Wednesday, 20 September 2017 20:12

The Motor Trades Associations of Australia (MTAA) and the Motor Trade Association of WA (MTA WA) have strongly argued that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) needs to understand the unbalanced power relationship between dealers and manufacturers which places significant pressure on dealerships to absorb the costs of meeting their Australian Consumer Law obligations.

It is pleasing that MTAA and MTA WA have been heard as reflected in ACCC Chair Rod Simms recent comments at this week’s dealers conference.

The MTAA and MTA WA have called for the complexity of the dealer/manufacturer relationship to be more accurately reflected in the recent submission to the ACCC's interim report from the Market Study into New Car Retailing. 

ACCC Media Release

Car manufacturers need to step up to meet their consumer guarantee obligations under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) and stop putting the squeeze on dealers through dealer agreements, policies and procedures, ACCC Chairman Rod Sims told the 2017 Australian Automotive Dealer Association National Dealer Convention in Sydney today.

As retailers, car dealers are the first point of call for consumers experiencing a problem with a faulty car, but information provided to the ACCC and released in the draft New car retailing industry market study showed an imbalance in the manufacturer-dealer relationship which imposes significant cost on dealers and ultimately affects consumers.

“The ACCC is concerned that some car manufacturers are shifting their consumer law obligations onto dealers. While consumers will generally make first contact with a dealer when seeking a car refund, replacement or repair, dealers are entitled to seek reimbursement for those remedies from the manufacturer where the manufacturer is responsible for the failure,” Mr Sims said.

“The ACCC believes that some car manufacturers have policies and procedures about how dealers respond to consumer guarantee or warranty claims which may limit a dealer’s ability to provide a car refund, replacement or repair to a consumer.”

“Information provided to the ACCC indicates that there may be stringent requirements being set by some manufacturers to establish a remedy is warranted before approving reimbursement to the dealer. There may also be predetermined maximum amounts that dealers are permitted to spend on repairs without further approval by manufacturers,” Mr Sims said.

“Many dealers believe that if they do not comply with these requirements, their franchise or dealer agreement will be put at risk. Consequently, dealers may be reluctant to offer remedies without certainty of being reimbursed, which may reduce consumers’ access to appropriate or timely remedies.”

Mr Sims reiterated that it remains the responsibility of dealers to meet their legal obligations to consumers under the ACL, and for manufacturers in turn to meet theirs by not adopting commercial arrangements that stifle consumer law rights. If they do, remedies are available to dealers.

“Where a dealer believes that dealer agreement provisions, policies, or procedures may breach the Franchising Code of Conduct, or the Competition and Consumer Act more generally, dealers can always report this to the ACCC for consideration,” Mr Sims said.

A copy of Mr Sims' speech is available at

Source: ACCC Media Release 155/17

MTAWA is proudly supported by