Page 649 - Week 02 - Thursday, 21 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Clause 4
MR STEVENSON (5.17): Mr Speaker, clause 4 discusses a contract. The problem is that it certainly does not say that it is written, and I believe that it does not need to be written; it can be a verbal contract. When you get into a situation where a verbal contract can apply in this area, it gets onto very shaky ground indeed. Someone could be ringing someone such as a client - it could be a solicited call; it could be a regular client; it could be a call solicited by the dealer - and, if there was a situation where the client agreed to a service of, say, $51, then that person is required to give various notices in writing, et cetera. So, we have a coverall here that really should not be. I think the situation should discuss written contracts. Verbal contracts lead us into far too many complications.
Another area is clause 4(1)(a), where it talks about "negotiations leading to the formation of the contract", et cetera. Then it talks about them taking place:
... between the consumer and a dealer in each other's presence in the Territory at a place other than trade premises of the supplier.
There could be many places that are not directly trade premises of the supplier, but still involve the business operating normally, as they do, without an indication that they should come under a Door-to-Door Trading Act.
Indeed, the Canberra Show would certainly not be a normal trade premises of the supplier. If we had a situation where business was carried out at the Canberra Show - if this legislation was currently in force - would it not mean that anyone selling anything over $50 would have to supply the people with information concerning these areas?
We also have a claim by the Attorney-General in his presentation speech that one of the major ideas of this was to place the contractual details and so on in plain language, so that the consumer could easily understand these things. Let us have a look at what clause 4(2) says:
Subject to subsection (3), for the purposes of paragraph 1(b) in determining whether an invitation is solicited or unsolicited, any solicitation by way of -
(a) printed or written material delivered but not addressed personally to the consumer; or
(b) advertisement addressed to the public or a substantial section of the public;
shall be disregarded, but where an invitation arises from a communication initiated by the supplier or dealer, or a person acting on behalf of the supplier or dealer, the invitation shall not be regarded as unsolicited.
Is that plain English? Can most people understand that?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .