HOW TO WIN A-z CLAIMS, V. 2.0
Reformatted for Discourse

I’ve taken my original sequence of claim examples and reformatted them into a single post, with capsule descriptions of each claim, making it easier to find the one most relevant to any particular situation. I 've retained the Introductory Matter from my original post.

I’ve also included my annual reviews of our A-z claim results at the bottom of the list.

The original thread is longer, has posts from numerous other users, and some questions answered that I didn’t duplicate here. I’ve included a link to the original thread at the bottom of this post.

Click “Content” to read any given section.

bunga bunga!

---

• Introductory matter

Content

Many you have written privately and said "Bunga, you –

sorry let me start again.

One or two o

In the fantasy world inside my head, many of you have written privately and said “Bunga, you always say that no, the customer doesn’t always win A-z claims. But how do you do it, Bunga? HOW DO YOU WIN A-Z CLAIMS???”

When asked so nicely, even if it is by the voices inside my head, how can I but share?

We see a lot on these boards about how to deal with scamming customers, but I cannot recall any lengthy discussion of how to win A-z claims. So I’m kicking it off by discussing our experience, and how we’ve won them. I hope others will chime in with theirs.

We have 51 closed A-z claims visible through Seller Central. Here is the tally of how they came out:

We voluntarily refunded: 20
Claim was granted and refund given out of our account: 10
Claim was closed (denied): 9
Claim was granted and Amazon funded: 7
Claim was withdrawn: 4
Order was canceled: 1

The voluntary refund claims arise for a variety of reasons, the customer thinking it was the appropriate way to ask for a refund being a big one, our delay in processing the refund another, and the item not having reached us yet a third. Some customers feel the right move (or perhaps the Amazon CSR does) is to file A-z the instant tracking shows the item has arrived back at our doorstep. This is something we need to get better about, getting our refund processing done quickly. But I am leaving the voluntary refund category out of further discussion because there is no actual dispute – in almost all of those cases we were already willing to refund.

Of the remaining 31 cases, we “won” 16 of them, where I define winning as not having to pay, either because the claim was denied, or because Amazon paid. Ten were paid forcibly out of our account, four were withdrawn, and one was a ridiculous A-z claim filed by an Amazon CSR because an order had not been canceled as requested – which was because of an Amazon processing glitch. (And the customer had called Amazon to chew THEM out for their part in the problems with her order while praising US . . . such are the vagaries of Amazon Customer Service).

So we’re winning (I’ll stop using the quotation marks from now on, and you’ll know I’m using the above definition) about 50% of our claims. As such you can understand why it works my nerves when sellers contend with magnificent ignorance that “The customer always wins A-z claims”. He most certainly does not.

One secret to winning A-z claims is knowing what your goal is. Sometimes it is going for the outright win – “We are allowed to charge restocking” or “We have not received this return, so of course we haven’t refunded.” Other times there is a more subtle strategy that involves playing for a paid-by-Amazon win. That’s where you try to make it clear that the situation is so muddied that Amazon cannot properly find for either side. It is precisely those circumstances where Amazon should step in and pay the claim in order to resolve it, and they often do. It’s important to know which of those you are going for when you respond to a claim.

I would also recommend keeping your response relatively short (not that I always do), giving as much information as is necessary and no more, and be forthright. You do not have to be a shrinking violet. If you have a case, make it! Someone wants to take money from you – the least you can do is put up a strong defense.

Finally, it of course helps to know Amazon’s rules and conduct your business properly. Sending out product with missing parts, for example, is going to make it a lot harder to win at A-z time, no matter how carefully you craft your response.

Below I give two examples of each outcome (Claim Closed, Claim Granted/Amazon Funded) – the claims, and our responses. I have edited out identifying information to protect the innocent.

bunga bunga!

(I later posted this addendum to my introduction.)

As I reread my post, I think that this:

“Finally, it of course helps to know Amazon’s rules and conduct your business properly. Sending out product with missing parts, for example, is going to make it a lot harder to win at A-z time, no matter how carefully you craft your response.”

was the best advice I gave as to how to win a claim – reach showdown with a hand that can actually win. After that there’s a little strategy, yes, but it provides only a certain amount of help in winning. The biggest thing you can do to help yourself win an A-z claim is make very sure you are operating within the rules, and that you respond to the claim properly.

