They decided to order the dress one size larger than the sample.
"The odd thing was... the [owner's] daughter disappeared in the back and came back in a minute or two. She said the manufacturer only had this size in stock," Templeton said.
Templeton said she had to put down a $230 deposit before the store would allow her to take photos of Amelia in the dress. So she did.
The mother and daughter received a call that the dress was in, and they returned to the store on May 29.
"They had a rolling rack with five or six dresses on it. The dresses were in clear zippered garment bags and looked like they were stuffed with tissue to hold their shape," Templeton said. "Except for one dress -- it had one crumpled tissue paper over it with a dry cleaner plastic bag over it. Seemed so strange."
"We realized this was the same sample Amelia tried on back in March. Same sequins missing on the shoulder and missing pieces of lace," Templeton said. "The bottom of the dress was chiffon but now was crumpled with at least three different stains. One looked like drizzled icing, one maybe an oil stain? Puckers, a snag and then it looked like someone ripped an entire seam."
Templeton asked about the imperfections, and Seng said that they were having problems with the manufacturer, Templeton said.
"I mentioned it had the same wear and tear as the sample Amelia tried on previously. She then went and got her husband," she said.
Templeton wasn't satisfied.
"When I asked for an invoice dated after March 17, showing that they did indeed order a new dress for Amelia, he went to 50 percent off," Templeton said. "The bottom line is they substituted a worn sample for first quality goods. And insisted that the designer has been shipping very poor quality this year."
