Why Consumer Problems Are Rising in Ireland — and Why Stronger Rights Do Not Always Mean Easy Redress

In just six months, 22,724 consumers contacted Ireland’s Competition and Consumer Protection Commission for information, advice or to report a problem. That was almost 2,200 more contacts than in the first half of 2025. Yet the most revealing figure is not how many people complained: among consumers followed up by the CCPC after seeking help, only 38% said their problem had been resolved, while 43% were still trying to obtain a solution and 19% had stopped pursuing the matter.

The data expose a paradox in Irish consumer protection. On paper, consumers now possess substantially stronger rights than they did only a few years ago. Faulty goods can carry rights to refunds, repairs or replacements; businesses must honour service contracts; online shoppers receive additional protection; misleading pricing is prohibited; and new rules now extend into digital services and product repairability. In practice, however, a legal right is only as useful as a consumer’s ability to enforce it against a business that disputes responsibility, delays responding or simply refuses to provide the remedy requested.

The CCPC’s latest figures also require careful interpretation. A contact to the helpline is not a court judgment and does not prove that a business breached the law. Consumers contact the Commission for advice as well as to report alleged problems, and changes in awareness, spending patterns and willingness to complain can all affect the figures. Even so, the scale and composition of the contacts provide an unusually detailed picture of where friction is developing in the Irish consumer economy.

The Overall Number Is Rising Again — but the Pattern Is More Complicated

CCPC contacts have not moved upwards in a straight line. The helpline recorded 39,172 consumers in 2023, followed by 44,247 in 2024. The total then declined to 42,791 in 2025. During the first half of 2026, however, contacts rose from 20,526 in the comparable 2025 period to 22,724, an increase of about 10.7%.

More striking than the overall increase is what consumers are asking about. Faulty goods and services remain by far the largest category, but the number actually fell slightly compared with the first half of 2025. Pricing contacts, by contrast, rose from 456 to 1,761, while advertising queries increased from 907 to 1,529 and contract-performance contacts rose from 1,365 to 1,714.

This means the current story is not simply that defective products are suddenly becoming much more common. The data point instead towards a broader consumer environment in which disputes about what was promised, what was charged, how products were advertised and whether contracts were properly performed are becoming more prominent.

Pricing contacts increased almost fourfold, while advertising contacts rose by around two-thirds. The CCPC report does not establish a single reason for those increases, and it would be wrong to treat every enquiry as evidence of misconduct. Price volatility, increasingly complex promotions, dynamic pricing, greater consumer awareness of legal requirements and individual disputes involving particular traders may all influence the numbers.

Vehicles Remain the Sector Most Likely to Send Consumers Looking for Help

Vehicles and transport generated 3,192 contacts in the first half of 2026, up 8% on the comparable period a year earlier. Utilities and fuel generated 2,130, an extraordinary 248% increase, while home building and improvements produced 1,407 contacts, up 13%. Together they illustrate why some forms of spending generate considerably greater consumer risk than an ordinary retail purchase.

Cars, energy contracts and building work share several characteristics. They can involve large sums of money, technically complex products, lengthy contractual relationships and information that the consumer cannot easily verify before agreeing to the transaction. A person buying a used car cannot inspect every mechanical component; a household choosing an electricity tariff may struggle to predict its future bill; and a homeowner commissioning a roof repair may be unable to assess the quality of work until water begins entering the property months later.

The financial consequences are therefore much larger than those associated with a faulty shirt or kitchen utensil. A defective vehicle can leave a household without transport while loan repayments continue. Poor building work can require another contractor to undo and repeat the original job. A disputed utility account can accumulate over months and create difficulty for a household already facing high living costs.

Ireland’s Consumer Law Has Changed Radically Since the 1980s

Modern Irish consumer protection did not begin with the latest legislation. The Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980 established many of the principles generations of consumers became familiar with, including expectations around merchantable quality and services performed with appropriate care and skill. The Consumer Protection Act 2007 subsequently strengthened rules against unfair, misleading and aggressive commercial practices and established the National Consumer Agency.

A further institutional change came in 2014 when the National Consumer Agency and the Competition Authority were combined to create the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission. This placed consumer protection and competition enforcement inside a single statutory organisation on the principle that functioning markets require both competitive businesses and consumers capable of making informed choices.

