New options to report seller-fulfilled returns issues
If you receive a return in a used, damaged, defective, or materially different condition, then you can charge a restocking fee from the buyer.
To charge a restocking fee:
- Go to Orders.
- Click Manage returns and select your order.
- Click Issue refund.
- Click Charge restocking fee on the Refund orders page.
You can now grade the condition of the returned item. On the Charge restocking fee page, select a description from the drop-down, upload a photo, and provide more detail in the comments text box.
This information will allow us to confirm that the item wasn’t returned in its original condition. It will also help us to understand customer behavior so that we can protect you and other sellers from future returns issues.
To learn more, go to Issue a partial refund
New options to report seller-fulfilled returns issues
If you receive a return in a used, damaged, defective, or materially different condition, then you can charge a restocking fee from the buyer.
To charge a restocking fee:
- Go to Orders.
- Click Manage returns and select your order.
- Click Issue refund.
- Click Charge restocking fee on the Refund orders page.
You can now grade the condition of the returned item. On the Charge restocking fee page, select a description from the drop-down, upload a photo, and provide more detail in the comments text box.
This information will allow us to confirm that the item wasn’t returned in its original condition. It will also help us to understand customer behavior so that we can protect you and other sellers from future returns issues.
To learn more, go to Issue a partial refund
115 replies
Seller_vrNqvHw0YWCKr
What about with FBA? So many of our returns were clearly used for a party and/or event and then get returned to us after the party is over. We know this because they still have the party message on our product.
Seller_ENBrTBTSn3PDq
All sounds good, but what about the NEGATIVE FEEDBACK we receive because of charging the restocking fee (FBM)?
Will Amazon be removing negative feedback relating to stocking fees per case?
Seller_JELEnXFOrnw4L
What about going one step (or a mile) forward...
That ALL fba returns will be returned directly to the seller and not to Amazon?
Seller_NpCTTKHemfADL
So does this mean you are getting rid of Return at First Scan?
If not how will this be addressed? As RFS will always refund the buyer in full if buyer uses a seller faulted reason to avoid paying for return labels.
Seller_2UQL96K7Patvu
Nice. But, this has been around for awhile. At least for me it has.
Seller_0ceakZ4Ra5ZUs
How is this new? Was like this for over a year
Seller_5DrrKeHsDwIGT
you need to do a better policy. The restocking fee I might start doing that.
Seller_R2dP7Hunjcdj0
"New options to report seller-fulfilled returns issues"
Way to bury the lede here, Amazon!
What Amazon describes is NOT NEW at all when dealing with items Returned in "Materially Different Condition". This ability to issue a partial Refund in those cases already existed.
What Amazon FAILS to highlight is that the Seller can now ONLY charge Restocking Fees IF the product is Returned in "Materially Different Condition".
THIS IS THE ACTUAL NEW CHANGE: Amazon NOW EXPRESSLY FORBIDS withholding ANY Restocking Fees on items Returned in original condition.
This is a CHANGE to existing policy, and this change was executed with ZERO announcements nor any input from those affected BY the change.
For example, until now the Seller could withhold 20% of the item cost from the Refund as "Restocking Fees". It WAS a posted Amazon policy, and the amount of withholding depended on the product, NOT ONLY the product condition.
NOT ANY MORE!
So, what ARE "Restocking Fees" anyway?
RESTOCK: verb (used with or without object) - to stock again; replenish.
FEE: noun - a charge or payment for professional services.
Restocking Fees have a CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS meaning in the English language, and PRODUCT CONDITION has NOTHING to do with this meaning. Restocking Fees exist because the Seller has absorbed Expenses when originally executing their part of the contracted order, and these expenses would otherwise be LOST income for the Seller.
Could it simply be that Amazon no longer understands how to use a dictionary?
By their very definition, Restocking Fees are EXACTLY THAT: The Costs involved with accepting a Return and Restocking it back into inventory. Restocking Fees are an attempt to (at least partially) recoup the EXPENSES ALREADY LOST when the Seller processed the order.
