Prematurely purchased furniture and whitegoods

So you speak for all retailers?

Speaking from practical experience, and not opinion, if it isnt in writing, it didnt happen. "Common sense" despite its definition, is not all that common, as exhibited by your posts. What's ironic about your stance is that it also is an opinion. To further illustrate this, as somone who's been "in business for decades", I pose to you a scenario - You are a small retailer with limited space, but you have great prices and service a growth corridor. Due to this your business is doing well. You are about to take a large delivery of stock, however you note that your warehouse is at capacity. You ask your sales managers who have posted great sales figures, how come the warehouse is full when most of the stock shows as sold. they all tell you that their customers are delayed in finishing their houses and need 5 months more worth of storage before delivery. What do you do? Remember, it is common sense that you would hold this for an undefined period of time while your customers finish building...whatever you will do will cost you money, wont it. So as somone whos been in "business for decades" you are now losing money. Great business strategy there.

That said, a retailer would be hardpressed to force somone to take delivery of goods if there is no delivery adress and wouldnt be able to just arrange an impromptu drop off even if there was an adress. If it's a large retailer i think you'll find they're more than reasonable in conversation. Also you will find that many retailers, especially those that have to order goods to be made, such as couches etc have written into their sales terms that delivery needs to take place no later than a period defined in therir paperwork. This is to avoid scenarios like the one above when imports land by the hundreds of container loads.

No buddy its the law, you enter into a verbal contract with customer, and yes I did represent 100, s of business
For years, and this overrides anything on paperwork which is overided by australian law, the customers right to storage is based on the verbal contract which got the sale, any personal company paperwork is not greater than the australian consumer rights.

You should stick to retail.

Yes ponzu and you should keep your sarcasm where the sun dont shine where it belongs, and no when your wrong with poor advice.

With all due respect Joker I do not think that a verbal discussion will override a written contract. For a start if there is no recording or witness then it becomes a case of who remembers best. The fact pattern you suggest pertains to contract law and should apply to all contracts. If this were the case why is is so hard to get builders to put stuff they verbally agreed to but was omitted from the contract. This would also extend to the sales persons that make lots of verbal promises which are later scrapped.

The question I would want to confirm is whether the sales man who verbally agrees actually has the authority to legally bind the company. It may be that sales persons are not officers of the company and are not able to legally make such promises.

Not trying to argue or doubt/ question your experience but I do think it is dependant on the details of the case and what can ultimately be enforced.

I still think a nice calm discussion and a common sense approach is called for. If it were me I would offer to pay a nominal storage charge as it has gone longer than expected. Thats just me.....

My advice, which mirrors that of other on this thread is sound. Yours despite being in business for decades is poor. Verbal contracts aren't worth squat, for a myriad of reasons, especially in a retail environment, but specifically for the reasons Aussiemark has pointed out.

My job has me testing businesses against legislation and regulations, and I can assure you there is no consumer law that stipulates a retailer must store goods after sale until the customer is ready.

Those sales contracts I refered to earlier are put together by companies legal firms, not their junior sales associates. They do a good job in ensuring that they are watertight and in line with local law and is not overridden by consumer law unless the written contract is contradictory to law. If you can point me to the consumer law that stipulates a retailer must store goods that it sold to a customer, you will be right and you can shout it from the mountain.

You still haven't answered my earlier scenario I posed you.

I believe that you belive you think you are right, but that doesn't make it so.

you still dont understand that in retail a verbal contract overides any solicitor paperwork has australian retail and consumer law overides this, this isn,t my opinion but fact , company policys dont mean diddle against australian consumer rights, thats why they were STORING FURNITURE, as no storage , no sale, simple.

show me where a verbal contract overrides a sales contract on paper that outlines the terms and conditions that are set out under consumer law, better yet show me where in the consumer law legislation what you've said is outlined. Ive linked it for you so this should be easy for you to do

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2011C ... _3#param46

Schedule 2 is consumer law.

Were not talking about company policies by the way, but contracts of sale.

Verbal contract or not, a store isn't necessarily a storage unit and it would be their goodwill to keep storing. I.e. maybe if they want a good reputation or more business they'd do it but I don't see any T and C's on any receipt you get from a general store that they need to accommodate your build delays. Regardless, hopefully the original poster can just talk to the retailer and sort it directly with them.

I think it is incorrect to assume that a sales person is authorized to contractually bind the store.

Also retail doesn't have different laws for contract. Basic contract law is the same for all who use contracts.

Written and correctly executed contracts often may supersede verbal agreements especially ones that are not wittnessed or recorded.

Let's agree to disagree, given that written contracts are the most relied upon.

OP speak nicely and see whether an arrangement can be reached even if a few is required.

By the builders or their contractors themselves most likely

Yep. Living in a new estate and having cameras all around there doesn't go by one week where I don't manage to capture a couple tradies coming into sites in the wee hours to have a look what they can steal.