The largest recent reform was the Consumer Rights Act 2022, which came into force on 29 November 2022. It consolidated and modernised substantial parts of Irish consumer law, strengthened remedies for faulty goods and services, established detailed rights for digital content and digital services, expanded rules governing unfair contract terms and implemented important EU consumer legislation.

The changes were significant because the economy had changed dramatically since 1980. Consumers were no longer buying only physical goods from local shops. They were paying for streaming subscriptions, software, cloud services, connected devices, online marketplaces and cross-border digital transactions. Consumer legislation therefore had to begin treating software updates, digital functionality and online platform transparency as ordinary elements of consumer protection.

What Rights Do Consumers Actually Have When Goods Are Faulty?

For goods purchased from a business, the basic principle is that the item must conform to the contract. It should work as reasonably expected, be fit for its normal purpose, match its description and possess the quality and durability a consumer can reasonably expect after taking account of factors such as its price and condition.

If a fault appears within the first 30 days after purchase or delivery, consumers generally have a short-term right to terminate the contract and obtain a full refund. After that period, the normal first remedies are repair or replacement, although a serious fault can justify termination without requiring the consumer to accept those remedies first. If a repair or replacement cannot solve the problem, is impossible, is not completed within a reasonable time or creates significant inconvenience, a price reduction or refund can become available depending on the circumstances.

The burden of proof is particularly important. Where a fault appears during the first year, consumer law presumes that the problem existed when the product was supplied unless the business can demonstrate otherwise. After the first year, the consumer generally has to show that the fault existed when the goods were supplied rather than resulting from misuse, accidental damage or normal wear and tear.

Consumers in Ireland can potentially seek a remedy for defective goods for up to six years. That does not mean every product has a six-year warranty or that a trader must replace an item after six years of normal use. The age of the product, its expected durability, its price and the nature and cause of the fault remain relevant.

A manufacturer’s warranty is also separate from statutory rights. If a retailer sells a faulty product, it cannot automatically avoid its legal responsibilities by telling the customer to pursue the manufacturer. The contract for the sale is normally with the seller, and the seller remains the first point of contact for remedies under consumer law.

Used Cars Expose the Difference Between Legal Protection and Practical Risk

Used vehicles are one of the clearest examples of why consumer disputes persist despite relatively strong legislation. A second-hand car purchased from a dealer is covered by the Consumer Rights Act 2022. It does not have to be equivalent to a new car, but its quality must be reasonable having regard to factors such as age, mileage, description and price, and it must be fit for its intended purpose.

Mechanical faults create difficult factual disputes because older cars inevitably suffer wear. The central question is often not whether the car developed a problem, but whether the defect was already present, whether its seriousness was compatible with what the buyer had been told and whether it represented reasonable deterioration for a vehicle of that age and mileage. Establishing those facts can require inspections, repair reports or other technical evidence.

Protection is considerably weaker when a car is bought from a genuinely private individual rather than a dealer. The Consumer Rights Act protections applicable to purchases from traders do not apply in the same way to private sales. That creates an incentive for consumers to establish clearly whether the person advertising a vehicle is genuinely a private seller, particularly on online marketplaces.

Irish law also prohibits disguised traders from presenting themselves as private sellers in order to avoid their obligations. Yet identifying such behaviour after a dispute has arisen can itself require time and evidence. This combination of high transaction values, mechanical complexity and differences between business and private sales helps explain why vehicles repeatedly appear near the top of consumer-contact statistics.

The Utilities Surge Needs Careful Interpretation

The increase from 612 utilities and fuel contacts in the first half of 2025 to 2,130 in the same period of 2026 is one of the most dramatic movements in the report. It does not, however, mean that complaints about electricity and gas suppliers alone increased by 248%. The CCPC category combines utilities and fuel, and contacts can concern pricing, advertising, contracts and other consumer questions as well as established legal breaches.

Energy is also subject to its own specialised regulatory structure. Electricity and gas suppliers must operate customer charters and codes of practice covering areas such as billing, marketing, disconnection, complaint handling and vulnerable customers. A customer who cannot resolve a dispute with an energy supplier or network operator can ultimately bring a formal complaint to the Commission for Regulation of Utilities.

The CRU’s separate figures illustrate why different complaint datasets should not be treated as interchangeable. Its Customer Care Annual Report for 2025 recorded 21,427 customer contacts, 13% fewer than in 2024, and said billing remained the main source of complaints while energy affordability continued to be a central concern. The regulator reported securing €178,000 for consumers through its complaint-resolution work.