These expenses include the gasoline involved in the transit of the item and package, the cost of packaging materials, the cost of labor to retrieve and process the order, and the labor cost in processing the Return and returning the item back to inventory. These costs are significant and occur EVEN IF the item is Returned in the Same Condition as when shipped.
What Amazon NOW considers to be "Restocking Fees" are ACTUALLY Partial Refunds issued on items Returned in Materially Different Condition from how they were when originally shipped.
This "NEW" policy is also thwarted by the existing RFS policy, which refunds orders under $100.00 when the Return shipping label is first scanned by the Return carrier. So, there is that contradiction to be dealt with as well.
To be clear: the availability for Sellers to issue Partial Refunds in situations such as this is NOT NEW, and has existed for at LEAST as long as I have been selling here.
What IS new is that 3rd Party Sellers are NOW expected to ABSORB all of the ACTUAL Restocking Fees on Buyer Error based Returns UNLESS the item is Returned in "Materially Different Condition".
The irony is that IF the item IS Returned in "Materially Different Condition", than it almost certainly can NOT be "Restocked" and "Resold", ESPECIALLY on Amazon. So IF you can NOT "Restock" it, than HOW can you charge "Restocking Fees"?
The ONLY Good Thing that the change is policy provides is that NOW, the Seller need no longer fear Negative Feedback for the Authorized Withholding of legitimate Restocking Fees on Returns based on Buyer error, since the Seller can NO LONGER withhold valid Restocking Fees.
No Restocking Fees withheld = No Negative Feedback for withholding Restocking Fees.
It SURE doesn't feel like an improvement, does it?
Amazon, as usual, you have taken a perfectly working system and DESTROYED it for no good reason.
Your platform is already the world's largest. People already use Amazon for purchases. YOU DID NOT NEED TO MAKE THIS POLICY CHANGE!
Your NEW actions have now made it markedly easier for Bad Actors to steal from 3rd Party Sellers by abusing the Amazon Return system, ESPECIALLY the since initiating the "Refund at First Scan" policy.
Worse, this NEW change to the existing Restocking Fees policy makes it actually possible for competitors to slowly bleed their competition by arranging for a continual series of orders and returns, causing a continual LOSS of funds to the original Seller. How did no one consider that?
AND Amazon will STILL not remove Negative Feedback received EVEN IN CASES where a partial Refund was issued precisely BECAUSE the item was Returned in "Materially Different Condition" and fees were withheld PER AMAZON POLICY.
So WHERE is the Seller Protection?
In THIS case, it is GONE!
To all Amazon employees, ask yourself this question: Why does Amazon continue to Strip-Away the very Seller protections that Amazon USED to offer? What is the goal here, to convince 3rd Party Sellers that Amazon is NOT a "Safe Place" to Sell products?
Because THAT is the message MANY of us are receiving from Amazon!
And I truly WISH it was not the case! I long for the "Good old days" of a few years back when Amazon ACTUALLY protected their 3rd Party Sellers.
Are those days Gone Forever?
Seller_nx8v7SMEX2ZBv
This guy asks me to cancel an order hours after i shipped . then he asks to cancel again after the tracking says it was at the post office and he picked it up . now he saying he cant do a return to refund him. whats wrong with these ppl they get away with this too often im not doing it refuse cancel due to shipped advise to call amazon customer service to walk through return. still asks to cancel and refund smh. shipping bought through amazon
New options to report seller-fulfilled returns issues
If you receive a return in a used, damaged, defective, or materially different condition, then you can charge a restocking fee from the buyer.
To charge a restocking fee:
- Go to Orders.
- Click Manage returns and select your order.
- Click Issue refund.
- Click Charge restocking fee on the Refund orders page.
You can now grade the condition of the returned item. On the Charge restocking fee page, select a description from the drop-down, upload a photo, and provide more detail in the comments text box.
