Sellers beware... helps perpetuate fraud with their A-Z guarantee.

Discussion in 'Ecommerce Forum' started by zeone, May 13, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. titanicuk

    titanicuk UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    52 3

    I agree AM or eBay is risky, that is why we only source item which has no or low resell value, this elimated alot 'Not not received' claim. When this happen will just take it as part of operational cost and move on.

    AM denied one of my buyer for 'Item not received' deliveried item. I was quite suprise to see that.

    Posted: Sep 6, 2011 By: titanicuk Member since: Sep 5, 2011
  2. MancunianCreative

    MancunianCreative UKBF Newcomer Full Member

    611 112
    Incredible that people have such nerve when it comes to these scams!
    Posted: Sep 6, 2011 By: MancunianCreative Member since: Aug 26, 2011
  3. Robprotronica

    Robprotronica UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    13 2
    Hi MancunianCreative,

    We were totally surprised by how calculating the "Buyer" was - in all communications he just kept saying they he had not received the goods - any evidence to the contrary was simply ignored.

    Basically Amazon are going to side with the "Buyer" unless the "Buyer" really makes a mistake so they can be very brazen about the fraud that they are pulling off.

    We will be moving towards titanicuk's suggestion of only selling lower cost items on Amazon so that the likelihood of fraud is lower and the cost of fraud can be considered part of doing business on Amazon.

    As per one of my earlier posts, the only items suitable for Amazon are low cost, high margin.

    Anything else is not worth the risk.

    Posted: Sep 7, 2011 By: Robprotronica Member since: Aug 28, 2011
  4. kalpna

    kalpna UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    4 0
    Customer bought ipad2 from us claimed to have received something different on the A-Z claim, would not tell us what was different, asked him to send the ipad back after more that 3weeks we got a package back yesterday, 15sep 11 straight away looking at the package i knew that there is no IPAD in there, we videoed the whole thing from sealed package to opening it in from of an independent witness a criminal lawyer and guess what we found returned BRICKS in the IPAD2 box??

    Sent the video to Amazon, with all evidence written statement from the lawyer, Amazon still went ahead and refunded the money to this buyer. Clearly crime is being committed using the Amazon platform and Amazon are encouraging this by refunding scammers and the buyers are fully aware of this so they keep doing this to sellers because they know they will get away with it.

    Bunch of IDIOTS work for Amazon,
    Posted: Sep 16, 2011 By: kalpna Member since: Aug 31, 2011
  5. Robprotronica

    Robprotronica UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    13 2
    Hi Kalpna,

    Really sorry to hear yet another scam supported by Amazon - However, they are not Idiots working at Amazon, I fear that it is much worse, Amazon are DELIBERATELY finding in favour of the scammers.

    Amazon make a promise to buyers that Amazon is the safest place to shop on the web and it is a very easy promise for Amazon to keep because it is not backed up with their money it is backed up with yours and mine. Unless there is cast iron evidence of a scam, Amazon are gong to give "the benefit of the doubt" in favour of the "Buyer".

    The scammers we have encountered seem to be well practised so whilst they have made a number of mistakes that make it clear their actions are fraud, they know the game well enough to stay on the right side of Amazon and steal the money or the goods.

    Posted: Sep 16, 2011 By: Robprotronica Member since: Aug 28, 2011
  6. gibby

    gibby UKBF Ace Free Member

    1,246 120
    All of this must be costing Amazon business too.
    I have heard many similar stories and we stopped our planned trial with Amazon after hearing some of them.

    One day they may learn.

    Posted: Sep 16, 2011 By: gibby Member since: Sep 11, 2007
  7. kulture

    kulture UKBF Legend Staff Member

    8,086 2,226
    Amazon are not as bad as these posts imply. I have had a few A- claims over the years and some have been declined by Amazon, some paid by Amazon, and some paid by me. In all cases Amazon have given the buyer the benefit of the doubt, where doubt exists. But if you word your defence carefully, are respectful of both the customer and Amazon, and "play the game" you will not always loose. In the end you will always get some scam artist who will steal from you. No matter how hard you try. It is the same as having a shoplifter. It is part of the cost of doing business.