Energy disputes are particularly prone to complexity because the amount eventually paid can depend on usage, meter readings, estimated readings, standing charges, discounts, contract duration and changing tariffs. During periods of volatile wholesale energy prices and changing retail offers, households also have greater reason to scrutinise bills and compare contractual promises with actual charges.

Home Improvements Produce a Different Kind of Consumer Risk

Home building and improvement disputes are structurally different from ordinary retail complaints. The product is usually a bespoke service performed over time at the customer’s property. The final quality cannot always be assessed immediately, and disagreements may arise over the original scope, materials, deadlines, additional work, stage payments and whether the finished job complies with what was agreed.

The CCPC recorded 1,407 contacts concerning home building and improvements in the first half of 2026, 13% more than during the comparable period in 2025. The problem is not new: during the whole of 2025, 2,838 consumers contacted the Commission about this sector, while those consumers reported spending an average of €14,597 on the affected building or improvement service.

Consumer law applies even where the parties did not sign an elaborate written contract. Agreements can arise through quotations, emails, text messages, conversations or the conduct of the parties. But an unwritten or poorly documented agreement can make a later dispute much harder to prove because each side may have a different understanding of what was included in the price.

Under the Consumer Rights Act, services must conform to the contract. Where work does not meet the agreed standard, the trader should generally bring it into conformity within a reasonable period, without charge and without significant inconvenience. Depending on the circumstances, a consumer can ultimately be entitled to a price reduction or to terminate the service contract.

The practical difficulty is that a homeowner may already have paid a substantial deposit or most of the contract price before discovering a defect. Repairing poor construction work can also involve another contractor, technical reports and potentially legal costs. The theoretical remedy may therefore be clear while obtaining it remains expensive and time-consuming.

Online Commerce Has Enlarged the Consumer Market — and the Number of Potential Disputes

Online-purchase contacts to the CCPC rose by 34% in the first half of 2026 to 5,925. Digital commerce gives Irish consumers access to far more sellers and greater price competition, but it also introduces distance, platform intermediaries and cross-border enforcement into transactions that once occurred face to face.

Among online contacts where the location was known, 73% concerned businesses based in Ireland, 12% elsewhere in the EU, 8% in the United Kingdom and 6% in the rest of the world. The majority of online consumer difficulties therefore cannot simply be attributed to foreign websites. Nevertheless, the international component complicates remedies because the applicable enforcement route depends partly on where the trader is established.

Online marketplaces must tell consumers whether a seller is a business or another consumer and explain how legal obligations are divided between the marketplace and seller. They must also provide information about how search results are ranked. These requirements are important because consumer protections can differ substantially depending on whether the transaction is business-to-consumer or a private sale.

Consumers purchasing online, over the phone or through most other distance contracts normally also receive a 14-day cooling-off period in which they can change their minds, subject to legal exceptions. This is separate from rights relating to faulty goods. A consumer who buys in a physical shop generally does not have a legal right to return a perfectly satisfactory product merely because they have changed their mind unless the retailer voluntarily offers such a policy.

Pricing Has Become One of the Fastest-Growing Sources of Queries

The rise in pricing contacts is especially notable because Irish rules governing sale promotions became more prescriptive in 2022. When a business announces a reduction on goods, the advertised discount must generally be based on the lowest price charged for the product during at least the previous 30 days. A retailer cannot simply raise a price shortly before a sale and use the inflated figure to manufacture a misleading discount.

Consumer prices must generally include VAT and applicable taxes, and businesses must not conceal unavoidable charges. Advertising that contains false information or leaves out significant information capable of influencing the consumer’s decision can also breach consumer protection law.

At the same time, lawful pricing itself has become more sophisticated. Airlines, accommodation providers and other businesses can use dynamic pricing, where prices move according to demand. A price rising rapidly is not automatically illegal. The consumer-protection question is whether the way the price was presented, advertised and ultimately charged complied with the law and the agreed contract.

This distinction matters. Consumer law does not normally regulate every price merely because customers consider it expensive. Its role is primarily to ensure transparency, prevent misleading commercial practices and make businesses honour contractual obligations.

The Weak Point Is Often Not the Law but the Route to Redress

The most important finding in the 2026 report may be what happened after consumers learned about their rights. Since October 2025, the CCPC has been contacting a sample of helpline users at least four weeks after their original enquiry. By the first half of 2026, 2,326 consumers had completed that first follow-up.

