Consumer Report: Should the Queensland public boycott Solomons Flooring?

Has Ms Fosse taken the gloss off Solomons?

The Sunday Mail (3 July 2011) recounts one of the most-bizarre events imaginable following a recent legal case in Brisbane.

Home owner Valerie Adams won a 7-month legal battle against Solomons Flooring at Brows Plains.
She had forked out a $900 deposit for a new carpet but three days after being told it would be installed within two weeks, she was advised the carpet would not be available for more than a month or even longer.
The store agreed to a refund which never eventuated forcing Valerie Adams to take action against Solomons in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT).

On June 22, Solomons was ordered to refund Mrs Adams $900 by the end of June.

This is when the apparent bastardry of Solomons really kicked in.

Bank records show that the refund was made over eight days with nine separate payments.

On one day, the intelligentsia at Solomons refunded $77 comprising four separate payments of 25c, $75.20, $1.05 and 50c.

But worse was to come when, according to The Sunday Mail, Solomons Flooring owner Sarah Fosse said the tribunal order had not specified how the deposit was to be refunded.

"We weren't told how to pay her," Ms Fosse said with the innocence usually attributed to someone who has difficulty understanding the intent of a court order.

Then Mrs Fosse dropped an absolute clanger: "As and when the funds were there, we transferred them across".
Wow!  What a gob smacking admission!

Things are apparently so financially tight at Solomons Flooring, the company was literally down to its last 25c in order to satisfy the tribunal order.

If Solomons could not find $900 to comply with a Tribunal order in one payment and is forced to pay as little as 25c at a time, their finances would appear to be in a somewhat precarious position, to say the least.
If consumers believe the company's explanation, they should think twice about dealing with Solomons or, if their Christian charity dictates, they could each donate 25c to Sarah Fosse to keep things going at Solomons. After all, 25c appears to be a big amount for Solomons.
If consumers don't believe the explanation, they should simply boycott Solomons over its treatment of Valerie Adams.
If she wishes, Queensland Consumer Watch would like to give Sarah Fosse the opportunity of putting her side of the story about Solomons' financial position and its reasons for paying Valerie Adams in the drip-feed manner in which it did. 
Our email address is