    Posted: Sep 16, 2011 By: kulture Member since: Aug 11, 2007
  8. Robprotronica

    Robprotronica UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    13 2
    Hi Gibby,

    I think Amazon win big time by telling buyers how safe they are with the A-Z guarantee.

    That guarantee is funded not by Amazon but by the sellers. If Amazon pay out the scammers all they lose is the commission which is no big deal - if they lose a seller, again I suspect this is no big deal as Amazon are essentially a commoditised marketplace with typically many sellers for every item.

    As I have mentioned before this makes Amazon a "High Risk" sales channel.

    I don't think it makes Amazon a "Don't Use At All" channel, just one that is more suitable for certain items, typically those with any or all the following characteristics:

    Low resale value - Designer Label Bedding rather than an iPad
    Low - medium sale price - Seller can afford to lose the item and not worth the effort for scammers
    High margin - Again seller can afford to lose a few.

    High Value, High Resale Potential and Lower Margin products are really not suitable for such a "High Risk" channel as Amazon.

    If all sellers treat Amazon this way then Amazon will be a bit of a "Cheap Bazaar" but again not sure amazon will be terribly troubled.

    Last edited: Sep 16, 2011
    Posted: Sep 16, 2011 By: Robprotronica Member since: Aug 28, 2011
  9. Robprotronica

    Robprotronica UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    13 2
    Hi Kulture,

    I don't think Amazon are "Bad" - Morally Reprehensible for supporting scammers - Yes definitely, and as you say totally predictable in supporting the "Buyer" if there is any "Doubt".

    The problem is the scammers know that Amazon will always side with them if they can create the slightest bit of doubt.

    So for example in our case which is the non delivery version of the scam, we arrange for the delivery driver to revisit the buyer at the delivery address, the buy will admit to talking to the driver, but in all correspondence with us and Amazon referred to the driver as returning to the buyers "neighbourhood".

    We have even sent Amazon a photo of the buyers from door along with a copy of the signature obtained at the time of delivery.

    As long as the buyer keeps saying I haven't had the goods Amazon are supporting him.

    Amazon have no reason to do anything else.

    So we have to consider Amazon as a "High Risk" channel and react accordingly e.g. insist on "Consignee Only" signatures on Amazon orders above a certain amount and modifying the profile of items we sell on Amazon to reflect the risk in the channel.

    Posted: Sep 16, 2011 By: Robprotronica Member since: Aug 28, 2011
  10. kulture

    kulture UKBF Legend Staff Member

    8,086 2,226
    In all online trading there is a risk of a scam. There will always be some customers who steal from you. Amazon initially make their job easier, but, unlike credit card companies, Amazon do keep a history of claims and if a buyer makes too many they too get struck off. Cold comfort for the sellers scammed along the way.

    Now you can begin to notice the potential scammers who are trying to get the seller to refund without an A-Z. Basically try to blackmail with the threat of negative feed back etc. It is potentially these scammers who know that they have reached their limit on A-Z claims who do anything to avoid making a claim.

    In my years of selling on Amazon I have noticed a trend where Amazon is less likely to side with the buyer, and less likely to get the seller to fund the refund if one is granted. Where initially the A-Z claim was ALWAYS granted and ALWAYS funded by the seller, this is not now the case. This could be because Amazon are changing policy a bit, or it could be because Amazon have built up more data on some buyers and are less likely to give THEM the benefit of doubt.

    I would say that online selling is a risky business, and using Amazon as a channel, provided you do it sensibly, is no more risky than using your own site.
    Posted: Sep 17, 2011 By: kulture Member since: Aug 11, 2007
  11. amazonseller007

    amazonseller007 UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1 0
    First of all the original poster ZEONE is lucky they did not get countersued.

