What Can You Do If Your SEO Agency Doesn’t Perform?

What Can You Do If Your SEO Agency Doesn’t Perform?

Your Legal Rights Under Australian Law (and What to Do Next)

If you’ve ever hired an SEO agency or “SEO guy” who promised the earth and then quietly disappeared into a tangle of excuses, you are not alone.

Many Australian businesses are left wondering: did I just waste my money, or do I actually have legal options when SEO services don’t perform?

This article looks at what can go wrong with SEO, what Australian law actually says about non-performing SEO services, and how a law firm like Sharon Givoni Consulting can help you sort it out.

When SEO Goes Wrong

SEO rarely fails in a dramatic – More often, it is a slow, frustrating drip.

You were promised “first page on Google in 30 days” and months later you are nowhere to be seen. You are paying a monthly retainer but have no real visibility over what work is being done. Your traffic is down, or worse, your website has been hit with a Google penalty after questionable “link building”. Reports arrive full of jargon and colourful graphs, but your enquiries have not moved.

Sometimes this is plainly a service failure.

Other times, the real issue is that expectations were never properly set in the first place.

In the work we have done we have found some SEO contracts to be light on concrete deliverables, which makes it harder to argue that the provider has actually “breached” anything.

There is also a spectrum in that at one end are well-meaning providers who have over-promised. At the other are outright SEO scams — something regulators, including the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, have repeatedly warned about.

Non-Performing SEO Services

In most cases, your relationship with an SEO provider is governed by two key legal frameworks: contract law, and the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), which sits in Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. Let’s take a look at these…

Breach of Contract

The starting point, naturally. is always the contract — whether that is a formal agreement, a proposal accepted by email, or even website terms.

If the SEO provider agreed to perform specific services — such as keyword research, on-page optimisation, reporting, or link building — and has simply not done those things, there may be a breach of contract.

Even where the contract avoids promising specific outcomes (for example, “no guarantees of rankings”), there is usually still an obligation to carry out services with reasonable care and skill.

Importantly, under the ACL, services supplied to consumers — and often to small businesses — come with automatic consumer guarantees. These include that services will be provided with due care and skill and be reasonably fit for their purpose. If an SEO provider has done very little, or has used outdated or risky tactics, those guarantees may be breached.

Remedies can include a refund (full or partial), termination of the contract, or compensation. What is realistic will depend on the contract, the evidence, and the scale of the problem.

“Too Good to Be True”?

The ACL also prohibits misleading or deceptive conduct (section 18) and false or misleading representations about services (section 29).

This is where statements like “guaranteed rankings”, “100% success”, or “instant results” become legally significant.

If an SEO provider makes bold claims without a reasonable basis — particularly where outcomes depend on factors outside their control — that may amount to misleading or deceptive conduct. The ACCC has made it clear that businesses must be able to substantiate performance claims.

While Australia does not yet have a large body of cases dealing specifically with SEO guarantees, the principles are well established and have been applied in digital advertising contexts.

For example, in the case of ACCC v TPG Internet Pty Ltd, the High Court confirmed that headline claims can mislead even where fine print attempts to correct them. Similarly, in the case of ACCC v Employsure Pty Ltd, Google Ads were found to be misleading due to the overall impression created.

Overseas examples also illustrate the risks. Proceedings such as Google Inc v Local Lighthouse Corp in the United States and enforcement action by the UK Competition and Markets Authority against Total SEO & Marketing Ltd (for fake reviews) show how regulators approach misleading SEO practices.

The key takeaway is simple: the same legal principles apply online. SEO is not a “wild west” — it is subject to the same consumer protection laws as any other service.

What Can You Do About It?

This all sounds very legal, but what does it mean in practice?

A firm like us, Sharon Givoni Consulting, can step in to review your contract, proposals, emails and reports to identify what was actually promised and what was delivered.

From there, the analysis focuses on whether there has been a breach of contract, a failure to meet consumer guarantees, or misleading conduct under the ACL.

A key part of this process is commercial — not just legal. That includes helping you quantify your loss, whether through wasted fees, the cost of fixing SEO damage, or lost opportunities, and assessing whether a claim is worth pursuing.

Often, the next step is a carefully drafted letter of demand setting out the issues and seeking a practical outcome, such as a refund, exit from the contract, or negotiated settlement. If needed, advice can extend to complaints, tribunal proceedings, or court action.

Just as importantly, a good lawyer will help you avoid a repeat experience by tightening future contracts so that expectations, deliverables and reporting obligations are clear from the outset.

How to Prepare Before Speaking to a Lawyer

Here is a great tip: If your SEO provider has under-delivered, preparation makes a real difference.

