Formal Escalation – Buyer Diverted Parcel, Collected After Refund (A-to-Z Misuse)
@Roberto_Amazon @Angie_Amazon @Spencer_Amazon @JiAlex_Amazon @TaylorR_Amazon@Danny_Amazon
@Kai_Amazon @Julia_Amazon @Julia_Amzn @Winston_Amazon @Ash_Amazon @Spencer_Amazon @Abella_Amazon @Ange_Amazon @Sakura_Amazon__ @Sakura_Amazon_
Order ID: 203-8804677-0142754
Claim date: 24 December 2025
Refund amount: GBP 31.14 (seller-funded)
ODR impacted: Yes
Summary
This A-to-Z claim was granted in error and now allows the buyer to retain both the item and the refunded funds, despite the fact that:
The buyer personally diverted the parcel to a ParcelShop
The original delivery estimate ceased to apply after diversion
The parcel remained in the courier network as a result of the buyer’s action
The buyer later collected the parcel on 30 December 2025
This is not a delivery failure. It is buyer-initiated diversion followed by unjust enrichment.
1. Dispatch and Original Timeline Were Compliant
Purchase date: 8 December 2025
Ship-by date: 12 December 2025
Original delivery estimate: 16–18 December 2025
Parcel handed to Evri: 15 December 2025
Valid tracking uploaded
There was no seller delay at dispatch.
2. Buyer Requested Parcel Redirection
Courier tracking confirms that on 17 December 2025 at 20:26, the buyer submitted a request:
“We’ve received your request to deliver your parcel to a ParcelShop.”
This was a buyer-initiated change.
Once a parcel is redirected at the buyer’s request:
The original delivery estimate no longer applies
Delivery timelines are recalculated by the courier
Any delay following redirection is not seller-caused
This was clearly explained to the buyer multiple times in writing.
3. A-to-Z Claim Opened Despite Buyer Redirection
Despite personally redirecting the parcel, the buyer opened an A-to-Z claim stating:
“Package didn’t arrive”
“The seller changed the delivery date”
This statement is factually incorrect.
The seller did not change the delivery date.
All date changes were generated automatically by Evri after the buyer’s redirection request.
4. Parcel Was Delivered and Collected
Tracking confirms:
Parcel delivered to ParcelShop
Collected by the buyer on Tuesday 30 December 2025 at 12:51
Status: Collected
This occurred after the refund was issued.
The buyer therefore retains:
The product
The refunded funds
This outcome directly contradicts the purpose of the A-to-Z Guarantee.
5. Policy Principle Breached – Unjust Enrichment
Amazon policy does not permit a buyer to:
Initiate a delivery change
Open an A-to-Z claim while the parcel is in transit due to that change
Receive a refund
Later collect the item
Allowing this result constitutes unjust enrichment and misuse of the A-to-Z system.
There is no seller fault in this case.
Required Corrective Actions
I formally request the following actions:
Immediate reimbursement of the seller-funded A-to-Z refund (£31.14)
Immediate removal of the associated Order Defect Rate (ODR) impact
Correction of the claim record to reflect buyer-initiated diversion and confirmed collection
Confirmation that this claim has been marked as buyer misuse
All supporting evidence (tracking, redirection request, delivery confirmation, collection timestamp, message history) is already available in Seller Central.
Notice of Further Action
If this matter is not corrected and reimbursement is not issued, I will pursue recovery of my financial loss through formal legal channels. The current outcome is unsupported by evidence, contrary to Amazon’s own principles, and allows the buyer to retain both goods and funds.
This is a request for correction, not goodwill.
Kind regards
Formal Escalation – Buyer Diverted Parcel, Collected After Refund (A-to-Z Misuse)
@Roberto_Amazon @Angie_Amazon @Spencer_Amazon @JiAlex_Amazon @TaylorR_Amazon@Danny_Amazon
@Kai_Amazon @Julia_Amazon @Julia_Amzn @Winston_Amazon @Ash_Amazon @Spencer_Amazon @Abella_Amazon @Ange_Amazon @Sakura_Amazon__ @Sakura_Amazon_
Order ID: 203-8804677-0142754
Claim date: 24 December 2025
Refund amount: GBP 31.14 (seller-funded)
ODR impacted: Yes
Summary
This A-to-Z claim was granted in error and now allows the buyer to retain both the item and the refunded funds, despite the fact that:
The buyer personally diverted the parcel to a ParcelShop
The original delivery estimate ceased to apply after diversion
The parcel remained in the courier network as a result of the buyer’s action
The buyer later collected the parcel on 30 December 2025
This is not a delivery failure. It is buyer-initiated diversion followed by unjust enrichment.
1. Dispatch and Original Timeline Were Compliant
Purchase date: 8 December 2025
Ship-by date: 12 December 2025
Original delivery estimate: 16–18 December 2025
Parcel handed to Evri: 15 December 2025
Valid tracking uploaded
There was no seller delay at dispatch.
2. Buyer Requested Parcel Redirection
Courier tracking confirms that on 17 December 2025 at 20:26, the buyer submitted a request:
“We’ve received your request to deliver your parcel to a ParcelShop.”
This was a buyer-initiated change.
Once a parcel is redirected at the buyer’s request:
The original delivery estimate no longer applies
Delivery timelines are recalculated by the courier
Any delay following redirection is not seller-caused
This was clearly explained to the buyer multiple times in writing.
