the original post from Wendy suggested that she thought she was overcharged, which appeared she wasn't.
Appears she wasn't overcharged even though the 'evidence' put up included loads of stuff she didn't have, until the rip off value was reached - seriously do you honestly believe she wasn't overcharged???!!
Well let me talk you through it in a parallel situation
Wendy wants to buy a car
Your Hisaronu example advertises a car at a certain price, sells her the car and Wendy reflects that it was really expensive for the car.
Your example vendor says that is the price, it was clearly and universally advertised, you fool for agreeing to it if you think it is too much.
In this example, Wendy goes in to buy a car and expects a fair price. Later, she reflects that it was really expensive for the car.
In our example, the dealer says this is nonsense, they have never sold a car to Wendy.
Then they say they did, and produce a receipt which suggests Wendy bought a car, and a quad bike, and a set of tyres, and an air freshener.
Both examples prey on the human trait of trust that they will be treated fairly - I suppose the difference is that you looked at the Hisaronu place and found details on the pricing - well that's what you said anyway.
The idea that people who trust that the price will be fair, then become fair game to overcharge is repulsive - can you disagree with that?
