What is it we don't know?, page-52

CP

All TGA's leased products are covered by the $1-buy representation, with rare exceptions that relate more to lease duration than category of product. For instance, if one wanted to lease a fridge for a year, and TGA agreed, but wanted to keep the fridge, then the contract would not fall under the $1-buy representation.

In respect to TGA's webpage, you posted similar sentiments on 05/04/17 (Post #: 23884443), and about then I called on a TGA outlet to discuss what leases were covered by the $1-buy representation, and I had much the same conversation with a more distant outlet by telephone. I also had a telephone conversation with Andrew Crowther on the end-of-lease statements. This information formed the basis of a specific-to-you post on 06/04/17 (Post #: 23907291). Readers seriously interested in this matter should follow the exchanges in that thread.

On resolving contractual uncertainty, a consumer lease is not legally a lease if it includes a purchase option, and hence no such options are provided in TGA's standard-form contracts. Resolving the problem of having contractual certainty to take ownership of leased consumer goods is a matter for the law makers to address, there is nothing that TGA can do unless the law is changed. TGA has requested changes, but to no avail. As Mexicanandre posted in the earlier mentioned thread, TGA's submission to Treasury dated 15 October 2015 covered this issue. It states in part:

• Section 169 of the Credit Code be amended to give the consumer a right to purchase the rented goods and to have the indicative purchase price inserted into the consumer lease.
• The amendment to section 169 of the Credit Code should not convert the consumer lease into a section 9 sale of goods by instalments