I moved to Venice for work in January. In November of 2012 I obtained 3 quotes and chose my provider based on previous experience moving with them. I was unable to provide an address at the time but noted I would be moving to Venice propper and talked (in the peresnec of someone else) about how I was stressed about the logistics of the move - that a Venice move was challenging. The contract noted the quote was for normal access which I assumed meant water access, this being Venice and all. The quote in fact was for road access, and now the removalist wants me to cover half of the outstanding costs - a further AUD1100 (GPB1417 all up - on top of the $4000 I have already paid) based on the fact we are both 'not blameless'. My goods have been sitting in the UK since mid January. I was not contacted until I practically stalked the company  and am now being patronised. Do I have any recourse to legal action? I believe I acted reasonably and that the Removalist is at fault and should have to pay for the additional cost. Am I best placed to pay up and then seek compensation? I want my things!

I also want to be very clear - the removalist  bills itself as

'Australia's and the world's largest moving company with over 40 locations in Australia and 600 locations worldwide. Whether you're moving across the street, moving interstate or moving around the world, X will move you door to door.

So relax, and let us carry the load'.

Given their obvious expertise, I consider it was unreasonable for them to quote me for a move to venice that involved road access - which is not normal, rather than boat access, and that they are at fault.

Thanks

Optional Information:
State/Territory: ACT

Already Tried:
I have a chain of emails to the removalist. It is true that water transport is not specified in the contract. The question is was it reasonable for me to assume normal access meant water access, and for them to assume truck?