section 18 ACL misleading conduct: examples and what to do

You were told the product had a feature it didn't have. The listing said "ocean view" and the balcony faced a car park. The salesperson assured you the plan had no lock-in period — and then a $400 exit fee appeared. In each of these situations, the business may have breached section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law — one of the most powerful and broadly applied provisions in Australian consumer protection.

Section 18 doesn't require the business to have lied deliberately. It doesn't require a contract to have been signed. It doesn't even require you to have lost money yet. What it requires is that the conduct was misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive — and that you were affected by it. Understanding how this works in practice gives you a significant advantage when a business tries to brush off your complaint.

Quick answer

Section 18 of the ACL prohibits businesses from engaging in conduct that is misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive, in trade or commerce. You don't have to prove the business intended to mislead you — only that a reasonable person in your position would have been misled. If you relied on a false or misleading representation and suffered loss as a result, you can seek compensation, a refund, or other remedies. This applies to advertising, verbal statements, product descriptions, contracts, and silence where there was a duty to disclose.

What the law actually says

Section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law reads simply: a person must not, in trade or commerce, engage in conduct that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive.

That brevity is deliberate. Courts and tribunals have interpreted it broadly over decades, and the result is one of the widest consumer protection provisions in the world. Here is what that means in practice:

"In trade or commerce" means the conduct must happen in a commercial context — a business selling to you, not a private individual. A car dealer's verbal assurances are covered. Your neighbour selling their old car privately is not.

"Conduct" includes far more than outright lies. It covers:

• Written or verbal statements (advertisements, listings, sales pitches, emails)
• Omissions — staying silent about something a reasonable person would want to know
• Half-truths — a statement that is technically accurate but creates a false overall impression
• Conduct itself — for example, displaying a product in a way that implies it has capabilities it doesn't

"Misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive" is an objective test. The question isn't whether the business intended to mislead you — it's whether a reasonable person in your position, seeing or hearing what you did, would have been misled. Honest mistakes still count.

Reliance and loss aren't required to establish a breach, but they are required to get a remedy. If you relied on the misleading conduct and suffered loss — you paid money, entered a contract, or made a decision you wouldn't otherwise have made — you can claim compensation or other relief.

Section 18 sits alongside more specific provisions in the ACL. Section 29 lists specific false representations that are prohibited (about the standard, quality, grade, or composition of goods; about price; about testimonials; and so on). Section 29 is narrower and more prescriptive — section 18 is the catch-all that covers everything else.

For goods and services that fall short of what was promised, the consumer guarantees in sections 54–60 may also apply alongside section 18. The two sets of rights are separate and can both be relevant to the same dispute.

When this applies (and when it doesn't)

Section 18 applies when:

• A business (not a private individual) made a representation to you — in an ad, a listing, a verbal statement, a contract, or an email.
• That representation was false, misleading, or created a false impression, even if it was technically accurate in isolation.
• A reasonable person in your position would have been misled.
• You relied on it and suffered some form of loss or detriment — financial loss, entering a contract you wouldn't have signed, or making a decision you wouldn't have made.

Real examples where section 18 commonly applies:

• A real estate agent describes a property as "fully renovated" when only the kitchen was updated and the rest is original 1970s fittings. See real estate misrepresentation for more on this specific context.
• A holiday booking platform advertises "beachfront accommodation" when the property is a 15-minute walk from the beach. The holiday accommodation false advertising article covers this in detail.
• A gym salesperson tells you there's no lock-in period, but the contract you sign contains a 12-month minimum term. See gym membership cancellation rights for the full picture.
• A software product is advertised as compatible with your operating system, but it isn't. The software didn't work as advertised article applies here.
• A mattress is described as "100% natural latex" when it contains a significant proportion of synthetic materials. This also engages section 56 of the ACL (goods must match their description) — see mattress doesn't match description.

Section 18 generally does not apply when:

• The seller is a private individual, not a business. Private sales on Gumtree or Facebook Marketplace between individuals are outside the scope of "trade or commerce" for section 18 purposes.
• The representation was clearly an opinion or puffery — "best coffee in Sydney" is not a factual claim a reasonable person would rely on. But "award-winning coffee" could be, if no award exists.
• You didn't rely on the representation. If you knew the claim was false before you bought, you can't later say you were misled by it.
• The loss you suffered was caused by something other than the misleading conduct.

