Journal of Consumer Policy

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 117–140 | Cite as

Protecting the Most Vulnerable in Consumer Credit Transactions

  • Therese Wilson
  • Nicola Howell
  • Genevieve Sheehan
Original Paper


There are two key ways in which the Australian Uniform Consumer Credit Code seeks to protect consumers in relation to consumer credit transactions. The first is by means of disclosure regulation where information is required to be disclosed to the consumer before the credit contract is entered into and the second is by way of “safety net” provisions, where contracts can be varied or set aside in the event of hardship, a finding that the transaction was unjust, or a finding of unconscionable fees or charges. This article explores the limitations of both of these means of protection, particularly in the case of vulnerable, low-income consumers. In order to highlight the inadequacies of these forms of consumer protection and the need for regulatory reform, we draw on interviews conducted with 30 low-income consumers who had recently signed a credit contract, focusing on their understanding of information disclosed in the contract, as well as their responses to hypothetical unfair terms and their understanding of their rights, for example in the event of an unjust transaction. These interviews were conducted as part of a joint research project between Brotherhood of St Laurence and Griffith University’s Centre for Credit and Consumer Law, funded by Consumer Affairs Victoria.


Consumer credit Disclosure regulation Safety net provisions Low-income consumers 



This research was funded by the Consumer Credit Fund, Victoria, Australia. We would also like to thank Samantha Robinson, Greta McDonald, and Greg Fisher for assisting with the recruitment of research participants and the anonymous reviewers for the helpful comments on this article. Most importantly, we would like to thank the 30 low-income people who participated in the research and openly shared their opinions. Their willingness to talk about their experiences with contracts and views of credit regulations has provided helpful insights.