This information will allow us to confirm that the item wasn’t returned in its original condition. It will also help us to understand customer behavior so that we can protect you and other sellers from future returns issues.
To learn more, go to Issue a partial refund
New options to report seller-fulfilled returns issues
If you receive a return in a used, damaged, defective, or materially different condition, then you can charge a restocking fee from the buyer.
To charge a restocking fee:
- Go to Orders.
- Click Manage returns and select your order.
- Click Issue refund.
- Click Charge restocking fee on the Refund orders page.
You can now grade the condition of the returned item. On the Charge restocking fee page, select a description from the drop-down, upload a photo, and provide more detail in the comments text box.
This information will allow us to confirm that the item wasn’t returned in its original condition. It will also help us to understand customer behavior so that we can protect you and other sellers from future returns issues.
To learn more, go to Issue a partial refund
New options to report seller-fulfilled returns issues
If you receive a return in a used, damaged, defective, or materially different condition, then you can charge a restocking fee from the buyer.
To charge a restocking fee:
- Go to Orders.
- Click Manage returns and select your order.
- Click Issue refund.
- Click Charge restocking fee on the Refund orders page.
You can now grade the condition of the returned item. On the Charge restocking fee page, select a description from the drop-down, upload a photo, and provide more detail in the comments text box.
This information will allow us to confirm that the item wasn’t returned in its original condition. It will also help us to understand customer behavior so that we can protect you and other sellers from future returns issues.
To learn more, go to Issue a partial refund
115 replies
115 replies
Seller_vrNqvHw0YWCKr
What about with FBA? So many of our returns were clearly used for a party and/or event and then get returned to us after the party is over. We know this because they still have the party message on our product.
Seller_ENBrTBTSn3PDq
All sounds good, but what about the NEGATIVE FEEDBACK we receive because of charging the restocking fee (FBM)?
Will Amazon be removing negative feedback relating to stocking fees per case?
Seller_JELEnXFOrnw4L
What about going one step (or a mile) forward...
That ALL fba returns will be returned directly to the seller and not to Amazon?
Seller_NpCTTKHemfADL
So does this mean you are getting rid of Return at First Scan?
If not how will this be addressed? As RFS will always refund the buyer in full if buyer uses a seller faulted reason to avoid paying for return labels.
Seller_2UQL96K7Patvu
Nice. But, this has been around for awhile. At least for me it has.
Seller_0ceakZ4Ra5ZUs
How is this new? Was like this for over a year
Seller_5DrrKeHsDwIGT
you need to do a better policy. The restocking fee I might start doing that.
Seller_R2dP7Hunjcdj0
"New options to report seller-fulfilled returns issues"
Way to bury the lede here, Amazon!
What Amazon describes is NOT NEW at all when dealing with items Returned in "Materially Different Condition". This ability to issue a partial Refund in those cases already existed.
What Amazon FAILS to highlight is that the Seller can now ONLY charge Restocking Fees IF the product is Returned in "Materially Different Condition".
THIS IS THE ACTUAL NEW CHANGE: Amazon NOW EXPRESSLY FORBIDS withholding ANY Restocking Fees on items Returned in original condition.
This is a CHANGE to existing policy, and this change was executed with ZERO announcements nor any input from those affected BY the change.
For example, until now the Seller could withhold 20% of the item cost from the Refund as "Restocking Fees". It WAS a posted Amazon policy, and the amount of withholding depended on the product, NOT ONLY the product condition.
NOT ANY MORE!
So, what ARE "Restocking Fees" anyway?
RESTOCK: verb (used with or without object) - to stock again; replenish.
FEE: noun - a charge or payment for professional services.
Restocking Fees have a CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS meaning in the English language, and PRODUCT CONDITION has NOTHING to do with this meaning. Restocking Fees exist because the Seller has absorbed Expenses when originally executing their part of the contracted order, and these expenses would otherwise be LOST income for the Seller.
Could it simply be that Amazon no longer understands how to use a dictionary?