To elaborate just a touch, here are some suggestions, cribbed from those of that late, great poster adamofdestruction, as to how to handle the claim when it comes in:

Tell the customer yes, you will be happy to refund. That should be at the very top of your e-mail. Make sure it is enthusiastic - “We will be happy to provide you with a full refund upon return of the item should that be the appropriate course of action” or whatever.

Don’t request photos, serial numbers, etc. Don’t argue with the customer. Don’t engage in Q&A.

Respond to the claim! And do it on the web page, not by responding to the e-mail. Failure to respond is an insta-lose.

If you’ve done those things, and followed Amazon’s rules during the transaction – you’ve shipped a complete product that matches the description, packed properly, etc. – you have put yourself in the best possible position to win a claim.

• Claim #1: Item not as described (item not returned, refund not given)

Content

(The claim was not, in fact, for item not as described – it was for a refund not given.)

Claim text: “refund not issued for return”.

Our response: "We’re sorry to hear there is a problem with this return. We have not received the item back, and as such, cannot issue a refund. If the buyer has tracking or other proof of delivery we would be happy to review the matter further, but we do not have this item in stock, and we have looked around to see if we have it sitting somewhere. As far as we can tell the item has not been returned to us. Once it is, we will be happy to issue a refund. Please note that this is a customer discretionary return, not a return because of an error on our part. It is incumbent on the customer to get the item back to us. Amazon suggests, as do we in our return info e-mail, that a trackable method be used for returns. We hope the customer has tracking info that we can review. In the meantime, we can only refund if we receive the item back. "

Result: Claim closed (denied)

Notes: A no-brainer – we don’t have to refund if we don’t have the item.

• Claim #2: Item not received (freight forwarder)

Content

Claim text: “not received missed edd”

Our response: “Customer is a freight forwarder. USPS tracking shows this item was delivered on November 20. As Amazon has ruled previously on A-z, professional freight forwarders need to be responsible for receipt and throughput of their own shipments. Please deny this claim.”

Result: Claim closed (denied)

Notes: This shows the power of the magic words “freight forwarder”. Amazon understands the issues associated with such folks and favors the seller in these instances, in our experience.

• Claim #3: Item not as described (correct item was sent)

Content

Claim text: “Two reasons for this claim. There are three listings under People’s Front. One of them Amazon sells, it is Judean People’s Front, the other, the one I tried to purchase, is entitled People’s Front of Judea. The appear different, slightly, and have different titles and asking prices. The People’s Front of Judea, as far as I can discover does not exist. So the listing is bogus. When I received the Judean People’s Front instead I contacted the seller and his attitude was basically buyer beware. You can read our emails. So I returned them and he charged me a $7.83 ‘restocking fee’ plus I paid for the return shipping, $5.85. I am claiming I should have pain NOTHING. I did nothing wrong, made no ‘mistakes’. I definitely have buyers remorse though. Over $12 for a seller error, why?”

Our response: “Customer has already been refunded less restocking for this discretionary return. The item shipped was the item ordered, ISBN 0123456789. Please deny this claim. ******* Here are further details in case you want them. ******** The customer is changing her story, a not-uncommon practice for her through our correspondence. Her first e-mail states ‘The tracking shows that this front was delivered but it was not! . . .’. Her second e-mail states ‘You sent me a different front than the one pictured’ (meaning she had, after all, received it). Her third e-mail states ‘I am sorry. This is the same front. I did receive what you sold me, what I don’t understand is why it is so much money.’ ******** Note well that final statement – ‘This is the same front. I did receive what you sold me.’ ******** Since then she has just been complaining about the price she paid. We told her we’d take it back, and we did. We told her in our return instructions the same thing we tell everyone, that she could return it, and how the restocking fees work. We refunded her less restocking. ******** Now she thinks she can change her story again and say that we didn’t, after all, send what she ordered. Well, we did. It has the correct ISBN and we sent it, and she affirmed that in her third e-mail. ******** We are allowed under Amazon’s rules to withhold restocking and not refund original shipping, and that is what we have done in this case. Please deny this claim.”