  1. Anae, M. and Coxon, E. (2007). Pacific consumers’ behaviour and experience in credit markets, with particular reference to the ‘fringe lending’ market: final report.
  2. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2007). Household income and income distribution, Australia 2005-06.
  3. Australian Consumers’ Association (2002). Submission to the review of the competition provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974.
  4. Australian Government. (2008). National consumer credit: Single, standard, national regulation of consumer credit for Australia.
  5. Better Regulation Executive and National Consumer Council (2007). Warning: Too much information can harm.
  6. Bright, S. (1999). Attacking unfair mortgage terms. The Law Quarterly Review, 115, 360–365.Google Scholar
  7. Bright, S. (2000). Winning the battle against unfair contract terms. Legal Studies, 20, 331–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlin, T. (2001). The Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW): Twenty years on. Sydney Law Review, 23, 125–144.Google Scholar
  9. Cartwright, P. (2004). Banks, consumers and regulation. Portland: Hart.Google Scholar
  10. Centrelink (2008). What is the maximum gross income to qualify for a health care card?
  11. Chant Link and Associates. (2004). A report on financial exclusion in Australia. Melbourne: ANZ.Google Scholar
  12. Chun, W. (2007). Hardship and the Consumer Credit Code. Australian Banking and Finance Law Bulletin, 22, 137–139.Google Scholar
  13. Consumers’ Federation of Australia (2008). Ultimate unfair contract.
  14. Coumarelos, C., Wei, Z., & Zhou, A. (2006). Justice made to measure: NSW legal needs survey in disadvantaged areas. Sydney: Law and Justice Foundation of NSW.Google Scholar
  15. Day, G. (1976). Assessing the effects of information disclosure requirements. Journal of Marketing, 40, 428–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Department of Trade and Industry (2003). Fair, clear and competitive, the consumer credit market in the 21 st century.
  17. Financial Ombudsman Service. (2005). Banking & finance—bulletin 46.
  18. Genn, H. (1999). Paths to justice: what people do and think about going to law. Portland: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Howell, N. (2006). Catching up with consumer realities: The need for legislation prohibiting unfair terms in consumer contracts. Australian Business Law Review, 34, 447–466.Google Scholar
  20. Howells, G. (2005). The potential and limits of consumer empowerment by information. Journal of Law and Society, 32, 349–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kempson, E. and Whyley, C. (1999). Extortionate credit in the UK: A report to the DTI.
  22. Kofele-Kale, N. (1984). The impact of truth-in-lending disclosures on consumer market behaviour: A critique of the critics of truth-in-lending law. Oklahoma City University Law Review, 9, 117–148.Google Scholar
  23. KPMG Consulting (2000) NCP review of the Consumer Credit Code final report.
  24. Lanyon, Elizabeth (2004) Changing direction? A perspective on Australian consumer credit regulation. Keynote Address, Australian Credit and the Crossroads Conference, Melbourne, 8–9 November.$file/lanyon.pdf.
  25. Malbon, J. (1999). Taking credit: a survey of consumer behaviour in the Australian consumer credit market. Hobart: Ministerial Council on Consumer Affairs.
  26. Ministerial Council on Consumer Affairs. (2008). Joint communiqué: Ministerial Council on Consumer Affairs Meeting, Friday 15 August 2008.
  27. Moorhead, R and Robinson, M. (2006). A trouble shared—legal problems clusters in solicitors’ and advice agencies. DCA Research Series 8/06.Google Scholar
  28. Niven, D., & Gough, T. (2004). The Operation of the Uniform Consumer Credit Code. Melbourne: Consumer Credit Legal Service Inc.
  29. O’Shea, P., & Finn, C. (2005). Consumer Credit Disclosure: Does it work? Journal of Banking and Finance Law and Practice, 16, 5–16.Google Scholar
  30. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Productivity Commission. (2008). Review of Australia’s Consumer Policy Framework. Final Report, Canberra.
  32. Ramsay, I. (2006). Consumer law, regulatory capitalism and the ‘new learning’ in regulation. Sydney Law Review, 28, 9–35.Google Scholar
  33. Ramsay, I. (2007). Consumer law and policy: Text and materials on regulating consumer markets (2nd ed.). Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
  34. Schetzer, L. (2007). Drowning in debt: The experiences of people who seek assistance from financial counsellors. Department of Justice Victoria. Melbourne, Australia.
  35. Scutella, R., & Sheehan, G. (2006). To their credit: Evaluating an experiment with personal loans for people on low incomes. Melbourne: Brotherhood of St Laurence.Google Scholar
  36. Sheehan, G., Wilson, T., & Howell, N. (2008). Coming to grips with credit contracts: Steps to protect vulnerable borrowers. Melbourne: Brotherhood of St Laurence and Centre for Credit and Consumer Law.Google Scholar
  37. Standing Committee on Law and Justice, Legislative Council, New South Wales Parliament. (2006). Unfair terms in consumer contracts, Report no 32, Sydney Australia.Google Scholar
  38. Sylvan, L. (2004). Activating competition: The consumer–competition interface. Competition and Consumer Law Journal, 12, 191–206.Google Scholar
  39. Tennant, D. (2006). Lo Doc loans—increased market access for lower income consumers, or the potential catalyst for a consumer credit meltdown? Speech to the FCAWA Conference, 23 October 2006.
  40. Wilhelmsson, T. (1997). Consumer law and social justice. In I. Ramsay (Ed.), Consumer law in the global economy, pp. 217–232. Dartmouth: Aldershot.Google Scholar
  41. Willis, L. (2006). Decision making and the limits of disclosure: The problem of predatory lending: Price. Maryland Law Review, 65, 707–834.Google Scholar
  42. Willis, L. (2008). Against financial literacy education. University of Pennsylvania Law School Public Research Paper No. 08–10, Philadelphia.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Therese Wilson
    • 1
  • Nicola Howell
    • 2
  • Genevieve Sheehan
    • 3
  1. 1.Griffith Law SchoolNathanAustralia
  2. 2.Law SchoolQueensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.Brotherhood of St LaurenceFitzroyAustralia

Personalised recommendations