By their very definition, Restocking Fees are EXACTLY THAT: The Costs involved with accepting a Return and Restocking it back into inventory. Restocking Fees are an attempt to (at least partially) recoup the EXPENSES ALREADY LOST when the Seller processed the order.
These expenses include the gasoline involved in the transit of the item and package, the cost of packaging materials, the cost of labor to retrieve and process the order, and the labor cost in processing the Return and returning the item back to inventory. These costs are significant and occur EVEN IF the item is Returned in the Same Condition as when shipped.
What Amazon NOW considers to be "Restocking Fees" are ACTUALLY Partial Refunds issued on items Returned in Materially Different Condition from how they were when originally shipped.
This "NEW" policy is also thwarted by the existing RFS policy, which refunds orders under $100.00 when the Return shipping label is first scanned by the Return carrier. So, there is that contradiction to be dealt with as well.
To be clear: the availability for Sellers to issue Partial Refunds in situations such as this is NOT NEW, and has existed for at LEAST as long as I have been selling here.
What IS new is that 3rd Party Sellers are NOW expected to ABSORB all of the ACTUAL Restocking Fees on Buyer Error based Returns UNLESS the item is Returned in "Materially Different Condition".
The irony is that IF the item IS Returned in "Materially Different Condition", than it almost certainly can NOT be "Restocked" and "Resold", ESPECIALLY on Amazon. So IF you can NOT "Restock" it, than HOW can you charge "Restocking Fees"?
The ONLY Good Thing that the change is policy provides is that NOW, the Seller need no longer fear Negative Feedback for the Authorized Withholding of legitimate Restocking Fees on Returns based on Buyer error, since the Seller can NO LONGER withhold valid Restocking Fees.
No Restocking Fees withheld = No Negative Feedback for withholding Restocking Fees.
It SURE doesn't feel like an improvement, does it?
Amazon, as usual, you have taken a perfectly working system and DESTROYED it for no good reason.
Your platform is already the world's largest. People already use Amazon for purchases. YOU DID NOT NEED TO MAKE THIS POLICY CHANGE!
Your NEW actions have now made it markedly easier for Bad Actors to steal from 3rd Party Sellers by abusing the Amazon Return system, ESPECIALLY the since initiating the "Refund at First Scan" policy.
Worse, this NEW change to the existing Restocking Fees policy makes it actually possible for competitors to slowly bleed their competition by arranging for a continual series of orders and returns, causing a continual LOSS of funds to the original Seller. How did no one consider that?
AND Amazon will STILL not remove Negative Feedback received EVEN IN CASES where a partial Refund was issued precisely BECAUSE the item was Returned in "Materially Different Condition" and fees were withheld PER AMAZON POLICY.
So WHERE is the Seller Protection?
In THIS case, it is GONE!
To all Amazon employees, ask yourself this question: Why does Amazon continue to Strip-Away the very Seller protections that Amazon USED to offer? What is the goal here, to convince 3rd Party Sellers that Amazon is NOT a "Safe Place" to Sell products?
Because THAT is the message MANY of us are receiving from Amazon!
And I truly WISH it was not the case! I long for the "Good old days" of a few years back when Amazon ACTUALLY protected their 3rd Party Sellers.
Are those days Gone Forever?
Seller_nx8v7SMEX2ZBv
This guy asks me to cancel an order hours after i shipped . then he asks to cancel again after the tracking says it was at the post office and he picked it up . now he saying he cant do a return to refund him. whats wrong with these ppl they get away with this too often im not doing it refuse cancel due to shipped advise to call amazon customer service to walk through return. still asks to cancel and refund smh. shipping bought through amazon
Seller_vrNqvHw0YWCKr
What about with FBA? So many of our returns were clearly used for a party and/or event and then get returned to us after the party is over. We know this because they still have the party message on our product.
Seller_vrNqvHw0YWCKr
What about with FBA? So many of our returns were clearly used for a party and/or event and then get returned to us after the party is over. We know this because they still have the party message on our product.
