Photographs

[alisuze]

I have bought an item based on the photographs I saw. I didn't read the description - the item was new. What I received is a fraction in size of the item in the photograph. I don't think misleading photgraphs should be allowed. The seller insists I have to pay the cost of return postage as I didn't read the description. I would agree if the item was used but for a new item the photographs should be a true representation of the goods on offer - surely that is the law?

What does everyone else think?

[red_magpie]

"Product size: Approx. 3.8*3.8*3.8CM/1.5*1.5*1.5 in"

The actual size is shown in one of the photos, and stated in the description. Next time you will read it, especially when buying from China.

You have no trading standards or consumer rights when importing items direct from China. They would cost more than they're worth to return.