Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation v Kent
[2012] QCAT 197
•17 May 2012
| CITATION: | Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation v Kent [2012] QCAT 197 |
| PARTIES: | Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation |
| v | |
| Denis James Kent |
| APPLICATION NUMBER: | OCR066-10 |
| MATTER TYPE: | Occupational regulation matters |
| HEARING DATE: | On the papers |
| HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
| DECISION OF: | Peta Stilgoe, Senior Member |
| DELIVERED ON: | 17 May 2012 |
| DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
ORDERS MADE: | 1. Pursuant to s 527 of the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 Denis James Kent is liable to reimburse, and is ordered to pay to, the Claim Fund established under s 408 of the Act the sum of $4,038.73 within 21 days of the date of this order. |
| CATCHWORDS: | MOTOR DEALERS – application for reimbursement of the fund Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000, s 573 |
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
This matter was heard on the papers in accordance with section 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009.
REASONS FOR DECISION
In March 2005, Mr Cathcart bought a car from Mr Kent. The car was a former taxi. The previous owner told the Office of Fair Trading that the odometer reading on the car was 900,000 km. When Mr Cathcart bought the car, the odometer reading was 183,000 km.
Mr Cathcart lodged a claim against the statutory fund for $5,755, being $3,300 for the difference in value between a car showing 900,000 on the odometer and a car showing 180,000 and $2,455 for repairs. On 19 February 2009, the Chief Executive allowed the claim in the amount of $4,038.73. Mr Kent was named as the responsible person.
The Chief Executive made demand for reimbursement of the fund by letter dated 22 July 2009, a copy of which has been supplied to the tribunal. Mr Kent has not responded that demand.
Section 572 of the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 allows the Chief Executive to apply to the tribunal for an order that Mr Kent reimburse the fund. The tribunal will make a reimbursement order if it is satisfied that:
a)The Chief Executive has made a decision in relation to a claim against the fund.
b)Under the Chief Executive’s decision, Mr Kent is liable to reimburse the fund in a specified amount.
c)Mr Kent was given an information notice under section 482 of the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000.
d)Mr Kent did not apply under section 483 of PAMDA to have the decision reviewed.
e)A letter of demand was sent to Mr Kent under s 490(4).
f)Mr Kent has not paid the stated amount within the time allowed under the letter of demand.
I am satisfied that the Chief Executive has provided the tribunal with the documents required by s 527(3).
The tribunal gave notice of the Chief Executive’s application by notice dated 18 June 2010 sent to Mr Kent’s last known address. The mail was returned with the notation “incorrect address”. The tribunal made direction on 23 August 2010, allowing Mr Kent to file further material by 30 August 2010. Mr Kent did not file any material.
By an oversight, the tribunal did not deal with the Chief Executive’s application promptly. The file came before me in February 2012 so I made a further direction allowing Mr Kent time to file material.
On 6 March 2012, Mr Kent rang the tribunal to say that he was “paying money to SPER for something that happened many years ago”. He has not filed any material, he has not made an application to have the Chief Executive’s decision reviewed and the tribunal has had no further contact with him.
The Chief Executive has filed a fresh statutory declaration confirming that, in fact, it has received no money from Mr Kent in relation to Mr Cathcart’s claim against the fund.
[10] I find that the requirements of s 527 of the Act have been satisfied. Pursuant to that section Mr Kent is liable to reimburse, and is ordered to pay to, the Claim Fund established under section 408 of the Act the sum of $4,038.73 within 21 days of the date of this order.
3
0
0