Five 2022 consumer wins, and what would you like to achieve in 2023?

It’s been a big year, with a number of important milestones achieved for consumers with the help of CHOICE members and supporters.

Read more about the wins here:


And now on to 2023.

Looking at many of the topics over this year there are a few I’d like Choice to get stuck into.

Number one for me is rewriting the Australian Consumer Law, which is a joke with all the vague terminology.

I am sure others will have some suggestions?


I’d like 2023 to be the year when consumers were helped to deal with the cost of living crisis as a result of major improvements in the the quality of the unit pricing that most large store based and some online grocery retailers is required to provide for packaged grocery and many other products that they sell.

Since 2009 there has been a national mandatory the Unit Pricing Code that requires unit prices to be displayed prominently and legibly and close to the selling price. Yet far too many unit prices, especially on the upper and lower shelves in stores, are still far too difficult even for consumers with OK vision and mobility to notice and read. And, this is impossible for the many consumers with defective vision and reduced mobility.

As result, consumer use of unit prices to compare values and thus save money, or get much more for the same amount of money, is substantially lower than it could be if unit prices were better displayed.

Since unit prices vary greatly between products and consumers spend large amounts of money on groceries, the under use of unit prices due to poor quality display results in several billion dollars of annual consumer detriment.


To add to the law why can’t someone scrutinise the petroleum industry ripping every one of with inaccurate fuel consumption at the time of refill. That is just a total scum bag way treat people. It already costs enough law is not tough enough to keep them in line. And the general law for consumers is no good

1 Like

Are you suggesting the metering at the pump/bowser is inaccurate? I’ve been resetting the trip meter on long trips recently. Typically when the low fuel light comes on it takes around 53-54litres to fill up. At one servo in Shortland the low fuel light had come on several kms down the road. It required more than 62 litres to full.

It’s an interesting aside. The trip meter also suggested at typical fuel consumption for the journey just completed required a refill closer to 50 litres would have been usual.

Since fuel use varies considerably most of the time between mixed urban and highway driving, it’s difficult to say just when there might be an issue. When travelling under near constant conditions over long distance, the norm is readily apparent. Whether we encountered a one off, or it is more common, it’s open to further comment.


Which one? I often go to Shortland to fill up because cheap… but I have had my suspicions about the metro…

1 Like

Snap! :wink:

Back home I regularly fill up containers of unleaded for the little mower and diesel for the big one. The 20l capacity steel ‘jerry cans’ provide a reliable guide on consistency of the pumps. One servo is a Woolies, the other Puma. I’ve never noticed any significant variation in fill level for a neat 20l out of the pump.

Petrol Spy has been most useful in finding the most convenient and lower priced fuel for home, Newcastle and when travelling.

1 Like

How do you know they hold just 20l? Do you fill to the top, if not how do your know how far up an opaque container is 20l?

1 Like

I don’t. I just know that for 20l which I take exact from the pump, the cans I use fill consistently to just on the lower edge of the spout. It’s annal but helps with filling the 2 stroke containers to an exact 5l by having whole numbers for each container. It’s the consistent average over time that provides confidence, (over multiple fills at more than one pump at more than one servo). I’ll suggest approx 0.5l error either way or 2.5% before it might be apparent.

I’d not rely on any plastic based fuel container for volume measurement, or one off fill of a steel can.

I doubt I’d notice a small error, also considering slight differences in density due to fuel temperature. The scale of the difference I believe I observed in Shortland was more than 10%. I questioned the measured quantity and moved on with what was a very full day and week of moving.

Is there a real issue here?
One report. I can’t reconcile the 5% of pumps under supplying by volume is costing just $12M. I’ll guess approx 5% of pumps are out of calibration in the other direction and supply more. It’s the difference averaged over many fills. Less than $1 per vehicle per year.


They estimate the average non-compliance is 6.3% of all businesses. Initial non-compliance in audits was around 30% and dropped after review to about 20% so that’s how they estimated that it was 6.3% for all involved in weight/volume measurements…Yep, I’m still struggling to reconcile that figure!

Screenshot 2022-12-22 150409

Full report can be found at:

And for their plan about compliance:


Have your say on CHOICE 2023 campaigns:

1 Like