20 April 2026

Lessons from Aidacare’s undertaking: unfair contract terms and consumer rights

Authored by: David Grace, Francesca Jones
Aidacare, a National Disability Insurance Scheme provider, has entered into a court-enforceable undertaking following the ACCC’s assertions of unfair contract terms and false or misleading representations regarding consumers’ rights to remedies for faulty products.

On 19 March 2026, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) accepted a court-enforceable undertaking from Aidacare Pty Ltd after the company admitted to likely making false or misleading representations to some of its customers about their rights under consumer guarantees.

In addition, Aidacare admitted to using standard form contracts that contained unfair contract terms, as they purportedly limited consumer rights and remedies for faulty products. This undertaking marks an important step in the ACCC’s enforcement of unfair contract terms.

Unfair contract terms

The ACCC raised concerns about Aidacare’s terms and conditions for the supply of goods and services, noting that they incorporated terms allowing Aidacare to:

  • require consumers to notify in writing of any shortages, breakages or loss of goods within 48 or 72 hours of receipt
  • deny consumers the right to reject defective goods if not reported within 48 or 72 hours of acceptance
  • limit its liability under warranty, contract, statute and tort to:
    • replacing, repairing or resupplying the goods or services
    • compensating for the cost of replacing, repairing or resupplying the goods or services beyond the price paid in the 12 months preceding the claim
  • avoid liability for faults or harm to the goods supplied, including those resulting from the negligence of Aidacare, its servants or agents
  • limit consumer rights and remedies to only those set out in the contract.

The ACCC alleged these terms to be unfair under section 24 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), as they created a significant imbalance between the parties’ rights and obligations. The terms were not considered a reasonable and necessary means to protect Aidacare’s legitimate interests and would cause detriment to consumers if applied or relied upon.

False or misleading representations

Aidacare is a NDIS provider that sells and hires healthcare equipment to aged care facilities, hospitals, wholesale traders and individual customers. It admitted that between 1 January 2022 and 21 May 2025 its false or misleading representations about consumer guarantees affected customers’ ability to access their rights under those guarantees.

As a result of these representations, the risk to consumers’ safety and physical wellbeing was heightened, causing both inconvenience and financial loss. The representations included claims that consumers within the contractual warranty period were not entitled to:

  • any compensation for the product’s replacement or repair
  • replacement, repair or other remedy
  • a refund for faulty or non-conforming products.

The ACCC asserted that these representations by Aidacare were contrary to consumers’ rights under Division 1 of Part 3-2 and Part 5-4 of the ACL, which apply regardless of the contractual warranty period.

Key lessons on unfair contract terms

Several lessons can be taken from the Aidacare undertakings and the ACCC assertions, including:

  • Standard form contracts are under scrutiny: businesses using standard form contracts must ensure all terms are fair and transparent. Clauses that limit consumer rights or remedies are open to be challenged by the ACCC.
  • Clear communication of consumer rights: any clauses that seek to limit or exclude statutory consumer guarantees or restrict available remedies are likely to be deemed unfair.
  • Remediate unfair terms promptly: when unfair terms are identified, businesses should not rely or attempt to apply them, act quickly to amend contracts and address any impact on consumers.

The Aidacare undertaking highlights that when unfair contract terms are found under section 24 of the ACL, remedies can apply to all affected customers over a defined period, not just those who raise complaints at the time. These remedies include, for any affected customer:

  • a full or partial refund of the purchase price
  • replacement with the same type and similar value of goods
  • free repair of the goods.

Moving forward from the Aidacare decision, businesses should be aware of the consumer guarantees that apply to their customers and ensure that contractual terms do not take away these rights.

Please contact our competition and consumer law team to discuss any of the matters contained in this article or to arrange competition and consumer law training for your organisation.

 

 

 

Like this article? Share it via:

This publication is for information only and is not legal advice. You should obtain advice that is specific to your circumstances and not rely on this publication as legal advice. If there are any issues you would like us to advise you on arising from this publication, please let us know.

Stay up to date with CGW

Subscribe to our interest lists to receive legal alerts, articles, event invitations and offers.

Key contacts

David-Grace
David Grace
Consultant

Areas of expertise

Read next