Misrepresentation in Listings

[shirlyflowergirl]

In the past, eBay allowed stock photos but they were designated as such. I notice this is apparently no longer  an eBay requirement  and stock photos appear in listings without being designated as such, thus misrepresenting the item being sold. For example, the listings for the item My Life as Author and Editor by H. L. Mencken have a stock photo for five hardcover copies and sixteen paperback copies. Many of these listing are by huge bulk sellers who buy books from libraries for negligible sums and list them with the stock photos, so a buyer is unaware of what he is buying. Many of the books are actually ex-library copies. The procedure is to list an ex-library or poor quality copy with a stock photo. The book may or may not be described as a library copy. If the buyer complains, he is offered a replacement copy or a refund. Of course, the hope is the buyer remains silent or asks for a replacement. Over time, it is economically feasible for these bulk sellers, but puts those who have a nicer copy to sell but want a slightly higher price at a disadvantage.

[klhmdg]

Buyers have the MBG.

I will not purchase from a seller who only has stock photos AND is not a retailer.

[slippinjimmy]

---

@shirlyflowergirl wrote:

In the past, eBay allowed stock photos but they were designated as such.

---

eBay has never had such a policy, no seller has ever been required to identify a listing picture as a "stock image".

As far as the mega booksellers, they get a pass on the actual policy which is that stock images should not be used for listings where the Condition is less than "New".

You might think that this special treatment is "unfair", that may be true but what is also true is that mega-seller get treated differently and that is basically how the world works.

[shirlyflowergirl]

This is good policy and I wish this were true of the majority of buyers. It will remain an unknown statistic, I'm afraid.

[whorunbartertown]

I have used a mix of stock and actual photos to avoid confusion. For example, if I was selling a video game, I'd use actual photos of the cartridge or disc, then stock pics of gameplay. EBay has never required me to differentiate real from stock.

[shirlyflowergirl]

I'd swear I remember seeing the disclaimer appearing with the photo, but be that as it may, if you check listings you will find that, while the majority of listings with stock photos are being listed by mega-sellers, there are many that aren't. This indicates that there is no "special" treatment, the policy is just not being enforced, and misrepresentation is allowable.

[pburn]

I don't make many purchases on eBay these days, but one of the things I do buy is used books from any one of those mega-sellers. 

I've run into two issues with those stock photo listings: 

1. a book that was ex-library, which was not disclosed and doesn't suit me;
2. a book or two that were not in the condition described; and,
3. several books in a series that were the wrong edition--I had intentionally chosen editions with a specific cover.

I filed for refunds/returns on all the books that didn't fit the description or photos, so those mega-sellers do have accountability when it comes to using those stock photos if something goes wrong.

Of course, for a while there, I was concerned eBay would brand me as a "serial returner" and strip me of my MBG rights! Didn't happen, though, and all the books (and other items) I've ordered since then have been more than satisfactory, so I think I'm in the clear.