Seller_ENBrTBTSn3PDq
All sounds good, but what about the NEGATIVE FEEDBACK we receive because of charging the restocking fee (FBM)?
Will Amazon be removing negative feedback relating to stocking fees per case?
Seller_ENBrTBTSn3PDq
All sounds good, but what about the NEGATIVE FEEDBACK we receive because of charging the restocking fee (FBM)?
Will Amazon be removing negative feedback relating to stocking fees per case?
Seller_JELEnXFOrnw4L
What about going one step (or a mile) forward...
That ALL fba returns will be returned directly to the seller and not to Amazon?
Seller_JELEnXFOrnw4L
What about going one step (or a mile) forward...
That ALL fba returns will be returned directly to the seller and not to Amazon?
Seller_NpCTTKHemfADL
So does this mean you are getting rid of Return at First Scan?
If not how will this be addressed? As RFS will always refund the buyer in full if buyer uses a seller faulted reason to avoid paying for return labels.
Seller_NpCTTKHemfADL
So does this mean you are getting rid of Return at First Scan?
If not how will this be addressed? As RFS will always refund the buyer in full if buyer uses a seller faulted reason to avoid paying for return labels.
Seller_2UQL96K7Patvu
Nice. But, this has been around for awhile. At least for me it has.
Seller_2UQL96K7Patvu
Nice. But, this has been around for awhile. At least for me it has.
Seller_0ceakZ4Ra5ZUs
How is this new? Was like this for over a year
Seller_0ceakZ4Ra5ZUs
How is this new? Was like this for over a year
Seller_5DrrKeHsDwIGT
you need to do a better policy. The restocking fee I might start doing that.
Seller_5DrrKeHsDwIGT
you need to do a better policy. The restocking fee I might start doing that.
Seller_R2dP7Hunjcdj0
"New options to report seller-fulfilled returns issues"
Way to bury the lede here, Amazon!
What Amazon describes is NOT NEW at all when dealing with items Returned in "Materially Different Condition". This ability to issue a partial Refund in those cases already existed.
What Amazon FAILS to highlight is that the Seller can now ONLY charge Restocking Fees IF the product is Returned in "Materially Different Condition".
THIS IS THE ACTUAL NEW CHANGE: Amazon NOW EXPRESSLY FORBIDS withholding ANY Restocking Fees on items Returned in original condition.
This is a CHANGE to existing policy, and this change was executed with ZERO announcements nor any input from those affected BY the change.
For example, until now the Seller could withhold 20% of the item cost from the Refund as "Restocking Fees". It WAS a posted Amazon policy, and the amount of withholding depended on the product, NOT ONLY the product condition.
NOT ANY MORE!
So, what ARE "Restocking Fees" anyway?
RESTOCK: verb (used with or without object) - to stock again; replenish.
FEE: noun - a charge or payment for professional services.
Restocking Fees have a CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS meaning in the English language, and PRODUCT CONDITION has NOTHING to do with this meaning. Restocking Fees exist because the Seller has absorbed Expenses when originally executing their part of the contracted order, and these expenses would otherwise be LOST income for the Seller.
Could it simply be that Amazon no longer understands how to use a dictionary?
By their very definition, Restocking Fees are EXACTLY THAT: The Costs involved with accepting a Return and Restocking it back into inventory. Restocking Fees are an attempt to (at least partially) recoup the EXPENSES ALREADY LOST when the Seller processed the order.
These expenses include the gasoline involved in the transit of the item and package, the cost of packaging materials, the cost of labor to retrieve and process the order, and the labor cost in processing the Return and returning the item back to inventory. These costs are significant and occur EVEN IF the item is Returned in the Same Condition as when shipped.
What Amazon NOW considers to be "Restocking Fees" are ACTUALLY Partial Refunds issued on items Returned in Materially Different Condition from how they were when originally shipped.
This "NEW" policy is also thwarted by the existing RFS policy, which refunds orders under $100.00 when the Return shipping label is first scanned by the Return carrier. So, there is that contradiction to be dealt with as well.