Start by gathering your documents — contracts, proposals, emails, invoices and reports. Then create a simple timeline of what happened, including key promises and when issues emerged. If possible, export basic data from tools like Google Analytics or Search Console to show what happened to your traffic over time.

Finally, be clear about your goal. This really helps us as your lawyer..Do you want a refund, an exit, help fixing the problem, or simply a better arrangement going forward? Clarity at this stage helps keep legal costs focused and proportionate.

How to Avoid SEO Problems Next Time

No one wants to spend their time in disputes. A few practical steps can make a significant difference.

Be cautious of absolute promises — rankings depend on factors outside any agency’s control. Insist on a clear scope of work, including what will actually be done each month and how it will be reported. Check termination rights and liability clauses carefully.

It is also worth asking directly whether any “black hat” techniques are used. These may deliver short-term gains but create long-term risk.

In many cases, having a lawyer review an SEO contract before signing is far cheaper than dealing with a dispute later.

SEO and the Law

Under Australian law, businesses can mislead not only by what they say, but also by what they imply — or fail to say. Silence can be misleading where important information is withheld.

Courts can also order corrective advertising, not just financial penalties, forcing businesses to publicly correct misleading claims. And, in some contexts, even technical conduct — such as using a competitor’s brand in hidden code — can raise trade mark and misleading conduct issues.

Why This Matters for Your Business

SEO is often sold as a technical service, but legally it sits squarely within contract law and consumer protection law.

But the strength of your position will usually come down to one thing: what was promised, and what can be proved.

Australian Consumer Law – Misleading or Deceptive Conduct

Section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (contained in Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)) provides:

“A person must not, in trade or commerce, engage in conduct that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive.”

This is one of the most powerful provisions used in Australian commercial disputes, including disputes involving online advertising, digital marketing and service providers.

Australian Consumer Law – False or Misleading Representations

Section 29(1) of the Australian Consumer Law prohibits businesses from making false or misleading representations about services, including their quality, performance characteristics, benefits or results.

This can become highly relevant where SEO providers advertise:

• “Guaranteed #1 rankings”
• “Instant Google results”
• “100% success rates”
• “Exclusive Google partnerships”

without a reasonable basis for those claims.

Consumer Guarantees for Services

Section 60 of the Australian Consumer Law states:

“If a person supplies services to a consumer, there is a guarantee that the services will be rendered with due care and skill.”

Section 61 further provides guarantees that services will be reasonably fit for purpose in certain circumstances.

For SEO disputes, this may become relevant where little work is performed, harmful tactics are used, or services are delivered incompetently.

Important Australian Cases

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v TPG Internet Pty Ltd (2013) 250 CLR 640.

This landmark High Court case confirmed that large headline advertising claims can still mislead consumers even where qualifications appear elsewhere in smaller print.

The case is frequently cited in misleading advertising matters involving online marketing and digital promotions.

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Employsure Pty Ltd [2021] FCA 749.

The Federal Court found that Google Ads used by Employsure created misleading impressions suggesting affiliation with a government agency. The case is important because it demonstrates that online advertising and search-related representations are fully subject to Australian Consumer Law principles.

In Google Inc v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2013) 249 CLR 435, which was a High Court decision, the judges examined misleading sponsored links and online advertising conduct. Although Google itself was ultimately not found liable in the particular circumstances, the case remains a leading authority on misleading impressions created through search advertising environments.

Wrapping it up

When SEO goes wrong, it usually doesn’t blow up overnight. It’s more like a slow leak. One day you realise you’ve been paying your SEO agency for months, but your Google rankings and enquiries look much the same – or worse.

The important thing to remember is this: SEO is not magic. It is a service, and in Australia services are covered by contracts and by the Australian Consumer Law. If an SEO provider has over‑promised and under‑delivered, the law lets you ask hard questions about what was promised, what was done, and whether those “guarantees” were ever realistic.

In practical terms, that might mean getting a refund, negotiating your way out of a bad SEO contract, or pushing back on misleading claims about “guaranteed #1 rankings” and “instant results”. It can also mean getting help to repair any damage done by risky tactics. A firm like Sharon Givoni Consulting can review your SEO agreement, look at the emails and reports, and explain your legal options in plain English – so you are not left guessing or Googling legal terms late at night.

Most importantly, once you have been through one bad SEO experience, you are in a better place to protect yourself next time. Clearer contracts, more realistic expectations and a quick legal check before you sign can make a huge difference. If your “SEO guy” hasn’t performed and you are wondering what to do next, that is exactly the moment to get proper legal advice, understand your rights, and turn a frustrating situation into a chance to reset your digital marketing on much safer, smarter terms.

---

Please note the above article is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice.

Please email us info@iplegal.com.au if you need legal advice about your brand or another legal matter in this area generally.