The tribunal held that while the claimant, as guarantor, was liable for the defaulted loans of the 2nd and 3rd respondents, the 1st respondent was procedurally at fault for failing to notify the claimant of the default before deducting her shares. The claimant's liability as guarantor was not disputed, nor was the fact of default. However, fairness required that the claimant be notified so she could seek repayment from the principal debtors. The tribunal found that the primary wrongdoing was by the 2nd and 3rd respondents for defaulting, but the 1st respondent's failure to notify the claimant warranted redress. The tribunal ordered the 2nd and 3rd respondents to refund the deducted amounts to the claimant, with costs and interest, but did not order the 1st respondent to refund the shares directly.