This is more for prints but also applies to stock licensing but it obviously happens with both. I'm considering going with a no-refunds policy.

I had somebody buy a $300 canvas print then wanted to immediately return it for a refund. Reason? Couldn't afford it! You would think they knew they couldn't afford it before they bought it.

And the dumba$$ of the week award goes to someone who bought a print and wanted to immediately return it. Reason? They thought they were buying the product in the picture! My site says "photographer" and "photos" everywhere and the checkout system even clearly says prints and asks them to pick a print finish, print size, etc.

So what's your policy?

I don't sell prints directly - I have FAA do that. And I'm assuming they have some way to deal with the inevitable nonsense over refund requests - I hope it's "NO!"

As far as my Symbiostock site, I don't do refunds, although buying a larger size (not a smaller one) is something I would do.

If someone was concerned about some aspect of an image and wanted to see the full size, I would e-mail them a full size watermarked image to inspect (should probably put that in my FAQ).

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on November 06, 2013, 19:49

I don't sell prints directly - I have FAA do that. And I'm assuming they have some way to deal with the inevitable nonsense over refund requests - I hope it's "NO!"

Absoutely it is not NO. Its a 100% money-back guarantee:
"If you're not happy with a purchase that you made on FineArtAmerica.com, for any reason, you can return it to us within 30 days of the order date.   As soon as it arrives, we'll issue a full refund for the entire purchase price."
http://fineartamerica.com/moneybackguarantee.html

maybe they don't charge us after

Do you think FAA would allow someone to return a print because they couldn't afford it? I know they say for any reason, but perhaps the way they regulate that is that the purchaser has to return the unwanted print to FAA, which discourages  things like the two examples the OP gave (thought they were buying the product or couldn't afford $300).

Who knows what FAA mean by any of their stated policies?
I've already gone over the disconnect between the their stated referral policy, and the reality; and have also mentioned in the past their 'third row sponsorship disconnect', whereby on their sponsorship page it says:

"Artwork Page Sponsorships
...
Each time someone visits one of your sponsored pages, your images will appear in the third row (in addition to wherever they would have normally appeared without your sponsorship).   It's a great way to ensure that your images are prominently displayed whenever someone searches for keywords that pertain specifically to your artwork."

The truth is that the third line sponsorship doesn't stop with the first four people who 'sponsor' the word. Any number of people can do so and the third line rotates images, which isn't as promised on the sponsorship page.
It is admitted in point 30 in the FAQ:
http://fineartamerica.com/contactus.html?tab=faq (third page)

FAA SMoke and Mirrors - sure they rotate, that's understandable. Otherwise the first people would be locked in and no one else could use those words. But here's the part that gets me. I think Mostphoto and Panther did things like this too, your photos always show up better in  the searches when you are looking. Makes you feel good, but it's not real.

Please note - when you are logged in to your account, you will always see your own images in the third row if you have sponsored the page.

Nope Paulie I wouldn't refund for "I can't afford it." After someone has ordered and you have to fund the product. Also the person who thought they were buying the object. I see that under photos on eBay all the time. Must be a language thing. You are not buying the item, you are buying a photograph."

Seems obvious and silly, but here we are. It's the Internet. 

I suppose both of these problems would make a case for working through FAA or someone who does the fullfillment and will take the return on your behalf. I'd still say, neither qualifies.

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on November 06, 2013, 20:18

Do you think FAA would allow someone to return a print because they couldn't afford it? I know they say for any reason, but perhaps the way they regulate that is that the purchaser has to return the unwanted print to FAA, which discourages  things like the two examples the OP gave (thought they were buying the product or couldn't afford $300).

Who knows what FAA mean by any of their stated policies?
I've already gone over the disconnect between the their stated referral policy, and the reality; and have also mentioned in the past their 'third row sponsorship disconnect', whereby on their sponsorship page it says:

"Artwork Page Sponsorships
...
Each time someone visits one of your sponsored pages, your images will appear in the third row (in addition to wherever they would have normally appeared without your sponsorship).   It's a great way to ensure that your images are prominently displayed whenever someone searches for keywords that pertain specifically to your artwork."

The truth is that the third line sponsorship doesn't stop with the first four people who 'sponsor' the word. Any number of people can do so and the third line rotates images, which isn't as promised on the sponsorship page.
It is admitted in point 30 in the FAQ:
http://fineartamerica.com/contactus.html?tab=faq (third page)