Detailed Instructions: Given a real-life anecdote of a complex ethical situation, generate a suitable title that describes the main event/root cause of the situation. Imagine that the given text is a social media post, and you have to write the title of the post, so the users can decide to read the main text or not.
Problem:Last week I purchased a Volcano on ebay for $300. For those of you that dont know, the Volcano is a vaporizer that is used for the ole devils lettuce. Its a tank of a unit thats known for  for its sturdiness and basically lasting forever. The unit was described as used which I figured was fine - maybe some scuffs or some residue but whatever. The listing also described and pictured a traveling case. Cool.

 I get it a week later and the case has a hole in the back the size of a quarter. My friend points out that you could fit the plug through so you can just keep it in the case the whole time when using it. It made sense and then I didnt care so much.

Then i go to plug it up and see the grounding prong is missing on the power cable, but theres still a hole im the cable as if one had been there before. I contacted the manufacturer of the vape with the serial number and confirm that its a 2011 unit and should, in fact, have a ground prong.The Volcano uses up 100 - 111 watts of electricity when its on. Neither of these defects were pictured (although the hole in the case I dont care so much about). 

I take pictures and open up a refund request on ebay. The seller offered me a $20 refund because it was "fully operational" (he is correct, it does turn on and function) and he "only sold it cause he was in a motorcycle accident and needed money." 

 
I rejected the refund and want to pursue a full refund through ebay if necessary but kind of feel bad too. I know it functions, but but the cable just sketches me out, as well as the fact that he imtentiomally chose not to picture either thing. WIBTA?
Solution:
asking for a full refund