Result: Claim Granted / Amazon Funded

Notes: I can’t honestly say I was playing for the “Amazon Funded” result here, but it didn’t surprise me either. The story is so convoluted and the amount in dispute so small ($11ish) that it made sense for Amazon to just pay. I particularly enjoyed the buyer saying “You can read our emails” – which, if actually read, showed the ever-shifting nature of her story.

• Claim #4: Item not received (but customer also sent a return request)

Content

Claim text: “I never got this book.”

Our response: "Customer appears to be confused. Simultaneously with this A-z claim, as Amazon can see, she sent a return request claiming that it was an Unauthorized Purchase. ‘Return reason: Unauthorized purchase Buyer comments: Don’t know who ordered this.’ So she is simultaneously saying that she never got it, and that she did get it - wants to return it - doesn’t know who ordered it. Well, which is it? ******** Meanwhile, tracking shows this item was delivered on July 19. ******** Customer sounds like a scammer to us, given that in her first e-mail she started with ‘I’ve check with all my neighbors’ which no one ever says. She appears to be experienced in claiming things were lost. ******** Anyway, tracking shows it was delivered, and the customer is making conflicting statements, so we ask that this claim be denied. "

Result: Claim Granted / Amazon Funded

Notes: I was definitely going for the Denied win here and didn’t get it, but I will take the Amazon funded version. It’s very unusual for me to out-and-out state that I think the buyer is scamming, but it seemed so in this case.

• Claim #5: Item not as described (unauthorized purchase)

Content

(Actually she is claiming, and had claimed in an e-mail to us, that this was an unauthorized purchase. We sent our regular return info including mention of restocking fees.)

Claim text: “The cu received unauthorized order from a third party seller, she already contacted the seller and request a prepaid label to return the item however the seller requires a postage return label to the cu. Cu dont want to pay the postage label. Customer request some assistance to get a prepaid label that she can use to return the item for free and get a full refund.”

Our response: “Well Amazon, we have to ask once again that you train your customer service staff to handle things properly and not file A-z claims when they should not be filed. ******** Although this claim is for ‘Item Not As Described’, that is not what the claim is, but for the record what we shipped is in fact the item that was ordered. Rather, the claim the buyer is making is that this was an ‘unauthorized purchase’. She further complains that she should not have to pay to return the item. ******** As Amazon knows, whether or not this is an ‘unauthorized purchase’ has nothing to do with us. We received an order through Amazon and we shipped it. How could an Amazon CSR possibly have filed an A-z claim against US? We had nothing to do with the order being placed – why are we being held responsible and having a black mark put on our record? The Amazon rep should not have filed this claim. ******** Under Amazon’s rules regarding a customer discretionary return we are not required to pay return shipping, we will not be refunding original shipping, and we will be charging our normal restocking fee for this item. If this customer has a problem with us following Amazon’s rules regarding a purchase that was made from us through her account, she needs to deal with either Amazon or the ‘unauthorized’ party who placed the order – but this is not our problem. ******** Since we are not required to pay return shipping on a customer discretionary return, whether the customer thinks it was an unauthorized purchase or not, we ask that you deny this claim. ///////// More importantly, we ask that you TRAIN THIS CSR so that he will know from now on that this is not a reason that a claim should be filed.”

Result: Claim Closed (denied)

Notes: Should have been a no-brainer, and one hopes it was. We cannot be held accountable for “unauthorized purchases” through buyer accounts. It is their responsibility, not ours, to secure their account against misuse.

