I have found over the years, due to the complexities involved, when dealing with forums such as these, that it is best to avoid citing specific parts of the legislation, as doing so simply over complicates the discussion.
For instance there is now, collectively, nearly a hundred Acts (both State and Federal) dealing with consumer protection – the consolidated, Australian Consumer Law, various other Commonwealth legislations regulating financial institutions, the state based Sales of Goods Act, Act’s, special Acts dealing with the sale of second hand goods and separate acts dealing with the sale of second hand motor vehicles etc…, as well as ancillary Acts such as those dealing with how Acts are to be interpreted, and then there are the tens of thousands of regulations relating to these Acts as well of the tens of thousands of current authorities (case law – some over a hundred year old and often to the uninitiated, contradictory) which define what the words in the legislation actually mean. Then of course there’s the fact that there is not one single government body which deals with consumer complaints. Instead you have at least five including the various state Consumer Affairs departments, APRA. the ACCC, ASIC and let’s not forget the various quasi-judicial authorities such the various ombudsman services (financial, postal, etc…) as well as the various small claims courts who are there to adjudicate disputes.
The saving grace is the legal process has come a long way since wigs and gowns. Today, it is accepted that everyone has a right to access their rights under the law and as such, over the years, when it comes to small claims, the processes has been simplified to allow unrepresented applicants access by eliminating the need cite complex legislation and case law to get their point across. That is, now it’s a simple case of providing concise statements of the facts as to what happened and if anything more is required, you will be given guidance as to what it is, and how to obtain it.
As for your problem, as I understand it, you bought something from Australia Post, paid to have it delivered by them with signature on receipt, and though you didn’t sign for it, they denied your claim on the basis their records show it was delivered.
Firstly davewill is absolutely correct – deemed delivery for the purposes of the Sales of Goods Act doesn’t apply. Instead what you have here is a play on words, in that what they are actually saying is – ‘you have made a claim under our in-house discretionary, non-judicial, non-binding claims process and we find in connection with that process we have fulfilled all our legal obligations re delivery of the item you bought from us' – that is for the purposes of our policy it is “deemed delivered”. They can do this because there is no legal onus on them to explain the meaning or context used in the decision made. In fact, what is happening here has all the hallmarks of commercial practice used by a lot of companies when it comes to complaints’. Reject it in the hope that the complainant won’t take it any further, and if they do, look at it again, and this time make a decision based on the actual facts.
So where from her. As davewill recommends, lodge a complaint with the ombudsman. Now the ombudsman knows from past experience that there have been a lot of cases where items have been delivered to the wrong address and signed for by someone not entitled to receive it. They are also aware that in some cases, in fact too many cases, contractors are simply signing the docket themselves and safe dropping the item. Therefore you need to concentrate on the signature part of the dispute. That is on the day they say it was delivered, you were home all day, there was no one else in the house, and you didn’t hear the knock in the door (doorbell ring) and no card was left in the letter box. Also demand to be provided with a copy of the signature and then provide a statement as to whether it is yours or not.
Now if the ombudsman finds that what you are saying is credible, then they will usually find that the most probable reason why you didn’t receive it was because of Australia Post/Contractor negligence, and if they make that finding you will get you money back. But, my guess is, once the complaint is lodged, very shortly thereafter, Australia Post will reverse their decision, if for no other reason than they are sick of getting a flogging from the ombudsman over this very kind of issue.
