Haines House Haulage Co Ltd v Gamble
| Haines House Haulage v Gamble | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | High Court of New Zealand |
| Full case name | Haines House Haulage v Gamble |
| Decided | 1989 |
| Citation | [1989] 3 NZLR 221 |
| Keywords | |
| accord and satisfaction | |
Haines House Haulage v Gamble [1989] 3 NZLR 221 is an often cited case in New Zealand, where a creditor banked a cheque as 'full and final settlement' and was unsuccessful at claiming the balance from the debtor. It's legal significance is that where a creditor banks a debtors cheque for a lesser amount and wants to still claim the balance from the debtor, they must notify the debtor within 10 days that the banked cheque was not accepted as full settlement.
Background
Haines House Haulage sold and moved a house on behalf of Gamble. However, when it came time to pay the resulting invoice charged of $2,811.09, Gamble disputed the amount owed. Lengthy correspondence was exchanged between the 2 parties culminating in Gamble send a letter to Haines with a cheque attached for only $672.18, with the letter clearly stating the cheque was being tendered on a full and final basis only, as well as their calculation for this amount.
Haines director received the letter and banked the cheque, but did not accept it as full settlement of the account, and subsequently demanded that Gamble pay the remaining balance of $2,138.91. Unfortunately, Haines waited 10 days before they informed Gamble that the cheque was not accepted as full settlement, and the remaining balance was still owed.
Gamble of course argued that the banking of the cheque was accord and satisfaction for the account and denied any liability for the remaining balance. Haines ultimately sued Gamble for the balance.
Held
The court ruled that as the debtor had not heard from the creditor for 10 days after they banked the cheque, that Gamble were entitle to believe that the cheque had been accepted as full settlement, and so accord and satisfaction applied here.