Perryman v Fast Colours Pty Ltd

[2025] NSWCATCD 109

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Perryman v Fast Colours Pty Ltd [2025] NSWCATCD 109

Hearing dates:

27 June 2025

Date of orders:

11 August 2025

Decision date:

11 August 2025

Jurisdiction:

Consumer and Commercial Division

Before:

A Duc, General Member

Decision:

The Tribunal orders the first respondent to pay the applicant $20,000 within 14 days of the making of this order.

Legislation Cited:

Civil & Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, s60

Civil & Administrative Tribunal Rules, Rule 39

Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW), 79D, 79F, 79L, 79N, 79U

Cases Cited:

Baltic Shipping Co v Dillon [1993] HCA 4

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton; Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Bassat; Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Cunningham’s Warehouse Sales Pty Ltd [2012] HCA 7

Middleton v Wrona [2023] NSWCATAP 158

Nu Line Constructions Ltd v Fowler [2014] NSWCA 51

Rona v Opes Lifestyle Homes Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 363

Thurston v Goway Travel Pty Limited [2020] NSWCATAP 140

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Applicant – David Perryman
First Respondent – Fast Colours Pty Ltd
Second Respondent – Bruce Hopper

Representation:

Applicant – self represented
Respondent – did not appear

File Number(s):

2025/00085497

Publication restriction:

Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. Mr David Perryman, the applicant, applies to the Tribunal seeking a money order for $20,000 (and other amounts) following the failure of an agreement he entered into with the respondent, Fast Colours Pty Ltd.

2. The claim is a consumer claim pursuant to the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) (the Act) relating to services that were paid for in advance, but not provided, by the respondent.

3. Mr Bruce Hopper (a representative of the first respondent) was also named as a respondent. For reasons that will become clear, the contract for services was made with Fast Colours Pty Ltd. Fast Colours Pty Ltd was joined as a respondent by order of the Tribunal on 1 April 2025. Orders also were made for the registry to serve Fast Colours Pty Ltd. Where the Tribunal refers to the respondent, it is a reference to the corporate entity.

4. The applicant alleges that in 2018 he entered into an agreement with the respondent for the applicant’s car, a 1978 Ferrari GTS, to be spray-painted by the respondent, with such work to be completed within a twelve-month period. In exchange, the applicant would pay the respondent $20,000, to be paid in instalments.

5. For several years the contract subsisted with various delays in the respondent providing the services. As of the middle of 2022 that work had not been performed by the respondent, either partially or totally. At that time, the applicant took his car back into his possession. For several months after that the applicant persisted in seeking for the work to be performed by the respondent. In 2023 the applicant concluded the work would not be performed and sought the return of monies he had prepaid to the respondent.

6. The contract between the parties was oral. At the time of making the oral contract in late 2018, the parties…