• Claim #6: Item not as described (freight forwarder, claim of damage)

Content

Claim text: “book is severely damaged”

Our response: "This customer is a freight forwarder. We told the customer we would accept his return because he is still within the return period, but his report of damage has been made too late, since it has been 17 days. Our guess is that this item was discovered to be damaged when the freight forwarder’s foreign recipient received it, and he is now trying to cause us to absorb the cost. ******** Information on this customer can be seen here: (link) and here (link). Note that he is listed as an importer and exporter. ******** Tracking for this item can be seen here: (link), and shows that it was delivered on July 10. ******** Customer waited 17 days, until today, July 27, to report damage to this item. As Amazon knows, the damage reporting period is 14 days. We are not required to accept a damage claim after this long, although we will still accept a return. ******** It seems probable that this customer reshipped the item on July 10 when he received it, and now, 17 days later, the item has arrived damaged at its final destination and he is attempting to blame us. As Amazon knows, we are not responsible for damage that occurs once a freight forwarder has received an item. ********As we told the customer, he is still within the return period, and we will accept the return. This A-z claim is an obvious attempt to cause us to pay for the return, and to avoid restocking fees. ******** Because the customer is a freight forwarder and this damage claim has been made too late, we ask that it be denied. "

Result: Claim Closed (denied)

Notes: I’m completely convinced this person forwarded our item out of the country, it was damaged en route, and he was trying to fix blame on us for that. Rereading the end of my response above I think my logic got a little muddled; “This A-z claim is an obvious attempt to cause us to pay for the return, and to avoid restocking fees” may be true as far as it goes, but it’s a side issue compared to “This item was damaged after it was delivered to the customer and therefore we are not responsible”. All was well that ended well, however.

This claim again shows the power of the words “freight forwarder”. The reason I gave links to info about this person is that the shipping address was just a regular name and address, not a Doral, FL address with numbers on it indicative of freight forwarding, so I thought I’d better hammer the point home. (And believe me I was happy when I Googled this person’s name and saw that he was a freight forwarder. Suddenly I could see exactly what had happened, and knew we would win the claim.)

• Claim #7: Item not as described (customer returned damaged item, we refunded 50%)

Content

(Customer returned damaged item, we advised the refund would be 50% or we would return the book to her. This is before we became aware, or perhaps before it became more clear to us, that the “or we’ll send this back to you” option is not really something we can force under Amazon’s rules).

Claim text: “The customer wasnt happy of the resolution the seller offered to her. The customer confirmed that as they received the book they sent it back to the seller. The customer wants to be refunded accordingly on the item they returned.”

Our response: “This customer seems to have a difficult relationship with the truth. ******** On November 1 this customer sent a return request that said the return reason was that she found a better price, and that ‘I cancelled this order prior to shipping and it still arrived’. That is not true. There is no cancellation request in Buyer/Seller Messaging regarding this order. ******** When the book returned to us, we informed the customer that it had not been returned in new condition, telling her that that the book was removed from shrinkwrap, creased on the back cover, and torn on the back cover. Given that the book was damaged and no longer in new condition we offered the customer a 50% refund per Amazon’s policies regarding returns of damaged items, or that we would return the book to her. ******** Since then it has simply been the customer telling us over and over that the book is not damaged – despite that fact that we have it in hand and can see that it is damaged. She also states (that problem she has with the truth again) that she could not have mixed up the books (which was the guess we offered as to how his happened, that she sent us the other book she bought) saying in her e-mail that ‘I could not have mixed up the books because I only had one book’. Yet she stated earlier that she had found a better price at a bookstore and presumably bought the book there, otherwise why would she be returning the item at all? ******** We are guessing the customer bought a damaged book and is attempting to return it to us in place of the new, in-shrinkwrap book we sent her. But even if that is not the case, under Amazon’s rules we are allowed to charge 50% restocking for a book returned to us in damaged condition. ******** We will put through that refund now, and we would like you to close this claim.”

Result: Claim Granted/Amazon Funded (more accurately, we gave the 50% refund, the claim was closed, then the buyer and Amazon exchanged e-mails and Amazon gave her the other 50% of the $200).

Notes: We stood our ground regarding this return being damaged and won. However, the buyer engaged in continued e-mails with Amazon and Amazon eventually appears to have forked over the rest of the money. I believe this is because the buyer is an educator. I’ve noticed that Amazon shows a certain softness toward teachers in their resolution of A-z claims.

We don’t, however. If we receive a damaged book in return, we’re not going to say “Oh, we’ll eat the $200, no problem . . .” regardless of the vocation of the buyer.

