Holt-Lea v O'Connor & Anor

Cody Holt-Lea purchased a 2004 Nissan Maxima sedan from Karin and Wayne O'Connor for $8,000 on 22 March 2021. Shortly after the purchase, the vehicle began to exhibit issues with excessive oil consumption and smoke emissions. Holt-Lea sought a refund or replacement vehicle from the O'Connors, who refused. Holt-Lea commenced proceedings in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) seeking a refund of the purchase price. The O'Connors did not appear at the hearing, and Holt-Lea was represented by his mother, L Holt. The central issue was whether the vehicle had a defect at the time of sale, which would entitle Holt-Lea to a refund under the guarantee of acceptable quality under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL).

The court considered the evidence presented regarding the condition of the vehicle at the time of purchase and the subsequent development of the defect. Evidence from Tanzer's Autocare Yeppoon suggested that the vehicle had overheated in the past, leading to potential damage such as a blown head gasket. However, the evidence did not conclusively establish that the defect was present at the time of sale. The court also noted that Holt-Lea did not raise concerns about the vehicle's condition until several months after purchase. The court held that the applicant bore the burden of proving the existence of the defect at the time of sale, a burden he had failed to meet.

The court concluded that while the vehicle did have a defect when inspected on 13 October 2021, there was insufficient evidence to establish that the defect existed at the time of sale. The applicant's claim for a refund was dismissed.