Non payment


I meant inventory COG is 150k. Unfortunately, it was just that counterfeit claim. I know that Amazon takes counterfeit claims extremely seriously, but I find it odd that sales are going through my account and I have been reinstated. Luckily, I can remove my inventory. I sat far too long on this in hopes it would get cleared up. This monday will be my 4th payout that they have refused to pay me, so I have about 3 months saved up.

The law firm sent me an email letting me know that the escalations team stated that my money will be held until the counterfeit claim is retracted by the person that placed it. Looks like I will be placing some removal orders this weekend.


The Law Firm needs to do their job and find out where the claim came from. Tortuous Interference.


Just to clarify: Are your outstanding loans from Amazon Lending?


I have one (very high amount) loan from Amazon Lending. I have another one from an outside lender. Similar concept to Amazon. Both 12 month loans, so fairly high payback per month.


Was this false counterfeit claim by any chance made by Clara? I am asking because there is a whole thread about this which was an amazon string and may have useful info for you and your lawyer to help expedite.


I’m guessing you’re thinking of the long “Clara Dufour-MariaDiaz-FictitiousBuyer(s)-RiverStreet,SeattleAddress-OpenSquare-Amazon-admitted sting/EPEG lawsuit/O+Z Brand Protection” thread that began last November?

If so, and the particulars of that situation do apply to the OP @bookseller3’s case - s/he mentions Amazon having reinstated his/her SoA Account upthread, as many of the common posters to that thread reported was (eventually) the case for their own - then you may well have rendered superlative service to his/her goal of satisfactory resolution; as it is generally the case that the less legwork an attorney need do, the fewer are the hours that will be billed, your heads-up could prove rather valuable…

I suspect that even the most casual of observers might agree that this is “the money quote” from that thread:


I would be looking for a more aggressive attorney that specializes in IP issues. Your loss from that malicious act has damaged you. This seems like a good case, your sales from what you said are high enough to justify seeking consultation from an attorney regarding actions against the person making the claim.

Those buyers claiming “counterfeit” ARE NOT experts, even if the book is counterfeit the buyer has ZERO qualifications to assert the legitimacy of the book.


Even if the complainant is an expert, it is still malicious that one claim is causing dispersal holdup. Have to get in touch with AMZ Legal and explain to them.
The good news is since one of the loans is AMZ that one could be put in abeyance until the claim is settled or a judgement is made about the claim. You might need better representation as this is dragging on too long.


I went through the exact same ordeal last January in a lawsuit against O&Z. It took 3 months to reinstate, 4 months to get my money released, and 12 months to release inventory. PM if you’d like more info.


Unless you can prove the person who claimed the book
was counterfeit acted with malicious intent–they knew the
book was not counterfeit–,I doubt you can sue them. They
are not responsible for the atrocious way Amazon has
treated you. Amazon alone is responsible for holding your
money well beyond any reasonable length of time.

Once Amazon reinstated your account and essentially acquitted
you of any wrongdoing, they should have immediately removed
the hold on your funds. Once the reason for holding your money
disappeared, so did their right to hold your money. Amazon is the
reason you are having this liquidity problem, not the person who
filed the complaint. This is all Amazon’s doing.


Its pretty hard to complain a book is counterfeit, and not know if it was or not. To make a counterfeit claim against a company would go down on the buyer more than the seller. You cant just falsely claim counterfeit against businesses and damage their business and way of living without proof of it. The OP should definitely find legal recourse against the false counterfeit claim if he is 100% sure the book isnt himself.


Obviously, if the buyer had not filed the complaint,
the seller would not be having this problem. However,
if Amazon had removed the hold on the seller’s funds
once it resolved the authenticity issue in seller’s favor,
then the seller would not be having the liquidity crisis.
In other words, if Amazon was not dragging their feet,
this complaint would not have caused the seller this
much trouble. There is no excuse for Amazon’s

When you think about it, the seller is really the victim
of both the buyer and Amazon. In my opinion, Amazon
is the main culprit.


Buyer most likely wanted to return the product without spending return shipping or something along those lines. Without his complaint Amazon would never have started the counterfeit/IP issues with the seller. The buyer is the main culprit and caused this length of issues. Amazon has to do what is required legally, with even more penalties constantly being created against Amazon because of counterfeits and IP infringement. They have to take certain steps to ensure its not actually happening, etc.

There is a clear main culprit that caused these to occur, and that is the buyer. Buyers think damaging a seller so they dont pay $5-10 in return shipping is the better option, and the buyer should be held fully responsible for his claims.


I’m with ya 1000%. You could have a potential lawsuit against person who made false claim.


Technically if they suspend his account he could potentially sue the buyer.


You know, I think some people have become so accustomed
to the arrogant and arbitrary business practices of Amazon that
they don’t realize how insane they are.

One customer complains about the authenticity of 1 book that was
bought from a long-time Amazon bookseller. On the basis of just
that 1 complaint, which might involve less than $25, Amazon is
holding $65,000 of the seller’s money. And doing it even after they
resolved the issue in the seller’s favor. How does that even make
any sense?

Imagine you are a company that sells bicycles to Walmart. Walmart
gets 30 days credit to pay you. And one customer complains about the
safety of one of your bicycles. No one else has complained about this bicycle. And Walmart responds by cancelling orders for all your bicycles and refuses to pay you for any bicycles they purchased but haven’t paid
for yet. At least until they investigate this customer’s complaint. And then,
1 week later, they tell you the customer’s complaint had no merit, but
they are still not ready to pay you for your bikes. And they won’t tell you
when they will pay you.

Would Walmart or any business operate like this?


Speak to a lawyer might be able to send a demand

Also might be able to sue for lost wages/damages

Might even be able to claim bad faith since your loans are with Amazon. Basically their causing you to miss your loan on purpose. If your able to make a case for bad faith or wrong doing that could mean retirement money.


First of all, there is no law that requires Amazon to suspend the
seller’s account and freeze his funds because he received a
complaint from 1 customer for 1 book.

Amazon could have notified the seller of the issue, ask for his
side of the story and say they will investigate it. But take no
action against the seller unless they find the book was counterfeit.

They could have said that given the seller’s history as an Amazon
bookseller, they will presume he was innocent unless found guilty.
Or they could have said they will not pay the seller the amount the
book sold for until they finish investigating the complaint. But no
more than that amount.

But to suspend the account and hold $65,000 because of 1
complaint is insane. And to add insult to injury, refuse to release
the seller’s money even after they decided the complaint lacked
merit and reinstated his account.

How can you blame Amazon’s unfair practices on the buyer?


Because the buyer lied to gain something caused monetary damages that you can sue for


Something just occurred to me. You said, “You cant just falsely claim counterfeit against businesses and damage their business and way of
living without proof of it.”

I agree with you. But isn’t that what Amazon is basically doing?
Presuming the seller is guilty without any proof and penalizing him?

And, even after they found him innocent, still penalizing him?

Based on what you said, the object of your criticism should be Amazon,
not the seller.