    Any and all issues arising out of the amazon a to z policy is between the seller and Amazon. The seller agrees to this via the terms of service they accepted prior to selling.
    The buyer is billed by Amazon and then pays them directly. In this case the person with the PS3 is simply a fulfillment agent.

    I am in no ways siding with people scamming or using fraudulent methods on Amazon.
    Furthermore I don't buy that Zeone actually took this case to trial, and won with the other side present.

    I need to reiterate the legal fact that issues such as this are between Amazon and the Seller ONLY. The buyer never entered into any contract to do business with you. If you sue a buyer, there is a very good likelyhood you will lose AND be responsible for the defendants costs to show up to court.

    Source: Amazon Terms of Service. ( I suggest you read it, and decide whether or not you still want to do business with them. As a seller, I wouldn't.)
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2011
    Posted: Oct 15, 2011 By: amazonseller007 Member since: Oct 15, 2011
  12. Robprotronica

    Robprotronica UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    13 2
    Not sure Amazonseller007 is entirely correct with the above interpretation of the Amazon Seller terms and conditions.

    Item 13 0f the general terms:-

    13. Relationship of Parties

    You and we are independent contractors, and nothing in this Agreement will be construed to create a partnership, joint venture, agency, franchise, sales representative, or employment relationship between the parties. Amazon is not an auctioneer, neither is it an intermediary between the buyer and the seller. ...

    And in "Selling on Amazon Service Terms"

    S-2.1 Sale and Fulfilment.

    (j) identify yourself as the seller of the product on all packing slips or other information included with Your Products and as the Person to which a customer may return the applicable product;

    Amazon is pretty vague in these documents as to what the relationship actually is and what their role is in the sale. The only thing that I could find that got really specific was that if anything goes wrong Amazon are not liable.

    Kinda how I thought it would be.

    Looks to me as if an "Amazon Seller" is the actual seller of the product and not Amazon who are just taking the money.

    Posted: Oct 16, 2011 By: Robprotronica Member since: Aug 28, 2011
  13. heavenly

    heavenly UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1 0
    Hi after reading all of your comments. I myself have had problems with Amazon. I sent a mobile off to a customer. I told the customer before I sent the item out I was checking the contents.He said he received the mobile and it had a scratch on the screen.He said that he wanted a full refund and opened a A to Z Guarantee claim.I responded to all emails and rang Amazon on numerous occasions and they never dealt with the claim they have refunded the buyer.And I have not received my mobile back. I think this is very unfair I have contacted Watchdog tonite.Anyone have any advice how I can claim my money back? thanks
    Posted: Mar 29, 2012 By: heavenly Member since: Mar 29, 2012
  14. Robprotronica

    Robprotronica UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    13 2
    Hi Heavenly,

    Sorry to hear of yet another victim.

    This is the "Damaged Goods" variant of the usual "Item Not Received" or "Wrong Item" standard Amazon scam.

    My limited understanding is that for Amazon to grant the A to Z Guarantee claim the "Buyer" needs to show proof of returning the item, hence the comments of others relating to receiving empty boxes and receiving empty envelopes requiring signatures. I suggest that you keep asking Amazon about what proof they have that the item has been returned when granting the claim - you need to be excruciatingly polite when dealing with Amazon A - Z claims people otherwise they simply stop replying.

    You have to also remember that it cost Amazon nothing to side with the "buyer" and it is in Amazon's best interest to nearly always side with the "buyer" in order too promote themselves as a safe place to shop online. Hence, I think it is unlikely that Amazon will change the A to Z decision they have made.

    You could try the small claims court and someone told me that it may be possible to report the "buyer" to the police for the theft of the phone - my view is the police will regard this as a "Civil" matter and not be interested.

    These scams are not going to stop so our view is that Amazon is a high risk channel best suited to high margin products or those with low resale potential. That is now the profile we have for the products we sell on Amazon and we have not had any problems since making those adjustments.

