Fair Trading vs AFCA: which complaint body fits your case

You've tried to resolve a dispute directly with the business and hit a wall. Now you're looking at your escalation options and seeing two names come up repeatedly: Fair Trading (or your state's equivalent consumer agency) and AFCA — the Australian Financial Complaints Authority. They both sound official, they're both free, and neither of them is a court. So which one do you go to?

The answer depends almost entirely on the type of business you're dealing with. Choosing the wrong body doesn't ruin your case, but it does cost you time — and in some disputes, time matters. This guide explains how each body works, what kinds of disputes each one handles, and how to decide quickly which path is right for you.

Quick answer

The key variable is whether your dispute involves a financial product or service. If it does — a bank, insurer, super fund, financial adviser, mortgage broker, or credit provider — AFCA is usually the right external dispute resolution body once direct negotiation fails, provided the firm is an AFCA member and AFCA's eligibility and time-limit rules are met. If your dispute is about goods or non-financial services — a retailer, tradesperson, gym, or online seller — your state or territory Fair Trading body is usually the right starting point.

A second variable is what you want the body to do. Fair Trading conciliation is a voluntary process: the body can facilitate a conversation but cannot make binding orders or compel the business to participate or pay. AFCA can make determinations that are binding on the financial firm if you accept them, though you are not bound yourself. Superannuation complaints follow their own AFCA rules, so check the position for that complaint type. Neither body is a substitute for a court or tribunal if you need a binding order that the other side is compelled to comply with regardless of their consent.

What the law actually says

The Fair Trading framework

Each state and territory has a fair trading or consumer affairs body involved in administering and enforcing consumer protection laws, including the ACL as it applies in that jurisdiction. The ACL itself is Schedule 2 to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, and each jurisdiction applies it through its own application Act — for example, the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) applies the ACL in New South Wales, while Victoria applies it through the Australian Consumer Law and Fair Trading Act 2012.

The consumer guarantees in the ACL — including section 54 (acceptable quality) for goods and section 60 (due care and skill) for services — are the legal foundation for most Fair Trading disputes. These guarantees apply automatically where you acquired the goods or services as a consumer within the meaning of section 3 of the ACL, and cannot be excluded by a business's terms and conditions. Under section 64 of the ACL, any term that tries to exclude, restrict or modify these guarantees or their remedies is void to the extent it attempts to do so.

Fair Trading bodies offer a conciliation service to help resolve disputes between consumers and businesses. Conciliation is voluntary and confidential. The body contacts the business, facilitates a conversation, and tries to help the parties reach an agreed outcome. Importantly, Fair Trading cannot make binding orders in ordinary consumer disputes and cannot compel the business to participate or to pay. If conciliation fails or the business declines to engage, Fair Trading will generally tell you to consider a tribunal or court.

The AFCA framework

AFCA is an external dispute resolution (EDR) scheme authorised under the Corporations Act 2001 and the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009. Covered financial firms — banks, insurers, credit providers, financial advisers, superannuation funds, mortgage brokers, and others — are generally required to be AFCA members, and when a consumer lodges a complaint the member firm must engage. It's worth confirming the firm is an AFCA member before relying on AFCA.

AFCA handles disputes about financial products and services: credit cards, home loans, personal loans, insurance claims, superannuation, investment advice, and similar matters. It does not handle disputes about goods, non-financial services, or general consumer transactions. If your complaint is that your bank wrongly charged you a fee, denied an insurance claim, or gave you unsuitable financial advice, AFCA is the right forum. If your complaint is that a retailer sold you a faulty appliance, AFCA has no jurisdiction.

AFCA's process moves through negotiation, conciliation, and — if those don't resolve the matter — a determination by an AFCA ombudsman; AFCA may use different resolution methods depending on the complaint. If you accept the determination, it is binding on the financial firm. You are not bound by it and can still pursue other avenues if you reject it. There are monetary limits on what AFCA can award, and these are updated periodically — check afca.org.au for current limits before filing.

For a deeper look at when AFCA is the right tool, see our guide to AFCA and financial services disputes.

When this applies (and when it doesn't)

Go to Fair Trading when:

• Your dispute is about goods or non-financial services purchased from a business in Australia where you acquired them as a consumer within the meaning of the ACL.
• The business has refused a refund, repair, or replacement for a faulty product or a service done poorly.
• You want a free, low-stakes first step before considering a tribunal.
• The business is a retailer, tradesperson, gym, hairdresser, removalist, or similar — not a financial firm.

Keep in mind that Fair Trading conciliation has eligibility criteria and limitations that vary by state. Most bodies require that you have already attempted to resolve the dispute directly with the business before they will accept a referral. Some bodies have minimum dispute values or categories of disputes they will not accept. The process is voluntary and confidential — the business can decline to participate, and Fair Trading cannot compel payment. Only a court or tribunal can make a binding order that the other side must comply with regardless of their consent.

Go to AFCA when:

• Your dispute involves a bank, insurer, super fund, credit provider, financial adviser, or mortgage broker.
• You have already made a complaint directly to the firm and either received a final response you disagree with, or the firm has not resolved your complaint within the required timeframe (generally 30 days for most complaints, 21 days for complaints involving financial difficulty, and 45 days for superannuation or traditional trustee complaints — check AFCA's website for current rules).
• The amount in dispute falls within AFCA's current monetary limits.
• You want a process that can produce a determination binding on the firm.

AFCA does not handle disputes about goods, general services, or matters outside the financial services sector. It also cannot help if the financial firm is not an AFCA member (though most authorised firms are required to be).

