We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Missleading Pictures
Comments
-
Tim - have you heard 'Late For The Sky', from the eponymous 1974 album by Californian singer/songwriter Jackson Browne..?I shot a vein in my neck and coughed up a Quaalude.
Lou Reed The Last Shot0 -
Late for... late for... Late for THE SKY!!I shot a vein in my neck and coughed up a Quaalude.
Lou Reed The Last Shot0 -
Phil, you're confusing yourself only. You're taking an observation about what a few people try and do, trying to change it into something else such as saying I'm saying everyone does this or the legal system is wrong etc etc (in an attempt to then try and say I'm not right).
There are people on here who will try and claim whether they actually take action or not to more than they are entitled to. There are people on here who will encourage others to do this. Whether they try then fail doesn't matter, that wasn't my original comment. I've an observation that some will try, encourage others to try for their own personal gain.
Are you and Wig again going to try and come back and then attempt to expand my observation into something else eg "so you trying to say xxxx". What I've said is written above, nothing more, nothing less. There is nothing to add/reinterpret (in an attempt to change what I've written so you can claim it's wrong).
I know what you're trying to do Phil, it's not going to work!
What the f...... ??? Can anyone make any sense of that post? I think he's finally lost the plot. :rotfl:
If anyone knows what on earth Tim is trying to say, could they PM me?0 -
pulliptears wrote: »Op wanted one that split like this:
But got one that split like this:
Most divan bases above single come split like the bottom picture (head half and foot half. The bed shown in the top picture appears to be made from two single bases that are linked together as they would be on a zip and link bed. If you want the base split like the top picture you usually have to ask for it, as it is not standard.0 -
Tim_Deegan wrote: »Most divan bases above single come split like the bottom picture (head half and foot half. The bed shown in the top picture appears to be made from two single bases that are linked together as they would be on a zip and link bed. If you want the base split like the top picture you usually have to ask for it, as it is not standard.
But if the product is illustrated in this way. you can IMHO have a resonable expectation to get what is illustrated.0 -
But if the product is illustrated in this way. you can IMHO have a resonable expectation to get what is illustrated.
Not really. There are usually loads of different base options, but most retailers will only show one option in the picture. However if the OP wasn't dealing with a big company then they might change it out of good will. It may be worth speaking to the manager.0 -
EDIT: to add: Perhaps a bed expert or retailer will know that there are likely to be many different looks to any make/model of bed. But the average man in the street is unlikely to know this - and that is the criteria a court would normally use
I disagree, if the product has a chance of not looking as it is represented then this has to be made clear. A customer can reasonably expect a product to look like it has been photographed on a retail catalogue. If it doesn't & there is nothing to tell you that it may not then it is misrepresentation. IMO a statement "images are for illustration purposes only" is all but meaningless, does not imply that the products may not look like the images supplied. The most that this statement means is that you will not be supplied with the furnishings and bed linens in the pictures, because that is what this phrase is always used for in everyday retail.
At the end of the day I think your view is unreasonable, and you obviously think my view is unreasonable. The only way to resolve such an issue is to ask the company to issue a no cost refund to the customer and if that does not work then a court can decide what is reasonable. That is what the courts are there for.0 -
It's nice to have your own opinion Wig, you should try it.
Is it annoying having to adjust your opinions when laws get changed because elements of them are fundamentally flawed?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.2K Spending & Discounts
- 247K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards