Scrapping haywire TV costs repair shop $128, following tribunal ruling

While their claim of mental distress was tossed, their malfunctioning TV shouldn’t have been, according to a recent Civil Resolution Tribunal ruling.

On Oct. 3, 2022, Maureen Rhodes and Francois Alain left a TV that was spontaneously turning off at 999 Prairie Electronics.

Tony Derick Szymanski, who runs the computer and phone repair business, gave the customers a receipt stating the shop was not responsible for goods left for more than 30 days.

In November, Szymanski recycled the television, something Rhodes and Alain said he had no right to do.

As compensation, Rhodes and Alain asked for $500 – $250 for the TV and $250 for mental distress.

The proprietor and the customers each offered a different account of what happened between the day the TV was dropped off and the day it was scrapped.

Rhodes contended they called but didn’t get through and that Alain went to the shop in late October but Szymanski ignored him and didn’t unlock the shop’s door.

Szymanski’s stated that he talked to the customers a few days after they dropped off the TV, telling them the repair would cost a total of $220. As the TV was about 10 years old, he also suggested it might not be worth repairing.

He tried to call the customers several more times but they never responded so he recycled the television, according to Szymanski.

Case hinged on a single digit

While Szymanski would usually be entitled to junk the TV after 30 days, Civil Resolution Tribunal vice chair Eric Regehr concluded the proprietor failed to make a reasonable attempt to call the customers because he wrote down the wrong phone number.

After the TV was recycled, the customers noticed the phone number Szymanski transcribed from a business card was wrong by one digit.

The terms of the agreement implicitly required Szymanski to make “reasonable attempts” to contact the customers before getting rid of the TV, Regehr wrote, adding it was the proprietor’s fault he had the wrong number.

“On balance, I conclude that Mr. Szymanski breached the parties’ contract by recycling the television without first notifying the applicants,” Regehr wrote.

The customers had asked for $250 for the TV. However, explaining the judgment was based strictly on the market value of the set, Regehr awarded the customers $45 for the TV.

“I doubt that a 10-year-old television that . . . spontaneously turns itself off has any market value, despite the applicants’ submission that it was otherwise in perfect condition,’” Regehr wrote. “A television remaining on is a key aspect of its operation.”

The customers had also asked for $250 for mental distress.

While mental distress might be considered in a case involving wedding photography or some other contract that includes a psychological benefit, Regehr found that didn’t apply in this case.

“A television repair contract has no psychological component, so I dismiss the applicants’ claim for mental distress,” Regehr wrote.

Including interest and tribunal fees as well as $45 for the TV, the applicants were awarded a total of $128.