An ACCC review of door-to-door selling, telemarketing and other unsolicited sales practices has found that businesses are frequently engaging in high pressure sales practices and breaching existing consumer safeguards and consumers are often misled during the sales process.



The ACCC report follows a designated complaint by the Consumer Action Law Centre. The report, published today, recommends increasing penalties for breaches of consumer safeguards, a new “opt in” approach for consumers targeted by unsolicited sales practices and clarifying existing rules apply to sales originating from lead generation.



The report details how consumers’ personal information is gathered online, through price comparison websites, online quotes, free trials or surveys, and then often sold through data brokers to be used to generate leads for unsolicited selling.



Unsolicited selling is when sales staff initiate a sales approach, uninvited by the consumer and when this occurs away from the seller’s usual place of business.



“Our report shows how consumers are being exposed to unsolicited sales practices that place them at financial and psychological risk, particularly consumers experiencing vulnerability or disadvantage,” ACCC Deputy Chair Catriona Lowe said.



About three-quarters of consumers surveyed said they had experienced unsolicited sales at least once in the previous two years, while about 28 per cent said they had made at least one purchase after an unsolicited sales approach.



“Our research demonstrates widespread non-compliance with existing rules by businesses and salespeople who engage in unsolicited selling. It is clear that change is needed,” Ms Lowe said.



“We have recommended targeted, stronger rules and increased penalties to address these serious concerns.”

Report finds unsolicited selling is widespread and often unwelcome



The ACCC’s market research found in the previous six months, 60 per cent of consumers surveyed were subject to telemarketing, 41 per cent had been approached in a public place such as a shopping centre, and about 30 per cent had experienced door-to-door selling.



Figure 1 - When was the last time you experienced/purchased using unsolicited selling?


      







Solar panels and energy devices were among products frequently bought through unsolicited selling. Many consumers who purchased such devices spent more than $1000.



Frequently, consumers signed up to finance arrangements, such as Buy Now Pay Later schemes, including for big ticket purchases.



Some smaller businesses in the solar devices sector claimed that up to 80 per cent of their business is generated from unsolicited selling and they would not be in the market without these sales channels.



Two thirds of respondents said they had felt pressured when contacted in unsolicited sales without their permission.



About 40 per cent of those who had made a purchase in the past two years had regretted it, while more than 60 per cent experienced problems with their purchase.



Respondents found salespeople were often pushy, refused to take ‘no’ for an answer, and manipulated consumers.



Case studies show salespeople frequently engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct, including misrepresenting the full cost of the purchase, whether goods and services were suitable or had been vetted by a trusted source, or whether consumers might be eligible for a government program. Consumers should always seek further information about eligibility for government programs before entering into any agreement.



A number of businesses that utilise unsolicited selling pointed to benefits such as the provision of information or offers on good and services to consumers. However, the market research does not support this view with 80% of respondents agreeing that unsolicited selling rarely provides them with useful information or offers.



“We acknowledge consumer groups’ view that a ban is the most effective response to concerns about unsolicited sales practices. We consider our targeted proposals to strengthen existing safeguards will protect consumers from harm, particularly when coupled with new laws banning unfair trading practices,” Ms Lowe said. 



“The proposed approach preserves the selling channel for the minority of consumers who value it. We have also recommended that the effectiveness of the recommended measures is subject to review within two years of implementation to see if compliance and outcomes have improved.”



Figure 2 - Goods and services purchased using unsolicited selling in the last 24 months


      





Special consumer protections are frequently breached



Consumers have special legal rights and protections, on top of their general consumer rights, when salespeople cold call or doorknock them or approach them in a public place. Businesses engaging in unsolicited selling have specific obligations.



A salesperson can only cold call or approach a consumer at certain times. They must hang up or leave if the consumer asks them to. The salesperson must tell the consumer who they are, what business they represent, and why they are calling or visiting.



When a consumer buys a product or service, the salesperson must provide them with an easy-to-read sales agreement.



After signing a sales agreement, the consumer has a termination or “cooling off” period of 10 business days to change their mind.



The ACCC found that consumers who made a purchase following an unsolicited sales approach in the last two years, reported that only:


70.9% of salespeople identified themselves
54.1% of salespeople provided a written copy of the agreement
63.0% of salespeople informed them of the termination period.




“Because of the frequent breaches of existing restrictions, we recommend the cooling off period be replaced with an ‘opt-in’ model. This will better protect consumers from high pressure selling tactics and from making purchases they do not want or cannot afford,” Ms Lowe said.



