Phillip v Bell Solar Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCATAP 162

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Phillip v Bell Solar Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCATAP 162 Hearing dates: 29 April 2019 Date of orders: 03 July 2019 Decision date: 03 July 2019 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: T Simon, Senior Member AR Boxall, Senior Member Decision: (1) The appeal is dismissed (2) Leave to appeal is denied Catchwords: CONSUMER CLAIM – error of law – s 48MA – fair and equitable Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Home Building Act 1989 Cases Cited: Nil Texts Cited: Nil Category: Principal judgment Parties: Elena Phillip (Applicant)

Bell Solar Pty Limited (Respondent) Representation: E Phillip (Applicant in person by telephone)

Mr Y Seomangal (Respondent) File Number(s): AP 19/02494 Publication restriction: None Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Citation: N/A Date of Decision: 15 January 2019 Before: S Smith File Number(s): HB 18/51069

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction 1. This is an appeal from a decision made on 15 January 2019 in the Tribunal's Consumer and Commercial Division. The Notice of Appeal was filed with the Tribunal on 16 January 2019, the day after the decision was made. 2. The decision concerned work performed by the Respondent at the Applicant's home in connection with the supply and installation of a solar electrical system, comprising solar panels and an inverter, for a total price of $7099: 1. The Applicant originally applied to the Tribunal on 30 November 2018 for compensation of $8000 for an alleged breach of statutory warranty by the Respondent in connection with that supply and installation. 2. In her application, the Applicant referred to four issues: 1. The system contracted for was a 6.60 kw system, whereas that supplied was a 5-kw system; 2. In the course of the installation, the Respondent cracked one or more roof tiles, which were inadequately repaired using silicon; 3. The wooden backing behind the inverter was not made with timber suitable for long-term use; and 4. The cable ties used in the course of the installation were unsuitable, being black plastic only whereas stainless steel cable ties (or a combination of stainless steel and plastic ties) should have been used. 1. In the course of the hearing on 15 January 2019: 1. The Applicant pressed only the last three of those issues; 2. The Respondent accepted that it was liable in respect of the defects so identified in those three issues; 3. The Tribunal found in the Applicant's favour in relation to the three issues which she pressed; and 4. The Tribunal made a work order requiring the Respondent to remedy those defects by 15 February 2019. 1. The Applicant objects to the making of a work order and appeals against it. She asks that the work order be replaced with an award of compensation in an amount sufficient to allow her to engage: 1. another contractor to remedy the defects, and 2. an inspector to assess the remedial work performed.