Neither body is right when:

• You need an urgent court order, injunction, or immediate enforceable relief rather than a conciliation or external-dispute-resolution process.
• The amount in dispute exceeds AFCA's monetary limits and you need a court.
• Your dispute is with a private seller rather than a business (the ACL's consumer guarantees apply to businesses acting in trade or commerce — most sole traders will qualify, but a genuine private sale between individuals generally falls outside the ACL's scope).
• You need a formal evidence process — discovery, subpoenas, cross-examination, or complex evidence management — for which a court or tribunal is usually more appropriate than Fair Trading or AFCA.

What to do today

Before you contact either body, there are steps that will strengthen your position regardless of which path you take.

1. Put your complaint in writing to the business first. Both Fair Trading and AFCA generally require evidence that you've tried to resolve the matter directly. A written demand letter creates that record and often resolves the dispute without needing to escalate at all. fairgo can generate a demand letter for free in about 90 seconds — it identifies the relevant ACL sections automatically and produces a letter you can send under your own name.

2. Identify the type of business. Ask yourself: is this a financial firm regulated under the Corporations Act or National Credit Act? If yes, AFCA. If no, Fair Trading is often the right path — but check whether another industry ombudsman applies, such as the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO) for telecommunications, or an energy or water ombudsman for utilities.

3. Gather your evidence. Receipts, contracts, emails, photos of defects, bank statements, correspondence — whichever body you approach will want to understand what happened and when. Organised evidence makes the process faster.

4. Check the body's eligibility criteria before filing. For Fair Trading, check your state or territory body's website — a full list is at /agencies. For AFCA, check afca.org.au for current monetary limits and complaint eligibility rules.

5. Lodge your complaint. Fair Trading complaints are typically lodged online through your state body's website. AFCA complaints are lodged at afca.org.au. Both processes are free for consumers.

If you're in New South Wales and want a step-by-step walkthrough of the local escalation path, see our NSW escalation guide.

What if the business refuses

If Fair Trading conciliation doesn't produce a resolution — either because the business declines to participate or because the parties can't agree — you will generally need to move to a binding forum. The right forum depends on the type of dispute and the amount involved.

For most ACL disputes about goods or services, the options typically include:

• State and territory consumer tribunals — such as NCAT in NSW, VCAT in Victoria, QCAT in Queensland, and equivalents elsewhere. These tribunals can often hear ACL disputes, though jurisdiction depends on enabling legislation and the nature of the claim. You can usually use them without a lawyer in many cases, though you may bring one. See our tribunal comparison guide for an overview of how they differ.
• The Magistrates Court (or equivalent in your state) — for many ordinary ACL disputes, particularly where a tribunal's jurisdiction is unclear or the claim type doesn't fit a specific tribunal-enabled category, the Magistrates Court is the correct binding forum. Filing fees and processes vary by state.

For AFCA matters, if you accept an AFCA determination and the firm does not give effect to it, AFCA is required to report the non-compliance to the relevant regulator and may take other steps under its rules. If you reject the determination, you retain the right to pursue the matter through a court.

The threat of escalation — made clearly in a demand letter — often prompts resolution before any of these steps are needed. Businesses generally know that tribunals and courts are familiar with "the warranty expired" and "our policy is no refunds" arguments, and that those arguments tend not to succeed where a consumer guarantee has been breached.

For a broader look at what happens after a business refuses your demand, see what to do when a business refuses a refund.

Common mistakes

A few patterns come up repeatedly in disputes that end up taking longer than they should:

• Going to the wrong body first. Sending an ACL complaint to AFCA, or a banking dispute to Fair Trading, wastes time. Both bodies will redirect you, but that redirection can take weeks. Spend two minutes identifying the type of business before you file.

• Treating Fair Trading as a binding forum. Fair Trading conciliation is a useful first step, but it cannot compel the business to pay or participate. If you need a binding outcome, you will eventually need a tribunal or court. Don't wait months for a conciliation that the business was never going to engage with.

• Filing with AFCA before exhausting the firm's internal complaints process. AFCA generally requires that you have lodged a complaint with the firm directly and either received a final response or waited the required period. Filing too early may result in AFCA referring you back to the firm first.

• Missing AFCA's time limits. AFCA has time limits for lodging complaints — usually within two years of the firm's final response, or six years from when you first became aware of the loss, subject to AFCA's rules and complaint-type exceptions. Check afca.org.au for current rules. Delay can cost you access to the scheme.

• Assuming the ACCC will handle your individual dispute. The ACCC investigates systemic conduct and takes action on behalf of the public — it does not resolve individual consumer disputes. For your specific case, Fair Trading and your state tribunal are the right forums. AFCA handles financial services disputes specifically.

• Not putting the initial complaint in writing. A phone call to the business creates no record. When Fair Trading or AFCA asks what steps you took to resolve the matter directly, a written email or letter is far more useful than a recollection of a conversation.

• Confusing a manufacturer's warranty with your ACL rights. If a retailer tells you your warranty has expired and they can't help, that may end your warranty claim — but it does not end your consumer guarantee claim under the ACL. The consumer guarantee is a statutory right primarily against the seller, not the manufacturer, and it does not expire on the same schedule as a manufacturer's warranty. See our guide to consumer guarantees vs warranties for more on this distinction.

Related reading

• Business refused your refund? Here's what to do next
• NCAT, VCAT, QCAT — which tribunal is right for your dispute?
• Escalating a consumer complaint in NSW — step by step

This article is general information about Australian Consumer Law, not legal advice. The ACL is complex and your situation may have details that change the analysis. For advice on your specific case, see your state's Fair Trading body — full list at /agencies.