@SEAmod

I have a difficult time reaching appropriate internal teams/individuals with this kind of thing so I am hopeful you can help.

I would like the business team to respond, by phone or in writing, with specific details about how the new RFS policy applies to Outbound Shipping charges in Buyer Fault scenarios. I can find nothing in Amazon’s help pages that addresses this.

We specifically charge customers separately for shipping for certain items because the items are costly to ship with respect to the item price and therefore make no sense to offer on Amazon if we are forced to absorb the cost of outbound shipping charges for Buyer Fault returns.

For example,

This item is returned frequently for two reasons:

1. Sellers of Saftron brand rails and ladders fail to mention in their descriptions that the rails and ladders include B0081KXP9Y, so purchasing the B0081KXP9Y separately is unnecessary. I am unable to edit those product pages myself because I do not sell the rails and ladders.

2. Buyers fail to read the bullet points and description of the B0081KXP9Y before purchasing. The bullet points clearly state “Note: New Saftron rails and ladders typically are shipped complete with escutcheons. You should not need to purchase this item separately if you are also buying a ladder or rail.” The description clearly states: “NOTE: New Saftron rails and ladders typically are shipped complete with escutcheons. You should not need to purchase this item separately if you are also buying a ladder or rail. For more details, contact the seller of the ladder or rail.”

Both of these situations are out of my control. But even with a very high (30% to 40%) return rate on this item, a majority of purchasers actually need the item. It is a disservice to those customers to remove this item from Amazon simply because the people that wrote the rail/ladder descriptions omit an important detail, or because buyers purchase the item by mistake when they do not really need it.

When a Buyer admits a Buyer Fault reason, Outbound Shipping charges should not be refunded.

However, Amazon’s new “refund at first scan” policy fails to take this into consideration. It refunds the buyer for Outbound Shipping Charges regardless of fault. This is ethically wrong. And it makes it financially impossible to continue to offer this item to the people that actually do need it. Because the item is so inexpensive, there is no way to maintain a reasonable price while figuring in a factor to pay the back and forth shipping costs involved in numerous returns.

For the time being, I have added this item (and all other items for which we charge freight separately from the item) to our Prepaid Returns Exemptions List. I would rather not, but I have no alternative to prevent Amazon applying an inappropriately over-aggressive refund policy.

Additionally, for this specific ASIN, I now feel like I must contact each buyer of the item prior to shipping to confirm that they actually need the item they ordered.

The truth of the matter is a buyer should be responsible for their buying decisions. If they bought this item and then realize they didn’t need it, and they avoided learning anything relevant about the product they were purchasing along the way, then they should most certainly NOT be entitled to a refund of separately billed Outbound Shipping Charges.

To the best of my knowledge, when I buy from Amazon, Amazon does not refund me for outbound shipping charges when I choose a buyer-fault reason for a return. Why then does it force 3P sellers to refund outbound shipping charges for buyer-fault scenarios?

Business Team - please respond in writing with the specific written policy regarding handling of Outbound Shipping Charges in the case of Buyer Fault returns. Because as I have stated earlier, I do not believe it exists.