We bought a raw lot from Goldin and relied on their description.

[ASF123]

So in your view, it’s perfectly fine for a seller to put whatever false, inaccurate or misleading information they want in the description, so long as they also include a photo?

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by ASF123

So in your view, it’s perfectly fine for a seller to put whatever false, inaccurate or misleading information they want in the description, so long as they also include a photo?

In my view, a buyer should use the information presented to them in an intelligent manner.

In this case, the cards were described as being in better condition than the very high quality photos showed, I would have believed my eyes, and chuckled at the description provided.

Had there been no pictures, the seller is at fault.

But there were pictures.

Very high quality pictures.

It is completely the fault of the buyer that he decided to glance at the pictures on his phone.

Speaking of "false, inaccurate or misleading information" :

[ASF123]

I’m completely with you on the BS that is PSA. But the unavoidable bottom line of your logic here is exactly what I posted above. Are you really ok with that?

I’m not saying the buyer doesn’t bear any responsibility - of course he does, and has admitted so. But to completely exonerate the seller is also unfair.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by ASF123

So in your view, it’s perfectly fine for a seller to put whatever false, inaccurate or misleading information they want in the description, so long as they also include a photo?

Exactly what I'm thinking too. Pictures should match the description. Period. If it doesn't, the seller should assume full liability, not the buyer. If we're supposed to go by pictures alone, why even bother with a description?

I hear complaints that eBay seller's don't put qualifiers in the title. So, by the logic in this thread, a qualifier isn't needed in the title because it's shown in the scan, right?

The lack of morals in this thread is really eye opening.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Both sides were negligent but I think Ken handled the aftermath much better; Marty's son should have just said thank you and moved on and not taken another swipe.