for the respondents to perform the work the subject of the quotation and for the applicant to pay the respondents the amount quoted for the performance of the work.