What to do today

If you believe a business has misled or deceived you, the steps that work are the same ones that work in most ACL disputes — but the framing matters.

1. Write down exactly what was said or shown to you, and when. Memory fades. Note the date, the channel (in-store, online, phone call), and the specific words or images used. If it was in writing — an email, a listing, an advertisement — save a copy or take a screenshot immediately.

2. Identify the gap between what was represented and reality. The clearer you can articulate this, the stronger your position. "The listing said X, but the product/service is actually Y" is the core of your claim.

3. Gather evidence of your reliance. This might be the purchase receipt, the contract you signed, or a record of the decision you made because of the representation. The question you're answering is: "What did I do because I believed what they told me?"

4. Calculate your loss. This could be the full purchase price, the difference in value between what was promised and what was delivered, or costs you incurred as a result (for example, accommodation costs if a property wasn't as described).

5. Write to the business. A written demand letter citing section 18 of the ACL, describing the misleading conduct specifically, and stating what remedy you're seeking is far more effective than a phone call. It creates a record, signals that you know your rights, and gives the business a clear path to resolve the matter without escalation.

fairgo can help you draft that letter in about 90 seconds — start here. The wizard identifies the relevant ACL provisions based on what happened and produces a letter you send under your own name.

6. Give a reasonable deadline. Fourteen days is standard for most disputes. State clearly what you'll do if the deadline passes without a satisfactory response.

What if the business refuses

If the business ignores your letter or refuses your claim, you have several escalation options:

• Your state or territory Fair Trading body. Each jurisdiction offers a free conciliation service. They contact the business on your behalf and attempt to broker a resolution. The full list of agencies is at /agencies. Conciliation resolves a significant proportion of disputes without any further steps.

• Your state consumer tribunal. NCAT in New South Wales, VCAT in Victoria, QCAT in Queensland, and their equivalents in other states hear misleading conduct claims. Filing fees are modest and you don't need a lawyer. The ncat-vcat-qcat-which-tribunal article explains how to choose the right one and what to expect.

• The ACCC. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission enforces section 18 at a national level, but it focuses on systemic conduct affecting many consumers rather than individual disputes. An ACCC complaint can be useful for flagging a pattern of behaviour, but it won't resolve your individual claim. Your state Fair Trading body and tribunal are the right forums for that.

• Federal Court or Federal Circuit and Family Court. For significant losses, section 18 claims can be brought in federal court. This is rarely practical for individual consumers without legal representation, but it is an option for larger disputes.

The demand letter is often enough. Businesses that know they've made a misleading representation — and that you can prove it — typically prefer to resolve the matter quietly rather than have it aired at a tribunal.

Common mistakes

A few patterns come up repeatedly in section 18 disputes:

• Assuming intent matters. The most common misconception is that you have to prove the business deliberately lied. You don't. If the conduct was objectively misleading — regardless of what the business intended — section 18 is engaged. "We didn't mean to mislead you" is not a defence.

• Confusing section 18 with the consumer guarantees. Section 18 is about representations made before or during the sale. The consumer guarantees (sections 54–60) are about the quality and fitness of the goods or services themselves. Both can apply to the same situation, but they're separate rights with separate remedies. If a product was described inaccurately and also fails to work properly, you may have claims under both.

• Not keeping evidence of the original representation. Websites change, listings get updated, and verbal assurances are denied. Screenshot everything at the time of purchase. If the ad has already changed, the Wayback Machine (web.archive.org) sometimes preserves earlier versions — though that's an external tool fairgo can't link to directly.

• Waiting too long. Limitation periods apply. In most states, you have six years from when you discovered the loss to bring a claim. But evidence degrades, memories fade, and businesses change. Acting promptly gives you a much stronger position.

• Asking for the wrong remedy. Section 18 entitles you to compensation for loss caused by the misleading conduct — not necessarily a full refund in every case. If you received some value from what you bought, the remedy may be the difference in value, not the entire purchase price. Calibrate your demand to your actual loss.

• Going straight to a negative review instead of a demand letter. A public review might feel satisfying, but it doesn't get your money back and can sometimes complicate a later legal claim. The demand letter first, escalation second, is the sequence that actually works. If the business still refuses, the business refused refund article covers what comes next.

Related reading

• Real estate misrepresentation in Australia — your rights
• Holiday accommodation false advertising — what the ACL covers
• Business refused your refund? Here's what to do next

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.