To be clear: the availability for Sellers to issue Partial Refunds in situations such as this is NOT NEW, and has existed for at LEAST as long as I have been selling here.
What IS new is that 3rd Party Sellers are NOW expected to ABSORB all of the ACTUAL Restocking Fees on Buyer Error based Returns UNLESS the item is Returned in "Materially Different Condition".
The irony is that IF the item IS Returned in "Materially Different Condition", than it almost certainly can NOT be "Restocked" and "Resold", ESPECIALLY on Amazon. So IF you can NOT "Restock" it, than HOW can you charge "Restocking Fees"?
The ONLY Good Thing that the change is policy provides is that NOW, the Seller need no longer fear Negative Feedback for the Authorized Withholding of legitimate Restocking Fees on Returns based on Buyer error, since the Seller can NO LONGER withhold valid Restocking Fees.
No Restocking Fees withheld = No Negative Feedback for withholding Restocking Fees.
It SURE doesn't feel like an improvement, does it?
Amazon, as usual, you have taken a perfectly working system and DESTROYED it for no good reason.
Your platform is already the world's largest. People already use Amazon for purchases. YOU DID NOT NEED TO MAKE THIS POLICY CHANGE!
Your NEW actions have now made it markedly easier for Bad Actors to steal from 3rd Party Sellers by abusing the Amazon Return system, ESPECIALLY the since initiating the "Refund at First Scan" policy.
Worse, this NEW change to the existing Restocking Fees policy makes it actually possible for competitors to slowly bleed their competition by arranging for a continual series of orders and returns, causing a continual LOSS of funds to the original Seller. How did no one consider that?
AND Amazon will STILL not remove Negative Feedback received EVEN IN CASES where a partial Refund was issued precisely BECAUSE the item was Returned in "Materially Different Condition" and fees were withheld PER AMAZON POLICY.
So WHERE is the Seller Protection?
In THIS case, it is GONE!
To all Amazon employees, ask yourself this question: Why does Amazon continue to Strip-Away the very Seller protections that Amazon USED to offer? What is the goal here, to convince 3rd Party Sellers that Amazon is NOT a "Safe Place" to Sell products?
Because THAT is the message MANY of us are receiving from Amazon!
And I truly WISH it was not the case! I long for the "Good old days" of a few years back when Amazon ACTUALLY protected their 3rd Party Sellers.
Are those days Gone Forever?
Seller_R2dP7Hunjcdj0
"New options to report seller-fulfilled returns issues"
Way to bury the lede here, Amazon!
What Amazon describes is NOT NEW at all when dealing with items Returned in "Materially Different Condition". This ability to issue a partial Refund in those cases already existed.
What Amazon FAILS to highlight is that the Seller can now ONLY charge Restocking Fees IF the product is Returned in "Materially Different Condition".
THIS IS THE ACTUAL NEW CHANGE: Amazon NOW EXPRESSLY FORBIDS withholding ANY Restocking Fees on items Returned in original condition.
This is a CHANGE to existing policy, and this change was executed with ZERO announcements nor any input from those affected BY the change.
For example, until now the Seller could withhold 20% of the item cost from the Refund as "Restocking Fees". It WAS a posted Amazon policy, and the amount of withholding depended on the product, NOT ONLY the product condition.
NOT ANY MORE!
So, what ARE "Restocking Fees" anyway?
RESTOCK: verb (used with or without object) - to stock again; replenish.
FEE: noun - a charge or payment for professional services.
Restocking Fees have a CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS meaning in the English language, and PRODUCT CONDITION has NOTHING to do with this meaning. Restocking Fees exist because the Seller has absorbed Expenses when originally executing their part of the contracted order, and these expenses would otherwise be LOST income for the Seller.
Could it simply be that Amazon no longer understands how to use a dictionary?