    Mobile phones have a high resale potential, are high value and my guess is they are not so high margin items, I think if I wanted to use Amazon as a channel for this type of product I would seriously look at "Fulfilment by Amazon" - I would take a guess that Amazon have a different view of A to Z claims filed against FBA orders than they do with seller fulfilled orders.

    Sorry none of the above is much help with your present situation. I understand only too well how frustrating and annoying these scams are.

    Posted: Mar 30, 2012 By: Robprotronica Member since: Aug 28, 2011
  15. herebus

    herebus UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1 0
    I was most interested to read your post. I appreciate that is was some time ago, but would be most grateful to know how things turned out. I have been the victim of a similar case and have recently written to watchdog.
    Posted: Apr 2, 2012 By: herebus Member since: Apr 2, 2012
  16. krupuk

    krupuk UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    14 3
    Posted: Apr 24, 2012 By: krupuk Member since: Apr 23, 2012
  17. alexredhed

    alexredhed UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    2 0
    I have had the exact same thing happen to me. Was a amazon customer every week for 5 years, was selling my Samsung galaxy s2 phone which i even bought from amazon through their seller service using it for the first time. I had repeated spam Nigeria buyers until i finally had a "real" uk buyer who paid, and so i sent it with the recommended Collect+ shipping which is part of amazon.

    Took the parcel to the shop and was tracked and delivered all shown in the amazon system.
    Now here is the ridiculous part, the guy claimed that the phone was not in the box and only contained accessories and then amazon resolution service got involved.
    They requested the delivery information on the premise it was NOT delivered.
    Now i told them there is delivery information in their system showing its delivered, i gave them tracking number and then they wrote back requesting signature which i did not have at that point.
    So i wrote to collect+ and by the time they provided me with this signature which took 3 days,the 3 days amazon gave me had basically expired. In fact i did send them by email a print screen of the details collect plus provided me with but either their system refused it or they did not even look at it.

    But throughout this whole process amazon did not respond to any of my questions or pointing out that the question of delivery receipt was not even an issue brought up by the buyer.

    This was over the weekend so they were not answering the phone, and in fact i did not receive once a coherent reply to any of my multiple internal messages and emails i sent them. All i got was automated or nonsensical responses saying things like this will be looked at carefully.
    Finally they returned back all the £300 held in my amazon account to the buyer and said no further communication will be entered into.

    To me this is blatantly fraud, and i am at a loss as to who i can speak to?
    The phone was sent without insurance too, as i did not expect it would be needed and i thought since amazon recommended £4.50 for delivery then the price i paid should be the same as this.

    I have contacted Guildford police, and then referred me to action fraud, but so far i have not had any reply from them.

    I will be contacting trading standards, but since this is so common a practice on amazon, i would appreciate if anyone knows of of how to best deal with this.
    I cannot let this go and for amazon to fob me off with not even taking anything i said into account.
    I have proof of delivery and yet they pay back the buyer because of no delivery?
    They are jokers.

    Please someone help. or tell me what i can do?
    Posted: May 28, 2012 By: alexredhed Member since: May 28, 2012
  18. kulture

    kulture UKBF Legend Staff Member

    8,086 2,226
    Take the buyer to small claims court. He ordered a phone, you delivered a phone, he signed for it. Now you want him to pay you for the phone. His defence is that there was no phone, you need to convince the judge that there was a phone.
    Posted: May 30, 2012 By: kulture Member since: Aug 11, 2007
  19. OldWelshGuy

    OldWelshGuy UKBF Legend Staff Member

    20,433 7,050
    Co Name Amazon on the documents drag them into court also as they are party to the fraud by their negligence.
    Posted: May 30, 2012 By: OldWelshGuy Member since: Jun 12, 2008
  20. Big Pete

    Big Pete Banned

    1,950 415
    I agree with kulture. legal action .. and shame on Amazon for the way they have let you down ..
    Posted: May 30, 2012 By: Big Pete Member since: Oct 13, 2009
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.