Consumer guarantees on a web design service

Three statutory guarantees attach automatically to a web design service supplied to a consumer in Australia, and they exist independently of whatever the contract says. A contract can describe the deal in enormous detail and still not remove them. Understanding what the three guarantees actually promise, and how the remedy differs depending on the severity of a failure, is a different question from what a contract should say. That question is covered on web design contracts in Australia, and it is worth understanding in its own right.

This is general information about how the guarantees work in outline. It is not legal advice, and whether a specific failure breaches a specific guarantee is a question of fact and degree that needs advice on the actual circumstances.

Which consumer guarantees apply to a web design service, in outline

Guarantee	What it requires
Due care and skill	The service is provided with the care and skill a reasonably competent supplier in that field would exercise
Fitness for a disclosed purpose	Where the client made a purpose known to the supplier, the service (and anything supplied as part of it) is reasonably fit for that purpose
Reasonable time	Where no time for completion was fixed by the contract, the service is supplied within a reasonable time

These sit within Part 3-2, Division 1 of the Australian Consumer Law, alongside further guarantees that apply where relevant — such as a guarantee that services will result in a reasonably durable outcome only where that description is apt to the actual service supplied.

Why a “no warranties” clause does not survive the ACL

Section 64 of the ACL provides that a term purporting to exclude, restrict or modify these guarantees has no effect to that extent. A clause stating “no warranties, express or implied, apply to this service” does not achieve what it says. Separately, section 64A permits a supplier, in many business-to-business arrangements, to lawfully limit its liability for a guarantee breach — commonly to re-supplying the service — where the service is not of a kind ordinarily acquired for personal or household use and the limitation is fair and reasonable in the circumstances. A commissioned website build purchased by a business is frequently in that category. The distinction between an exclusion (ineffective) and a limitation (potentially effective) is covered in depth on web design contracts in Australia, because it is a contract-drafting question as much as a guarantees question.

What the “due care and skill” guarantee actually measures

The guarantee is measured against the standard a reasonably competent supplier in the same field would meet. It is not measured against perfection, and not against the client’s own subjective expectations. A build with a genuine defect engages this guarantee — broken functionality, code that does not do what was specified, or a site that fails basic technical standards a competent developer would have met. A build the client simply dislikes on taste grounds, where the work meets a competent standard, does not.

What the “fitness for a disclosed purpose” guarantee requires you to have actually disclosed

This guarantee turns on a purpose being made known to the supplier, expressly or by the circumstances, before or at the time of contracting. A business that tells a supplier it needs a site capable of handling a defined volume of orders, and receives a site that cannot, has a stronger claim under this guarantee. A business that never stated the requirement has a weaker one, even if it is disappointed to discover the limitation afterwards. This is a reason a written brief matters beyond good project management. It is evidence of what was disclosed, which is part of what this guarantee is measured against.

Reasonable time under consumer law, and why it rarely helps on its own

Where a contract fixes a delivery date, that date governs, and this guarantee has less work to do. Where no date is fixed, “reasonable time” is assessed against the circumstances — the scope of the project, industry norms, and any delay attributable to the client’s own conduct. Late content and delayed approvals, for instance, are both relevant to what counts as reasonable. In practice, a dispute about a late build usually turns on what the contract actually specified, rather than on this guarantee. That is one of several reasons a fixed or milestone-based timeline is worth insisting on, at the brief stage.

Major failure versus a lesser failure, and why the remedy differs

The Australian Consumer Law distinguishes a major failure of the guarantees from a failure that is not major, and the available remedy differs between them. Broadly, where a failure is major, the consumer generally has a choice between a refund, a replacement (rarely meaningful for a bespoke service) or compensation for the drop in value, and can also recover damages for reasonably foreseeable additional loss. Where a failure is not major, the supplier is generally entitled to attempt to fix it within a reasonable time first. Whether a specific defect amounts to a major failure is a question of fact and degree assessed against the statutory description, not a line this page can draw for a specific dispute.

Time limits, and why acting promptly matters for consumers

A claim under the consumer guarantees is generally subject to a limitation period. Separately, delay in raising a defect can itself weaken a claim, by suggesting the defect was accepted or is unrelated to the original work. Raise a genuine defect in writing as soon as it is identified. Do not accumulate a list to raise all at once later.

What this means practically for your consumer rights, before a dispute happens

None of the above replaces a well-drafted contract — the guarantees are a statutory floor, not a substitute for stating scope, milestones and acceptance criteria clearly, covered on web design contracts in Australia. What the guarantees add is a backstop that applies even where the contract is silent or poorly drafted, which is precisely when they matter most.

What to do next if a guarantee has been breached

If you believe a website build has breached one of these guarantees, document the specific defect, when it was identified, and what was disclosed to the supplier before the contract was signed. That documentation is what any assessment of the guarantee will turn on. Whether a specific situation amounts to a major failure, and what remedy follows, needs advice from a lawyer on the actual facts, not a general information page. The cost implications of asserting a remedy are covered on what drives the cost of a website.