I’m looking for some help or insight regarding an upright commercial freezer I purchased in September 2024 via Bunnings Marketplace (sold by Comchef, model: FED-X XURF1200SFV).
It was advertised as having a net capacity of 1200 litres and being tropicalised for Australian conditions, with a working ambient temperature of up to 43°C.
However, after researching and reviewing the GEMS registration, I found:
The freezer is only certified as Climate Class 4 (30°C / 55% RH)
The net usable capacity is officially listed as 791 litres, not 1200L
I contacted the importer (Federal Hospitality Equipment), and they gave vague answers like “it was tested under Class 4 but proved working at 43°C” but refused to provide evidence. They’ve since ignored my follow-up emails.
Comchef is refusing to offer a refund, and Bunnings has not resolved it (yet). I’m preparing to take it to Fair Trading and possibly NCAT under the grounds of misleading claims and product not fit for purpose.
Has anyone here had similar experiences or advice? Would love to know how others approached similar ACL refund cases.
If you have not yet sent Bunnings and Comchef a formal 'Letter of Complaint’ you will need to do that prior to lodging any further actions. Failure to do so will result in your being advised to do so, and to ‘come back’ if there is no resolution from that.
In addition to the Choice link above, you can use the Community search to find advice here on how to write a Letter of Complaint for the best chance of success.
Make sure you keep a copy of the advertisement if it is still possible. This proof of claims will be helpful in proving your case about the claims made by the seller. I see that you are aware of the areas of complaint that is possible under ACL, it has happened before that advertisements have been changed when complaints have been made so that the original claims no longer are apparent or available.
From the ACCC on the matter of claims of fitness for a purpose, the trouble being that proving it may be made more difficult if changes have been made.
Products and consumer rights
When buying a product, a consumer has the right to expect the following things. ### Acceptable quality
I initially contacted both Comchef and the importer to clarify the situation. The importer has since stopped responding to my emails. Comchef informed me that because I didn’t notify them within three days of delivery, there isn’t much they can do. They also failed to respond to my formal letter of rejection requesting a refund. I have now written to Bunnings, giving them sufficient time to address the issue before escalating it to Fair Trading. I have retained copies of all advertising materials — both past and current — as they continue to list the product incorrectly on their websites.
Thank you. Yes I have copies of all of the original listings however, both the supplier and importer dont appear concered by my claims as they continue to advertise the product on their websites with the same incorrect information
Apologies if this seems like a ‘piece of work’ question, but was your ‘letter of rejection’ a formal ‘Letter of Complaint’ following the requirement of one and called a Letter of Complaint? Anything else can be construed as ‘idle chit chat’.
Before raising the issue with the supplier, I initially contacted the importer to seek information and clarification regarding the actual net capacity, the claimed operating performance (which exceeds the specifications listed on the GEMS register), and whether the freezer’s compressor cycling (approximately five minutes on, five minutes off) and recurring ice buildup were considered normal or indicative of a fault.
The importer eventually responded but provided vague and unhelpful answers. For example, when I queried the claimed operating performance at 43 degrees — noting that the GEMS register lists the unit as tested to 30 degrees — their response was simply, “the unit was tested as Climate Class 4 but has been proved working normally at an ambient temperature of 43 degrees.” When I sought clarification on what evidence supported this claim and asked them to address my other concerns, they ceased responding altogether.
Following this, I contacted the supplier by phone and followed up with an email outlining all of my concerns. Initially, the supplier did not respond. When I followed up, he advised that he had no direct consumer contract with me and that I would need to deal with Bunnings, as the purchase was made through their marketplace.
At that point, I issued a formal letter of complaint to the supplier, outlining my rights under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), specifying the breaches I believe have occurred, and advising that I am seeking a refund as my remedy of choice. The supplier responded along the lines that because the issues were not reported within three days of delivery, there was little they could do, and even if Bunnings requested a refund, they would decline it.
At no point in any of the supplier’s correspondence has he addressed or acknowledged the specific concerns I raised. His responses have only stated his refusal to provide a refund.
I have now submitted a formal complaint to Bunnings, asserting my rights under the ACL, and I am awaiting their response.
Then with the difficulty you currently face getting a response you are satisfied with from the seller, you really don’t have any other option than taking the matter to Fair Trading and then if needed NCAT if you wish to pursue getting some form of recompense. Of course you also have the option of just accepting the current outcome, but this seems very unsuitable in the circumstances you describe.
If you haven’t done so already, I strongly suggest you seek legal advice before going any further forward with the matter to ensure you have covered all possible legal bases, this includes who you should be seeking redress from as it may not be Bunnings or it may not just be Bunnings.
In regards to the time limit imposed by the seller, the ACCC provide this information
Businesses can’t take away a consumer’s rights
The basic rights covered by consumer guarantees can’t be taken away by anything a business says or does.
For example, a business can’t take away these basic rights by:
displaying a ‘no refunds’ sign, or otherwise saying that refunds are not available at all, or not available at all after a certain number of days
There are free Consumer Legal Advice services if cost is of any concern and we do list some on this site.
I also further suggest that if you haven’t already done so, to make a complaint to the ACCC about the issues, including the time limit imposed by the business, at
Thank you for posting about your problem here, and if you wish please keep us informed of your progress. When information is provided here it is often searched by other people who are in similar circumstances and any advice, steps taken, experiences, all can help them deal with their issues. The Community exists to help everyone by the shared experiences and knowledge.
This is passing the buck to Bunnings, where Bunnings is clear they have no responsibilities. These fall to the seller on their marketplace:
Bunnings indicates its only role is limted to:
If you are unable to resolve a complaint or dispute with a Trusted Seller in relation to your Products, you may submit your complaint to [email protected] and we will do our best to investigate your complaint.
The seller will know this as it will be part of the agreement when advertising their products on Bunnings website.
However Bunnings does have the ability to remove sellers from their marketplace. Hopefully they do when there is enough evidence that a seller is misrepresenting the products they are selling through the marketplace.