By their very definition, Restocking Fees are EXACTLY THAT: The Costs involved with accepting a Return and Restocking it back into inventory. Restocking Fees are an attempt to (at least partially) recoup the EXPENSES ALREADY LOST when the Seller processed the order.
These expenses include the gasoline involved in the transit of the item and package, the cost of packaging materials, the cost of labor to retrieve and process the order, and the labor cost in processing the Return and returning the item back to inventory. These costs are significant and occur EVEN IF the item is Returned in the Same Condition as when shipped.
What Amazon NOW considers to be "Restocking Fees" are ACTUALLY Partial Refunds issued on items Returned in Materially Different Condition from how they were when originally shipped.
This "NEW" policy is also thwarted by the existing RFS policy, which refunds orders under $100.00 when the Return shipping label is first scanned by the Return carrier. So, there is that contradiction to be dealt with as well.
To be clear: the availability for Sellers to issue Partial Refunds in situations such as this is NOT NEW, and has existed for at LEAST as long as I have been selling here.
What IS new is that 3rd Party Sellers are NOW expected to ABSORB all of the ACTUAL Restocking Fees on Buyer Error based Returns UNLESS the item is Returned in "Materially Different Condition".
The irony is that IF the item IS Returned in "Materially Different Condition", than it almost certainly can NOT be "Restocked" and "Resold", ESPECIALLY on Amazon. So IF you can NOT "Restock" it, than HOW can you charge "Restocking Fees"?
The ONLY Good Thing that the change is policy provides is that NOW, the Seller need no longer fear Negative Feedback for the Authorized Withholding of legitimate Restocking Fees on Returns based on Buyer error, since the Seller can NO LONGER withhold valid Restocking Fees.
No Restocking Fees withheld = No Negative Feedback for withholding Restocking Fees.
It SURE doesn't feel like an improvement, does it?
Amazon, as usual, you have taken a perfectly working system and DESTROYED it for no good reason.
Your platform is already the world's largest. People already use Amazon for purchases. YOU DID NOT NEED TO MAKE THIS POLICY CHANGE!
Your NEW actions have now made it markedly easier for Bad Actors to steal from 3rd Party Sellers by abusing the Amazon Return system, ESPECIALLY the since initiating the "Refund at First Scan" policy.
Worse, this NEW change to the existing Restocking Fees policy makes it actually possible for competitors to slowly bleed their competition by arranging for a continual series of orders and returns, causing a continual LOSS of funds to the original Seller. How did no one consider that?
AND Amazon will STILL not remove Negative Feedback received EVEN IN CASES where a partial Refund was issued precisely BECAUSE the item was Returned in "Materially Different Condition" and fees were withheld PER AMAZON POLICY.
So WHERE is the Seller Protection?
In THIS case, it is GONE!
To all Amazon employees, ask yourself this question: Why does Amazon continue to Strip-Away the very Seller protections that Amazon USED to offer? What is the goal here, to convince 3rd Party Sellers that Amazon is NOT a "Safe Place" to Sell products?
Because THAT is the message MANY of us are receiving from Amazon!
And I truly WISH it was not the case! I long for the "Good old days" of a few years back when Amazon ACTUALLY protected their 3rd Party Sellers.
Are those days Gone Forever?
Seller_nx8v7SMEX2ZBv
This guy asks me to cancel an order hours after i shipped . then he asks to cancel again after the tracking says it was at the post office and he picked it up . now he saying he cant do a return to refund him. whats wrong with these ppl they get away with this too often im not doing it refuse cancel due to shipped advise to call amazon customer service to walk through return. still asks to cancel and refund smh. shipping bought through amazon
Seller_nx8v7SMEX2ZBv
This guy asks me to cancel an order hours after i shipped . then he asks to cancel again after the tracking says it was at the post office and he picked it up . now he saying he cant do a return to refund him. whats wrong with these ppl they get away with this too often im not doing it refuse cancel due to shipped advise to call amazon customer service to walk through return. still asks to cancel and refund smh. shipping bought through amazon
