The preamble to the legislation, published on the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission website, says: "If a product or service you buy fails to meet a consumer guarantee, you have the right to ask for a repair, replacement or refund".

It also says even if a product or service was purchased before January 1, 2011: "you may still have rights under the previous consumer protection law called the Trade Practices Act".

Given all of the above why weren't all the thousands of donors who paid $700,000 to have either their own, or loved ones', names recorded on the now defunct "Immigration Bridge" project given refunds years ago?

The original plan, to build a pedestrian bridge between the National Museum and Lennox Gardens, was ditched in 2010 following significant community opposition.

Unfortunately for the thousands of donors, who were either migrants or the children of migrants from all parts of the country, the bridge's advocates had launched their fundraising long before the i's were dotted and T's were crossed.

Most, including Susan McIntosh and her husband, had paid hundreds of dollars to ensure the names of family members who had migrated to Australia would be recorded on plaques on the handrails of a structure that would never be built.

On being told a prominent memorial, to carry the names donors wished to honour, would be erected near the National Archives of Australia, the McIntoshes and an estimated 7000 other supporters chose to remain a part of the project.

Although almost a decade has passed no memorial has been forthcoming.

Immigration Place Australia, the charity originally founded to supervise the project, was deregistered last April.

Former committee members have told The Canberra Times the money, about $700,000 from the donors and another $445,000 from other fundraising, was spent on advertising, consultants and a design competition.

"The money doesn't exist anymore," Geoff Bowland, a former committee member involved with the project since its inception, said. He is pinning his hopes on a rich benefactor "like Dick Smith".

Emmanuel Notaras, another former committee member who says the project is not dead, just in hiatus, is confident the Federal Government will eventually come to the party.

Nobody is offering to pay back the hundreds of thousands of dollars that was raised. The legal entity that solicited the funds has, like Monty Python's famous dead parrot, "ceased to be".

Even if all those who paid up in the expectation of a physical monument did decide to lodge a claim the question would be "against whom?".

The Immigration Bridge has become an embarrassing debacle for all concerned. It is clear, with the benefit of hindsight, the decision to source funds from the public was premature.

Given it seems unlikely any benefactor, either public or private, would be foolhardy enough to try to resurrect the scheme, those who contributed have clearly lost out.

Members of the migrant community will surely think twice about supporting any future projects of this nature.

That, given the magnificent contribution they have made to this country which deserves to be recognised, is the saddest outcome of all.