Only 38% said their issue had been resolved. Another 43% were still pursuing a resolution and 19% were no longer trying. Of those whose cases had been resolved, 41% received either a full or partial refund. The results demonstrate that information about rights can produce real outcomes, but they also reveal how much effort consumers sometimes have to expend before those rights become meaningful.

Among respondents who tried to resolve their problem, 53% reported contacting the trader at least five times: 30% did so between five and nine times, 16% between ten and nineteen times and 7% at least twenty times. Some 46% described contacting the trader as difficult, and 22% said they had incurred additional costs while attempting to resolve their issue.

This is economically significant even when the underlying claim is modest. Time spent on telephone calls, writing emails, obtaining reports, travelling, taking time off work or arranging alternative services has a cost. Where the expected recovery is small, consumers can rationally decide that pursuing a valid claim is no longer worth the effort.

That creates what economists describe as consumer detriment beyond the direct financial loss. A household loses not only money but also time, convenience and confidence. If consumers repeatedly conclude that contractual rights are difficult to enforce, the credibility of consumer law itself can weaken.

The €2,000 Small-Claims Limit Has Become a Major Fault Line

When a business and consumer cannot resolve a dispute directly, Ireland’s small claims procedure provides a relatively accessible route for certain claims. It is generally designed to operate without a solicitor and currently covers qualifying claims of no more than €2,000.

That figure increasingly looks disconnected from the value of many modern consumer transactions. The CCPC referred or signposted almost 6,000 consumers to the Small Claims Court in the first half of 2026, yet consumers contacting the helpline reported spending an average of €6,473 on the product or service behind their problem.

The mismatch is particularly obvious for cars and home improvements. In the first half of 2026, home building and improvements accounted for 718 small-claims referrals, the largest individual sector, while vehicles and transport generated 515. Yet a major vehicle defect or building dispute can easily exceed the €2,000 limit.

A consumer can still use the procedure where the original purchase cost more than €2,000 if the amount actually being claimed does not exceed the limit. But a person seeking compensation substantially above that threshold may need to consider ordinary court proceedings or independent legal advice. That introduces additional cost and complexity precisely in the cases where the financial exposure is greatest.

The Government has committed to substantially increasing the small-claims limit, while the CCPC has publicly recommended an increase to €8,000. As of early September 2026, the existing €2,000 limit remains an important practical constraint, so the proposed higher threshold should be treated as a reform under consideration rather than an existing consumer right.

The CCPC Does Not Function as a Court for Every Individual Complaint

Another common misunderstanding concerns the role of the CCPC itself. The Commission provides information, receives reports, promotes compliance and takes enforcement action, but its consumer helpline does not ordinarily adjudicate every private dispute and order a company to refund an individual customer. Consumers normally have to approach the trader first and use the appropriate complaints, ADR or court process where necessary.

Reports from individuals nevertheless matter because they provide intelligence about patterns. In July 2026, information reaching the CCPC through its helpline contributed to the return of €250,000 in unused gift-card credit to consumers. The Commission also reported successful prosecutions against six major retailers and two second-hand car dealers during the preceding 18 months for misleading consumers.

The difficulty is the deterrent effect of sanctions. The CCPC said in August that, for the consumer-law breaches in question, it currently has to prosecute a business before a court can impose a fine, and that recent cases had resulted in fines of €1,000. The Commission argues that direct administrative financial sanctions would allow stronger and more proportionate enforcement against serious or systemic breaches.

The Government has been working on a Consumer Protection, Competition and Enforcement Bill intended to strengthen those powers. Proposals include allowing administrative financial sanctions for certain serious or systemic consumer-law breaches and enhancing the CCPC’s investigative and enforcement capabilities. Those proposals are important, but until enacted they should not be confused with powers already available across all ordinary domestic consumer disputes.

Alternative Dispute Resolution Is Growing but Remains Fragmented

Consumers may also have access to alternative dispute resolution, which can avoid the cost and complexity of litigation. Ireland currently has authorised ADR bodies covering areas including financial services, utilities, communications and a range of other consumer disputes. The CRU, for example, can resolve qualifying complaints against energy suppliers after the consumer has completed the supplier’s own complaints process.

The Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman performs a similar specialised role for financial-service complaints, while ComReg operates in communications and postal services. NetNeutrals EU is authorised in areas including online purchases, flights, motor vehicles and certain new-home disputes.