3. A-to-Z Claim Opened Despite Buyer Redirection
Despite personally redirecting the parcel, the buyer opened an A-to-Z claim stating:
“Package didn’t arrive”
“The seller changed the delivery date”
This statement is factually incorrect.
The seller did not change the delivery date.
All date changes were generated automatically by Evri after the buyer’s redirection request.
4. Parcel Was Delivered and Collected
Tracking confirms:
Parcel delivered to ParcelShop
Collected by the buyer on Tuesday 30 December 2025 at 12:51
Status: Collected
This occurred after the refund was issued.
The buyer therefore retains:
The product
The refunded funds
This outcome directly contradicts the purpose of the A-to-Z Guarantee.
5. Policy Principle Breached – Unjust Enrichment
Amazon policy does not permit a buyer to:
Initiate a delivery change
Open an A-to-Z claim while the parcel is in transit due to that change
Receive a refund
Later collect the item
Allowing this result constitutes unjust enrichment and misuse of the A-to-Z system.
There is no seller fault in this case.
Required Corrective Actions
I formally request the following actions:
Immediate reimbursement of the seller-funded A-to-Z refund (£31.14)
Immediate removal of the associated Order Defect Rate (ODR) impact
Correction of the claim record to reflect buyer-initiated diversion and confirmed collection
Confirmation that this claim has been marked as buyer misuse
All supporting evidence (tracking, redirection request, delivery confirmation, collection timestamp, message history) is already available in Seller Central.
Notice of Further Action
If this matter is not corrected and reimbursement is not issued, I will pursue recovery of my financial loss through formal legal channels. The current outcome is unsupported by evidence, contrary to Amazon’s own principles, and allows the buyer to retain both goods and funds.
This is a request for correction, not goodwill.
Kind regards
9 replies
Seller_TnBH4Q213xF7r
Have you raised an Appeal?
If not, you need to do so, as MODS seem to have gone completely on the Forums, as several have mentioned.
I would:
Write far less for A-Z, as they lose interest after 1 line.
a) provide a link to Evri with tracking.
b) Explain that the Evri tracking proves the Buyer re-directed the delivery on 17 December to go to a shop to be collected, so no longer to be on time on the 18 to the Buyers address on the order, as a new date was then provided.
c) Screenshot of the Evri tracking and highlight the fact that the Buyer actioned the divert, not you.
d) Prove that the Buyer collected the item from the shop (again a screenshot as proof). Explain to A-Z that the shop only gives the parcel with proof (eg Drivers Licence), so has to be this Buyer and no one else.
Good Luck!
A few questions:
Did the Buyer also contact you before the A-Z Claim?
- if yes, what was the reply?
What date was the A-Z Claim?
- if before 18 December, how was that possible?
What date did you process the order, so shows as shipped?
When was the first Evri scan?
- My only questionable statement of yours would be, you said: 'Parcel handed to Evri: 15 December 2025' - BUT, 'Ship-by date: 12 December 2025' - so was the 1st Evri scan on 12 December or before? - if not, then you did not send on time. If on 12 December or before, so shipped on time, point that out as well in the screenshot.
PS - As an aside though, I am aware that sometimes when a Delivery Driver is 'too busy' - they alter to divert to a shop/Post Office, etc, so not really the Customer doing that. Then the Driver can drop-off a lot of parcels there, so it seems like they are on time. They may also feel that is being helpful, rather than the delivery being delayed. I saw our local Evri Driver had literally an overloaded van full to the brim of small packages to deliver that day, they admitted impossible to deliver them all, but that is what they were given, so they said most would be late (or other Drivers may divert to a shop maybe?)
Seller_6HXPDZ2n6YG3n
The customer was redirected to the post office one day before delivery.
He opened an A-to-Z claim because the estimated delivery date changed after the redirection.
After receiving the refund, he then went to the post office and collected the parcel.
This was a planned theft action and no Amazon rule can justify this behaviour.
The customer now has both the item and the payment.
I received an ODR, and I lost both the item and the money.
Can anyone honestly say this is justice, or point to any Amazon rule that allows this?
@Roberto_Amazon @Angie_Amazon @Spencer_Amazon @JiAlex_Amazon @TaylorR_Amazon @Danny_Amazon @Kai_Amazon @Julia_Amazon @Julia_Amzn @Winston_Amazon @Ash_Amazon @Spencer_Amazon @Abella_Amazon @Ange_Amazon @Sakura_Amazon__ @Sakura_Amazon_
Seller_6HXPDZ2n6YG3n
I understand that moderators may be reading this thread, but I have not yet received any feedback.
Could a moderator please clarify why an on-time order affected by courier misdelivery, with no seller fault, has resulted in an ODR impact?
@Roberto_Amazon @Angie_Amazon @Spencer_Amazon @JiAlex_Amazon @TaylorR_Amazon @Danny_Amazon @Kai_Amazon @Julia_Amazon @Julia_Amzn @Winston_Amazon @Ash_Amazon @Spencer_Amazon @Abella_Amazon @Ange_Amazon @Sakura_Amazon__ @Sakura_Amazon_
Joey_Amazon
Hey @Seller_6HXPDZ2n6YG3n,
Than you for providing us with such a detail post regarding your matter.
When researching the claim associated with your order I show the buyer has withdrawn the claim.
Thank you for being a part of this community!
