Misrepresentation

Does the trade descriptions act exist in SL?

The reason I ask is that I saw a lovely, lovely suit on a blog yesterday. (Black and white gingham in case you're interested. It's classier and less twee than it sounds.) I nipped on over to the shop, found said suit and purchased.

I was so excited I rezzed and opened the box right there and then. The shop was virtually empty other than my friend Q so I didn't mind changing. I rifled through the box checking what was there. Pants - check. Jacket, complete with various options of with and without waistcoast and open and closed front - check. Waistcoat, separate - check. Shirt - erm....

I checked the picture in the shop again. Yes, there is a shirt in the picture. I rechecked the box to make sure the shirt wasn't hidden under one of the jackets or something. No, no shirt.

Don't get me wrong, it's not a big issue. I have a really nice black shirt that does go rather well with the suit, as it happens, so it's not like the suit is unwearable. And it is a really nice suit so I don't want to slag off the designer in any way at all. I guess my issue is just a point of principal. If the picture of a product shows an item should it necessarily state that said item does not come with the purchase?

With this suit there was a note at the bottom of the poster saying what jacket options came with the suit, and the pants and stuff. And there was no mention of the shirt. So I guess I shouldn't be surprised. But what's the etiquette? Do most stores explicitly state when a displayed item is not part of the purchase rather than just listing the items that are included?