The system can be faster and less adversarial than litigation, but it is not a single universal consumer tribunal. Different bodies have different jurisdictions, procedures and powers, and participation outside sectors where it is legally required can depend on the applicable ADR arrangements. For consumers, understanding which organisation has jurisdiction can itself become part of the problem.

Collective Redress Is Another Important but Relatively New Development

Ireland historically relied heavily on individual consumers pursuing individual remedies. That model is poorly suited to situations in which thousands of people suffer the same relatively small loss. A €20 or €50 individual claim may be too small to justify litigation even when the aggregate effect across a large customer base is substantial.

The Representative Actions for the Protection of the Collective Interests of Consumers Act 2023 created a new mechanism allowing designated non-profit qualified entities to bring representative actions on behalf of groups of consumers. The legislation commenced in April 2024 and can cover areas including energy, financial services, telecommunications, travel, data protection and other consumer markets.

For qualifying cases, representative actions can seek injunctions as well as redress such as refunds, repairs or replacements. The mechanism is potentially important because it reduces the dependence of consumer enforcement on thousands of people independently pursuing the same dispute.

Its long-term significance will depend on how actively the system is used, the availability of qualified entities and the types of cases that reach the High Court. It is therefore best understood as an important new enforcement architecture rather than evidence that the individual-redress problem has already been solved.

New Repair Rights Have Arrived in 2026

Ireland’s consumer framework continued to expand in August 2026 with regulations implementing the EU Right to Repair Directive. The rules are intended to make repairing certain products more practical and attractive rather than encouraging premature replacement.

The new regime introduces obligations on manufacturers of products covered by EU repairability requirements, provides for a standard European Repair Information Form and requires the development of a national platform to help consumers locate repair services. The broader objective is both consumer protection and waste reduction: a product that can be economically repaired should remain usable for longer.

This represents a shift in consumer policy. Traditional law concentrated primarily on what happens when a newly purchased item is defective. Right-to-repair policy increasingly addresses what happens later in the product’s life, including access to repair services and information.

It could eventually reduce one source of consumer frustration, particularly for expensive appliances and electronics. Its impact will depend on the products covered, the cost and availability of repairs and how effectively businesses adapt to the new obligations.

Further Rules on Greenwashing and Durability Take Effect This Month

Another major change is due on 27 September 2026, when Ireland’s implementation of the EU rules on empowering consumers for the green transition takes effect. The reforms target misleading environmental claims, unreliable sustainability labels and commercial practices that obscure information about product durability and repairability.

Generic environmental claims such as describing a product simply as environmentally friendly will face stronger restrictions unless they can be substantiated. Businesses making claims about future environmental performance will need credible and verifiable commitments, while consumers are intended to receive clearer information concerning warranties, durability, repairability and software updates.

The reforms reflect another transformation in the consumer marketplace. Consumers increasingly make purchasing decisions not only on price and quality but also on environmental claims. If those claims cannot be trusted, the market rewards marketing rather than genuinely more sustainable products.

Why Businesses Also Have an Interest in Strong Consumer Enforcement

Consumer protection is often presented as a conflict between customers and businesses, but weak enforcement can damage compliant companies as well. A business that invests in quality products, clear contracts, trained customer-service staff and effective after-sales support incurs costs that a less responsible competitor may attempt to avoid.

If misleading discounts, poor workmanship or refusal to honour remedies provide a commercial advantage without meaningful consequences, responsible businesses face distorted competition. Effective consumer law therefore protects not only households but also businesses that comply with the rules.

The reverse is also true. Consumer rules that are unnecessarily complicated or inconsistently interpreted can create costs for smaller businesses that may lack specialist legal departments. Good enforcement consequently requires both credible sanctions for serious breaches and clear guidance that makes compliance practical.

The Cost to Households Extends Beyond Refunds

The CCPC’s finding that consumers spent an average of €6,473 on the product or service associated with their contact demonstrates the financial scale of the transactions involved, but that figure should not be interpreted as the average amount consumers lost. In many cases only part of the transaction may be disputed, and some consumers ultimately obtain repair, replacement or reimbursement.

The broader economic cost lies in the combination of direct losses, extra expenditure and time. Twenty-two per cent of surveyed consumers reported incurring additional costs while seeking a resolution. Households may also have to replace a product temporarily, hire another tradesperson, obtain an expert report or continue paying finance on an unusable asset.

