Auto-authorised returns: responsibility for cost of return label
I had a recent order where the customer initiated the return of a music CD three weeks after it was posted, the reason given was that it was 'No longer needed'. The disc was Like New when sent but had fingerprints all over it when it arrived back, so the customer had presumably played it and used me as a lending library!
Amazon auto-authorised the return with a pre-paid label (I assume that this is now automatic with all return requests?). The amounts involved are small, but it's the principle that matters here: Amazon deducted £1.40 (less commission) from my payment account for a refund to the customer. The total order value including delivery was £6.60, so it seems that the customer has been charged £5.20 for the return: presumably £3.35 for the return label plus £1.85 to cover my original postage.
However, I have also been charged £3.35 on my payment account for the return label, in addition to the small refund to the customer, which means that I am out of pocket on the transaction. I raised a SAFE-T claim, as I don't understand why I have been charged for the return label when it's clearly the customer's responsibility to pay for the cost of the return when the reason given is 'No longer needed', as explained here:
https://sellercentral-europe.amazon.com/help/hub/reference/external/G202072200
SAFE-T claims team has denied my claim and refused to provide any explanation.
This doesn't seem right to me. Has anyone else found that they have been charged the cost of the return label when it's the customer's responsibility?
It would have been better if the customer had contacted me directly, returned the item at their own expense (at much lower cost than using the standard tracked pre-paid label) and then I would have issued a full refund less the cost of my original postage. Whenever customers request return via Amazon it always gets auto-authorised and I end up out of pocket and am unable to adjust the refund... what a terrible system!
20 replies
Seller_tj5bg90i9gyCk
It seems as though Amazon just keep the Amazon fees on the original transaction and they don't reimburse these to the seller. The amount by which I'm out of pocket equates to the amount of Amazon fees on the original order less reimbursed fees on the refund to the customer.
Is this what normally happens? Are other sellers finding that they are out of pocket even when it's the customer who is charged for the return label?
Seller_RAXEWLxQ2dbmN
Most likely they'd copied it before sending it back. :(
I had one the other week that was autho-authorised but I refused to reimburse their return postage as they chose the 'no longer needed reason', which is basically equivalent to a change of mind.
Seller_pvx82zrXMTSpX
As a FBM seller, we are waiting for the return system to hurt us. Like you, we cannot change our return settings and we are stuck with Amazon Prepaid. However, when we get a return request Amazon usually just provides the buyer with our address and gives them the autonomy to choose whichever return method they wish (usually the most expensive). Whilst the return is often auto-authorised if made within 30 days of delivery, we inspect every return first and manually process the refund through the return request. This gives us the opportunity to edit the amount to be refunded for return postage. I am not sure if there is a setting somewhere that I had changed a while back to allow us the chance to do this or if it is because our items are high-value.
To my knowledge, the SAFE-T team should have had your back for a return that was 'no longer needed'. They should have also provided an explanation for their decision as you now have limited basis to appeal beyond what you already know. It is often discussed on this forum that they are simply not fit for purpose. Unfortunately, your only recourse is to gather everything you know and appeal the SAFE-T decision.
Adding to your other point, we have also had several experiences where Amazon did not reimburse their commissions following a refund - you are not alone! We have had mixed-results with seller support querying these. I find myself poring over every transaction on here most days.
Good luck!
Seller_W6JSpivonYNIh
These auto returns biggest scam I ever came across. People just abusing this system as much as they like, and you cannot do anything. Absolutely ridiculous.
I feel for you, we going through this almost on the daily basis. Before they introduced this nonsense we used to get 1-2 returns a month.
Seller_hzbEpXdZ6aDBQ
You were charged for the return label, but it was then deducted from the buyers refund , so you have had the money back and not paid for the label.
Amazon will keep 20% of the referral fee, as a return admin fee.
Seller_M2Il1yiayMfjp
Hi
Yes its getting ridiculous
I worked it it cost the business £1200 in return shipping fees on amazon due to these and at least half were buyer remorse
Another to add to a long list of unfair policy's on amazon
Seller_XFH5a9uW8sEko
SAFE-T claim team denial is very usual and illogical these days so you are not the only one to have this, I do not what kind of criteria they are setting, but almost every claim is denied and some of them are permanently refused to pay even all the required documents and evidences are provided. Some which are paid, they are not paid equal to the damaged/loss you face on a product. There is no platform to complaint against them so whatever is their decision is the decision. I hope someone from Amazon to look into this.
Seller_tRuvBEHDedp4q
Unfortunately this is illegal. You cannot deduct the cost of your original postage charged to ship the item. Customer is due a 100% refund on the price they originally paid (unless they opted to upgrade for a premium delivery service, when you can deduct the difference between your standard service and the premium one). This is not an Amazon policy but your legal duty.
For a change of mind return then customer is however responsible for the return cost.
Because so many sellers were ignoring their legal duty and not refunding customer outgoing shipping charge, Amazon brought in this system to give customers a pre-paid label for any return.
What then happens is when customer uses the label to make the return, the first scan will initiate a charge to your account for the return postage. Then customer is refunded in full the original price paid less the pre-paid return label cost. You will see a deduction from your account of the difference between original price paid and the return label cost.
So, ignoring fees for now (its difficult to include these when dont know it was sold as FBM, FBA, etc)
Customer buys at £6.60
You get credit in account of £6.60 (minus fees)
Customer returns item (return label cost £3.35)
You are charged £3.35 for the label
Customer refunded by Amazon £6.60 - £3.35 = £3.25
Amazon deducts from your account this £3.25 (minus the Amazon refund admin fee + other non refundable Amazon fees such as Closing fee)
Your total loss is £3.25 (customer refund) + £3.35 (return label)= £6.80 (original price paid by customer
Customer has taken a loss of £3.35 for the return
You will be down the original cost of £6.80 plus the Amazon refund admin fee.
Amazon charge a percentage of the sale as a referral fee. You get this back from Amazon minus an admin fee of 20% of the referral fee). The Amazon refund admin fee is charged because it is standard practise that when a refund is processed on a card, the card processing fee on the original transaction is NOT refunded. You will find this is standard across the industry - even Paypal will not refund their fees on a refund. So any refund will always mean you are down. I believe media items also have a 50p closing fee which is probably also non-refundable.
Seller_hzbEpXdZ6aDBQ
The buyer actually paid £4.02 for the return label, as VAT is added on top of the £3.35.
The postage label that you purchased does not get refunded, you will have lost that.
The rest will be the 20% refund admin fee, if you click on the blue figure at the end of the line in transaction view you will see a breakdown of all the figures.