My hypothesis about the buyer “mixing up the books” could be totally incorrect. However, it is an example, sort of, of what I described above regarding the strategy of muddying the waters so that Amazon will pick up the ball and refund. (Not exactly, however, since we were already going to refund 50% for the damaged item.) Also note that when trying to muddy the waters, saying the buyer is confused or lying helps.

• Claim #8: Item not as described (different from what was ordered, but it was not)

Content

Subreason: Completely different from what was ordered

Claim text: “I ordered Judean People’s Front by John Cleese, but instead received People’s Front of Judea by Michael Palin”. (names and authors changed, but the titles did have some similarity)

Our response: "This book was delivered on August 26. Customer wrote to us on September 24 stating the item she received was not the item she ordered. This is well outside the 14 day material difference reporting period, and we explained that to her. ******** Because this customer reported this claimed material difference well outside the 14 day reporting period, we ask that you deny this claim. "

Result: Claim Closed (Denied)

Notes: This is an important example because it shows that Amazon does stick to the 14 day reporting period for material difference. (That period is stated explicitly in the help for Used BMVD, but not for New as in this case.) Customer was still within the 30 day return period, but because she was outside of the 14 day material difference reporting period Amazon denied this claim.

It also shows that short and sweet can win the claim. Elaborate explanations are not required.

My suspicion is that this buyer was BSing us . . . it should not take that long to notice you’ve received the wrong book. But we’ll never know.

• Claim #9: Item not received (buyer gave incorrect address)

Content

Claim text: “Item was sent to incorrect address, contacted seller to sent item or forward it to the correct address since the other one doesnt exist, seller refused, he said the item was delivered, the incorrect address does not exist”

Our response: "This claim has been made too early. An A-z claim cannot be filed until 3 days after the delivery period, which for this order is Dec 12, 2014 to Dec 30, 2014. Amazon’s rules state: ‘Buyers can first file a claim after the earlier of 3 calendar days after the maximum estimated delivery date, or 30 days after the order date.’ Neither of those has passed yet. This claim should be denied on that basis alone. ******** Please read the buyer-seller correspondence if you choose to adjudicate this based on this ‘incorrect address’ claim being made by the buyer. As the buyer states in her e-mail of 6:42 pm on December 16, ‘Item went to the wrong address because the shipping address was entered wrong by mistake…’ As you can see, the buyer GAVE US the wrong address; we shipped to the address she gave us. ******** The item shows as delivered by USPS to that incorrect address. We cannot be financially responsible if a buyer gives the wrong address for her shipment. Our job is to deliver to the address we are given and we have done that. ******** Because this claim has been filed before a claim is allowed to be filed, and because the customer by her own admission gave us an incorrect address and we delivered to that address, we ask that this claim be denied. P.S. In the past Amazon has had a tendency to pay claims like this itself. We think it more appropriate that the customer absorb the cost of her own error. Also please note that it is a common scam to give a fake address and then claim non-delivery. "

Result: Claim Granted (Amazon Funded)

Notes: This is a typical Amazon-pays/wrong shipping address claim. In cases of incorrect addresses given by the buyer, there are two possibilities. If the tracking shows that the item has been “Delivered” and there is no evidence that the item is returning to the seller, Amazon will refund the buyer out of its own pocket. If tracking shows the item is on its way back to the seller, Amazon will (in the old days) refund the buyer out of the seller’s pocket and tell the seller that he’ll get the item back when it returns, or (more recently) mark the claim with “Waiting for seller to refund the buyer”. In the latter case, they usually check back in a week or so, sometimes forcibly refunding the buyer from the seller’s pocket, presumably if they can see the item has not returned but is on its way back, and sometimes (it appears) waiting longer.

My plea that the claim be denied based on its being untimely did not succeed; neither did my recommendation that Amazon not pay for this buyer’s error.

• Claim #10: Item not as described (buyer not receiving our emails)

Content

Claim text: “I tried to contact the seller a few days ago, sending a description of my problem as well as pictures and have not heard back since. I would like a replacement rather than a refund.”

