Iliffe v Onsite Trade Services Pty Ltd

[2025] NSWCATCD 48

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Iliffe v Onsite Trade Services Pty Ltd [2025] NSWCATCD 48

Hearing dates:

4 February 2025

Date of orders:

12 June 2025

Decision date:

12 June 2025

Jurisdiction:

Consumer and Commercial Division

Before:

B Koch, General Member

Decision:

(1)   The name of the respondent is amended to Onsite Trade Services Pty Ltd.

(2)   The respondent is to pay the applicant the sum of $9,536.78 immediately.

Catchwords:

CONSUMER LAW – misleading or deceptive conduct

Legislation Cited:

Australian Consumer Law (NSW)

Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)

Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW)

Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dukemaster Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 682

Forbes v Wan [2020] NSWCATAP 129

Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298

Nguyen v Cosmopolitan Homes [2008] NSWCA 246

Texts Cited:

Nil

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Sarah Iliffe (Applicant)
Onsite Trade Services Pty Ltd (Respondent)

Representation:

Ms Iliffe, in person (Applicant)
No appearance (Respondent)

File Number(s):

2024/00332987

Publication restriction:

Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. By application lodged on 9 September 2024, the applicant claimed the sum of $16,094 against Onsite Trade Services Pty Limited (respondent) for alleged misleading or deceptive conduct related to plumbing services provided to the applicant by the respondent.

2. There was no appearance for the respondent at the group list hearing on 4 October 2024. The applicant lodged documents in accordance with directions made by the Tribunal but the respondent. No documents were lodged or served by the respondent.

3. The application was listed for final hearing on 4 February 2025.

4. On 3 February 2025, the respondent lodged with the Tribunal a document titled “Respondent’s Submissions”. That document was not provided to the applicant prior to the hearing the following day.

5. Despite having filed the “Respondent’s Submissions”, there was no appearance for the respondent at the hearing on 4 February 2025. The applicant appeared and gave evidence subject to an oath.

6. The Tribunal determined that the way it ought to proceed, consistent with the guiding principle to facilitate the just, quick and cheap resolution of the real issues in the proceedings (see s 36 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)), was to determine the applicant’s claim based upon the uncontradicted evidence of the applicant, but to have regard to the “Respondent’s Submissions” (as submissions only) and provide the applicant with an opportunity to respond to the “Respondent’s Submissions” by submissions in reply.

7. The applicant provided her submissions in reply on 10 February 2025.

Applicant’s Case

8. The applicant resides in residential premises in Annandale, NSW. On 23 September 2021, the applicant had a blocked sewer. She conducted searches on Google and contacted PlumbCorp to book a jet blast.

9. Later that day, the applicant received an email from PlumbCorp which confirmed her booking for 24 September 2021 and noted that PlumbCorp “is owned and operated by Onsite Trade Services Pty Ltd”. The Tribunal notes that that statement reflects the Australian Business Number provided on each of…