These burdens are not evenly distributed. A household with substantial savings can absorb a disputed €1,000 repair bill while pursuing a complaint. A lower-income family may need the same money immediately for rent, energy, food or transport. Delayed redress therefore has a different practical effect depending on a household’s financial resilience.

There is also a psychological and social cost when consumers repeatedly encounter unresponsive complaint systems. Confidence that contracts will be honoured is one of the foundations of a functioning market. When that confidence declines, consumers may become more reluctant to purchase from unfamiliar businesses, use new services or spend large sums on home improvements and other discretionary purchases.

Why More Consumer Contacts Do Not Necessarily Mean Ireland Has Become a Worse Marketplace

There is an important alternative explanation for part of the increase in contacts: consumers may simply be more aware of their rights and more willing to enforce them. The Consumer Rights Act received substantial publicity, the CCPC has expanded its guidance and online tools, and more than one million visits were made to the Commission’s website during the first half of 2026.

A rise in complaints can therefore be caused by worse business behaviour, greater consumer awareness, more transactions, changes in the sectors where people spend money or a combination of all four. Helpline statistics alone cannot disentangle those effects.

The online trend illustrates this problem. A 34% increase in contacts concerning online transactions sounds alarming, but it occurred in an economy where digital purchasing has become deeply embedded in everyday life. Without knowing how the overall number and value of online transactions changed during the same period, the increase in complaints cannot by itself establish that an individual online purchase became 34% riskier.

The same caution applies to the companies named by consumers. Appearing frequently in a helpline report does not itself establish wrongdoing. Large businesses can generate more contacts simply because they conduct far more transactions. Enforcement findings, court decisions and verified breaches must therefore be distinguished from raw contact volumes.

The Most Important Protection Gap Is the Distance Between Having a Right and Enforcing It

Ireland’s legal framework has become substantially stronger during the past decade. The Consumer Rights Act modernised remedies, digital consumers gained explicit protection, online marketplaces face greater transparency obligations, collective actions became possible and new repair and environmental-marketing rules are extending the framework again in 2026.

Yet the CCPC’s follow-up research shows why legislation alone cannot eliminate consumer detriment. A consumer who has to make ten telephone calls, write repeated emails and contemplate court proceedings before a business honours a straightforward obligation still bears a significant enforcement cost, even if the law is technically on their side.

The €2,000 small-claims ceiling is the clearest structural example. It provides an accessible route for relatively modest disputes but leaves a gap when an ordinary household transaction involving a car, kitchen, roof or renovation is worth several times that amount. Raising the limit would not solve every problem, but it could make formal redress proportionate to a much larger share of modern consumer purchases.

Administrative sanction powers for the CCPC could address the problem from the opposite direction by increasing the cost to businesses of systemic non-compliance. Stronger ADR and collective-action mechanisms can reduce the burden on individual households. Together, those reforms would shift more of the enforcement responsibility away from consumers having to fight every dispute alone.

What the Next Phase of Irish Consumer Protection Is Likely to Look Like

The most plausible future is not a dramatic disappearance of consumer complaints. Markets are becoming more complicated, not less. Products increasingly combine hardware, software and subscriptions; purchasing crosses national borders; pricing can change dynamically; home renovations involve high-value bespoke contracts; and households are purchasing increasingly sophisticated vehicles and energy services.

Consumer protection will therefore have to move from simply defining rights towards making those rights easier to exercise. The Right to Repair rules, collective-action mechanism and September 2026 sustainability reforms all move in that direction, while proposed administrative fines and a larger small-claims threshold could materially affect enforcement if enacted.

For businesses, the direction of travel is also clear. Providing a product or service is no longer the end of the commercial relationship. Transparent pricing, accessible complaint handling, reliable after-sales support, accurate environmental claims and timely remedies are becoming increasingly central legal obligations.

For consumers, meanwhile, documentation is becoming more important. Keeping advertisements, contracts, quotations, invoices, photographs, emails and records of conversations can determine whether a claim is easy or difficult to prove. Paying larger deposits by card rather than irreversible payment methods can also provide an additional potential route through chargeback procedures where applicable.

The underlying lesson from the 22,724 contacts is therefore not simply that Irish consumers are complaining more. It is that modern consumer disputes increasingly involve large sums, complicated contracts and long chains of communication. Ireland has built a considerably stronger legal framework around those transactions, but the next challenge is ensuring that obtaining a repair, refund or properly completed service does not itself become a second consumer problem.