Summary judgment — failure to repay loan — duty of care — Personal Property Securities Register (PPSR) — leave to issue a third party notice — Forivermor Ltd v ANZ New Zealand (formerly National Bank Ltd) [2014] NZCA 129 — Pre-Cast NZ Ltd v Any Step Ltd [2015] NZHC 2375. The plaintiff sought summary judgment against the respondents for payment of a debt arising from a 2015 loan agreement, which the respondents had made no repayments towards. The respondents sought leave to issue a third party notice against the company they say was the finance broker that arranged the loan, and raised a counterclaim that the plaintiff owed them a duty of care to search the Personal Property Securities Register (PPSR) in order to establish if there were any securities registered over a boat that the respondents were purchasing with the loan. In 2015, the plaintiff agreed to advance $100,000 to a bank account nominated by the respondents in order to purchase the boat. In reliance on the New Zealand Safe Ships Certificate they provided to the plaintiff, the respondents believed that they were dealing with the legal owner of the boat, however, neither the respondents, plaintiffs, or the third party finance broker searched the PPSR to check if any security was registered over the boat, which in fact there was. The respondents were unable to retain possession of the boat and the person who appeared to sell them the boat was declared bankrupt, fleeing to Australia when the plaintiff transferred the money to his bank account. The respondents made no payments towards the loan and this default led to the plaintiff seeking to recover the loan principal and accrued interest plus costs. The Judge considered the submissions, holding that the respondents did not have a defence that could be tried, therefore summary judgment could be granted. The Judge found the plaintiff owed no duty of care to search the PPSR, as case law has established a lender is under no obligation to give advice unless it is specifically requested to do so. Further, a counterclaim is not in itself a defence. The Judge then considered if leave should be granted to join the third party in the proceedings, effectively granting a delay on summary judgment. There must be a compelling reason for denying a summary judgment, as the plaintiff is entitled to the "fruits of a judgment" when liability is clear. The Judge found that while the third party had arranged the loan, the respondents signed the document, thereby acknowledging the particulars of the contract. The Judge declined leave to join the third party and was satisfied the grounds for summary judgment were met. The respondents were held jointly and severally liable for $146,416.95 with interest at the rate of 20.75% per annum daily from 9 May 2017 until the date of payment and indemnity costs pursuant to the loan agreement. Judgment Date: 27 June 2018.