Procurement Risks for Interior Designers

Used under a Creative Commons Licence

If you are an interior designer in Australia, there is a good chance you have asked yourself questions like, “Am I responsible if a product I ordered arrives damaged?”, “Do I have to refund a client if a sofa is delayed?”, or “Can a supplier’s mistake become my legal problem?”.

These are increasingly common concerns in the industry. Procurement — a task many designers see as a practical add-on to their creative work — is now one of the most legally sensitive areas of interior design practice.

This is because the Australian Consumer Law treats recommending, sourcing and supplying products as activities that can attract consumer guarantees, statutory obligations and potential liability, even if you never touched the item beyond placing the order.

Many interior designers are surprised to discover that they can be considered a “supplier”, and in some cases even a “manufacturer”, under the ACL simply because they sourced a product or passed on supplier information to a client.

This can expose them to disputes about product quality, fitness for purpose, suitability, delays, defects and refunds. The danger comes not from bad intent, but from the assumption that procurement is a harmless administrative task. In fact, the law in Australia treats it very differently.

Sofa not stain resistant

A common scenario illustrates this. Imagine a designer selects a custom sofa for a client based on a supplier’s brochure that describes the fabric as “stain-resistant”. Then, ween the sofa arrives, the fabric looks worn and shabby after two weeks. The supplier insists the client must raise the issue directly with the manufacturer and that pilling is “within industry tolerance”. But the client turns to the designer, insisting that the representation about durability was part of the designer’s professional advice. Without clear disclaimers and strong procurement processes, the designer may have inadvertently made a “representation” about the product under consumer law. The tricky part is that this is so, even though they merely repeated what the supplier said.

Delays

Another example involves delays.

An interior designer uses their trade account to order pendant lights from a European brand. Because the order was placed in the designer’s name, they are legally the “supplier”, meaning that if the lights arrive six weeks late, the designer might be the one that has to compensate the client.

The supplier might not offer any delay remedy at all. The client might insist the designer should have “known the risks” or “managed the ordering better”. Procurement suddenly becomes a financial liability rather than a convenience.

Safety obligations and electrical standards

There are also circumstances where the designer is unintentionally drawn into safety obligations.

One designer we advised sourced a statement lamp for a client, relying on the supplier’s assurance that it met Australian electrical standards. When the lamp sparked during installation, the client blamed the designer for recommending an unsafe product. In that case, we were able to resolve the dispute, but it highlights a core issue: a designer who suggests, sources or orders a product may be seen as responsible for ensuring it is safe, compliant and suitable. This is so even when they have no control over manufacturing or quality control.

Managing the orders

Another dilemma arises when designers attempt to simplify logistics by ordering goods on behalf of clients. It is understandable why this happens — designers want to manage the experience, consolidate deliveries and secure trade discounts. The problem is that the contract then forms between the designer and the supplier, not between the client and the supplier. If a marble tabletop arrives cracked, and the supplier refuses a refund, the designer becomes responsible for pursuing the claim, storing the damaged item and replacing it. The client expects a perfect outcome because, in their mind, the designer was the one who purchased the product. A designer can easily end up out of pocket, even though they are not at fault.

These situations demonstrate why procurement needs to be approached with the same diligence as any other legal and contractual task.

Designers must understand that the rules under Australian Consumer Law can impose obligations regardless of intention. A designer who simply “helps” a client order tiles may later be expected to provide remedies if those tiles differ from the sample, arrive late or are damaged in transit. Designers often assume that suppliers will automatically “take responsibility”, but many suppliers have strict policies, limited remedies and long response times — leaving the designer stuck between an unhappy client and an uncooperative supplier.

Clear contracts are the best defence

Interior designers can easily find themselves caught in the middle of disputes simply because clients assume they are responsible for things they never controlled. When a project involves suppliers, freight companies, trades and manufacturers, clients often see the designer as the person who “oversaw everything”, even when the designer had no say in how something was made, shipped or installed.

This misunderstanding alone is enough to cause tension — and sometimes legal issues — under the Australian Consumer Law.

A lot of problems start when approvals or product choices are confirmed quickly or informally. Designers often rely on emailed images, supplier brochures or sample photos to keep projects moving, but when the final product looks different in colour, grain or finish, clients may say they didn’t realise what they were agreeing to. Even small differences, like a natural timber table with more variation than expected, can become major disputes if nothing was properly recorded at the time.

There is also the financial side. Procurement takes time, involves risk, and often brings responsibilities that clients don’t see. If fees aren’t clearly explained, or if trade discounts blur the lines of who is actually “supplying” the goods, designers can unintentionally create expectations they never meant to take on. When something goes wrong, clients often look to the designer to fix the problem — even when the issue rests with the supplier or manufacturer.

The truth is that procurement touches on consumer law, contracts and risk in ways that are far more complex than most designers realise. Many disputes arise not from mistakes, but from a lack of clarity about who is responsible for what. These issues can’t usually be solved with a quick template or a standard clause. They need proper legal guidance and documentation that reflects how the designer works in practice.

Because of this, having a professionally drafted agreement — one that’s tailored to the realities of procurement in the design industry — can make a huge difference. A lawyer who understands both the creative process and the legal framework can help make sure the designer’s role, responsibilities and limits are clear from the start.

In the end, procurement isn’t something to avoid — it just needs to be managed with the right support. Many designers only discover the risks after a problem arises. With proper advice and clear documentation, they can protect themselves, set fair expectations and run smoother, more secure projects.

FAQs

1. Do interior designers have to provide refunds for faulty supplier products?
Only if they are legally considered the supplier. If the client contracts directly with the supplier, the supplier is responsible.

2. Can a designer be liable if a product is unsafe?
Yes, if they recommended or sourced it without proper disclaimers or checks.

3. Is using a trade account risky?
It can be, as it creates direct contractual liability.

4. What if a client changes their mind after placing an order?
This depends on the designer’s contract and the supplier’s terms.

5. Does the ACL apply to design services?
Yes — both design work and procurement activities may fall under the ACL.

How We Can Help

Drafting and reviewing procurement-safe contracts.
Advising on ACL obligations for design and procurement.
Helping manage supplier issues, defects and delays.
Creating clear client sign-off and approval processes.
Providing tailored procurement disclaimers and risk-management clauses.
Assisting with disputes involving suppliers or clients.
Offering practical legal guidance tailored to interior design businesses.

Procurement Risks for Interior Designers