Public Defender: Dress stress success

A DRY cleaner ruined this woman’s new dress but was only willing to compensate her for half its value. So she turned to Public Defender.

John Rolfe Public Defender columnist

2 min read

April 17, 2014 - 12:00AM

DailyTelegraph

NO ONE takes Gemma Breen to the cleaners.

Ms Breen bought a $280 dress from Seduce Bondi Junction which she had dry-cleaned before wearing for the first time — and again after.

On the second occasion the dry cleaner used the wrong chemical and ruined the dress.

But they were only willing to give her $140, saying 50 per cent cash compensation was their policy.

That policy is written on a large sign at the store.

The situation highlights two protections afforded by the Australian Consumer Law: first that services “must be provided with acceptable care and skill or technical knowledge and taking all necessary steps to avoid loss and damage”, and second, that signs or “policies” cannot restrict your rights.

GOT A LEGAL QUERY? BRYDENS LAWYERS ANSWER YOUR Qs LIVE

FOLLOW PUBLIC DEFENDER ON TWITTER

A common one is “no refunds on sale items”. Such a sign is illegal. The dry cleaners’ may be, too.

When Public Defender first contacted the dry cleaners the response was: “We do admit we stuffed it up.”

But, I was told, there were mitigating circumstances; there was pre-existing damage, the care label had been removed, the dress was “used” and there was no receipt, so how could accurate compensation be determined?

Ms Breen said there was no pre-existing damage.

She had checked for faults before purchase. Her mum made her. The only damage prior to the second dry clean was caused during the first because, Ms Breen said, the chemical that later ruined the dress was tested on it.

She had received text messages to this effect, asking her to approve a more expensive treatment. She also noted that, at the time of the first dry clean, the care label, which was rather unfortunately attached to the front of the dress, was still in place.