Our response: "As Amazon can see in Buyer / Seller messaging, contrary to the buyer’s assertion that he has not heard from us, we responded to his e-mail yesterday, January 5. We explained to him in that e-mail that we would not be able to replace the item, so we would give him a full refund, and offered him a postpaid return label. We have to assume that the customer did not receive this e-mail, since he now claims not to have heard from us. ******** We will be happy to provide this customer a refund once we have received the item in return, and we will also provide a postpaid return label so that he can return the item, as stated in our e-mail. ******** We believe your normal process at this point is to put the claim into Waiting for seller to refund status, so please do that, and find out from the customer whether or not he would like to receive the postpaid return label. (Or we can just send one, but if this customer didn’t receive our last e-mail we wonder if he will receive the next one.) ******** If you would prefer, you can of course deny the claim, since we did offer a postpaid return to the customer. He is saying he would prefer a replacement, but as we have explained, that is not an option, as we do not have any more copies of this book. "

Result: Claim Closed (Denied)

Notes: Sometimes a customer simply doesn’t receive your e-mails. He gets angry, you get frustrated. Sometimes he then files an A-z claim.

Fortunately Buyer/Seller messaging tells all, and pointing out to Amazon that you have, in fact, responded to the buyer is (unsurprisingly) the winning strategy. It is also not surprising that when Amazon e-mailed the buyer for, we assume, some response to our e-mail saying “Here is our return info” and +they+ received no response, they closed the claim. A person who can’t receive e-mail can’t be helped, and Amazon knows that isn’t the seller’s fault.

Amazon did not, in fact, put this into “waiting for refund” status. Instead, they asked us to send return info, which we did. The buyer never responded either to us or Amazon, and that was that.

• Claim #11: Item not as described (customer changes story from return request simply wanting to return, to A-z claim stating item was defective)

Content

Here’s a situation often discussed on the forums: a buyer switching from simply wanting to return something, to an A-z claiming the item is defective. Some on the forums claim that the buyer will automatically win the claim, so the seller should just man up and pay return shipping and not charge restocking. Our experience is different.

Claim text: “Customer purchased book as a gift for her granddaughter that is due in January. Book was received in less than new appearance with the top of the binding being crumpled in and debris all over book. Customer wanted to return the book but was told by seller that they cannot verify condition of book. Customer is upset over perceived implication of lying. Customer believes restocking fee for substandard product is unfair and unreasonable…”

Our response: "Customer’s story regarding this transaction seems to be ‘evolving’. You can see the customer’s e-mails in buyer/seller messaging. ******** This item was apparently purchased by the Customer as a gift for her daughter. ******** Customer’s first e-mail to us requested return information, and made no mention of there being any damage to this item. We agreed to accept the return and sent return information. ******** Customer’s daughter, for whom this was a present, then wrote us using the Customer’s account and asked us to waive the restocking fee. There was no mention of any damage to the item in this, the second e-mail on this topic. ******** We responded saying no, we won’t waive restocking. At that point customer’s daughter wrote us from her own account claiming the item was damaged. After some back and forth there, customer has now filed an A-z claim, claiming that the item was damaged. ******** Amazon, there had been two separate e-mails to us regarding returning this item, and neither mentioned damage. Only after learning that restocking fees would be due and that we would not waive them did the customer discover that the item was damaged. That alleged damage could have – should have – been brought up in either of the two earlier e-mails, but it was not. ******** While we don’t say that the customer is simply trying to avoid the fees by claiming the item is damaged, we do say that it is our policy that damage must be mentioned in the first contact regarding a return – not the third one, and not after the customer has been complaining about the restocking fee. ******** Because we agreed to take this item as a discretionary return, because we are allowed to assess restocking fees, and because the customer waited until the third contact, and after complaining about the fees, to mention that the item was supposedly damaged, we ask that this claim be denied. "

When we received the book, we added to the claim response that there was no visible damage to the item.

Result: Order Refunded, as we had said we would do, with both original shipping and restocking withheld from the refund.

Notes: The buyer cannot change his story between the initial return request and an A-z claim. A buyer must report damage in the first contact; he cannot wait to do so until he learns that he will have costs associated with his return. We were able to refund while withholding both original shipping and restocking. It did help our case that the buyer was rather blatant in her change of story, and that she had complained about the restocking fees in writing prior to the change.

Continued in next post.