Ironically - given the conversations about safety that I've had with some of you in the past - that wasn't the first thing that occurred to me. I was thinking more along commercial lines and the chargebacks that some vendors might be experiencing through their PayPal accounts.
Too many of these is... a bad thing.
But I do take your point, Kully.
In my mind, the fault in that scenario lies with the buyer. If someone buys something, adamant that they believe the part will fit their car, then it's their lookout. I can understand a seller asking 'Are you sure?', but the follow up to that should be 'Please understand that if you've bought this then you've bought it. Make sure you're satisfied that the part advertised is the one you need before committing to a purchase.'
I see where you're going with that and from a practical sense I agree. A not so hypothetical example is Tracey trying to buy front brake pads:
"I need a set of pads for a Rover R8 Coupe, part number XXYY1234."
"What's your registration?"
"It's A123BCD"
"Okay, no. You actually need part number XXYY5789."
"No, I really don't. The brakes are from a ZS"
"Whoever told you that is wrong. You need part number XXYY5789."
"The brakes.
Are from.
A ZS. I know what I'm talking about. I need XXYY1234."
Now I imagine that the motor factors get people in every day who
think they know what they want, but get protected against a false purchase by their diligence. Tracey is not one of those people, and her brakes are from a top-end ZS.
But someone who drives even a lightly-modified car can fall foul of this. Even I did with my Rovers (for similar reasons). There needs to be a way of saying, "I know what I'm doing and I indemnify you against prosecution if I mess this up". To be honest, I would've thought that someone working on their own car
automatically excuses the supplier, (notwithstanding the wrong thing being in the box) but apparently not.