The opt-in model would replace the current ‘termination period’, where the transaction remains valid unless it is cancelled by the consumer. In an ‘opt-in’ model a consumer is required to confirm the sale within a set period and separate from the sales interaction before the sale takes effect and payment can be processed.



The research also found that more than 37 per cent of First Nations respondents had a Do Not Knock sticker, but about 73 per cent of them said they still had approaches from door-to-door salespeople.



“We were also concerned that many respondents reported that they were not provided with a written copy of the agreement and that consumers generally lacked awareness of the existing protections for unsolicited consumer agreements,” Ms Lowe said.

Lead generation practices increasing with digital transformation



Unsolicited sales are increasingly driven by online lead generation practices where businesses use consumers’ personal information they obtained themselves or bought from third parties including data brokers.



Consumers raised concerns about consent, privacy, and whether businesses were acting in their best interests when collecting and disclosing personal information for marketing purposes.



“We consider that unless the purpose of the data collection to generate a sales contact is clearly disclosed a sale remains unsolicited, however this has not been tested. The rules in place now were developed before the widespread use of consumers’ data in generating sales leads. We are recommending that lead generation is explicitly included in the rules governing unsolicited selling,” Ms Lowe said.



The report also notes the ACCC’s support for proposed reforms to existing privacy rules on the use of consumers’ data.

ACCC actions against unsolicited selling practices



The current maximum penalty for a breach of the rules in the Australian Consumer Law applying to unsolicited sales is $50,000 for a corporation and $10,000 for an individual.



The ACCC has taken enforcement action against harmful unsolicited selling practices in energy, education, telecommunications, therapeutic goods and selling to First Nations consumers.



In relation to door-to-door selling practices in the energy sector, these include successful actions against AGL, Australian Power and Gas, EnergyAustralia, and Origin Energy.



In relation to training colleges using unsolicited selling to enrol students in VET-FEE HELP courses, the ACCC took successful court action against Acquire Learning and Careers, Get Qualified Australia, Empower Institute, Unique International College, and Captain Cook College.



Other recent outcomes include action against telecommunications provider Superfone, therapeutic goods provider Revitalife, and health insurance comparison platform Choosewell.

Background



In March 2025, the Consumer Action Law Centre submitted the first ‘designated complaint’ to the ACCC under a new complaints framework. It alleged harmful unsolicited sales practices and recommended the ACCC conduct a market study.



In response, in June 2025, the ACCC announced it would examine unsolicited selling and lead generation practices.



The review included consultation with businesses, industry associations, government, consumer groups and consumers. The ACCC also conducted market research to gather information on consumer experience.



The report published today presents the outcome of this review.



On 10 July, the ACCC published its latest Electricity Market Inquiry report, which also highlighted issues such as consumers being sold solar battery systems that do not suit their needs, faulty installations, and poor battery performance.

ACCC Report Highlights Misleading Practices in Unsolicited Sales

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has conducted a review of unsolicited sales practices, including door-to-door selling and telemarketing, revealing that many businesses engage in high-pressure tactics that often mislead consumers. The report, prompted by a complaint from the Consumer Action Law Centre, recommends stricter penalties and a new 'opt-in' model for consumers targeted by unsolicited sales.

According to the ACCC, a significant number of consumers reported experiencing unsolicited sales, with 60% subjected to telemarketing and 41% approached in public places. Many consumers felt pressured during these interactions, and a substantial portion regretted their purchases. The report highlights that salespeople frequently misrepresent costs and eligibility for government programs, leading to consumer harm.

The ACCC's findings indicate a need for stronger regulations, as existing consumer safeguards are often breached. The report suggests replacing the current cooling-off period with an 'opt-in' model, requiring consumers to confirm sales before they are finalized. This change aims to protect consumers from high-pressure tactics and ensure they are fully informed before making purchases.

Additionally, the report addresses the role of online lead generation in unsolicited selling, emphasizing the need for transparency regarding the use of personal data. The ACCC supports reforms to privacy rules to better protect consumers in this context. The report concludes with a call for targeted measures to enhance consumer protection and compliance in unsolicited sales practices.



ACCC Report Highlights Misleading Practices in Unsolicited Sales

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has released a report revealing widespread misleading and high-pressure sales practices in unsolicited selling, prompting calls for stronger consumer protections.