Concern regarding Fulfilled by Merchant (FBM) orders that are marked as delivered by the carrier, yet are later disputed by customers claiming non-receipt. Despite valid tracking information and confirmed delivery status from USPS, these orders are still being refunded—leaving sellers at a loss and with little recourse.
It is deeply troubling how easily a customer can deny receipt of a package, even when there is clear proof of delivery. There appears to be no requirement for the customer to take basic steps—such as contacting their local post office or checking with neighbors—before filing a claim. Additionally, customers are not held accountable for ensuring that the shipping address provided is secure and accessible, which is a key part of successful delivery.
On other major e-commerce platforms, once a tracking number confirms delivery, the matter is typically considered resolved. The responsibility then shifts to the customer to follow up with the carrier to locate the package. Unfortunately, Amazon’s current approach seems to favor refunding the customer without fully investigating the situation, even when all seller obligations have been met.
As a California-based seller, I have even resorted to tracking down the buyer’s local post office and attempting to file a missing package claim myself—steps that, quite frankly, should not fall solely on the seller when confirmed delivery is documented
Amazon must review its policy on FBM delivery disputes, especially those involving confirmed delivery. Sellers need fair protection when they’ve fulfilled their shipping obligations in good faith. At the very least, additional verification steps should be required from the customer before a refund is granted in such cases.
This is a recurring issue that significantly impacts third-party sellers: customers who repeatedly claim that their orders did not arrive, despite valid tracking information and confirmed delivery by the carrier.
At present, it appears there is no formal mechanism in place to identify or flag customers who habitually file “Item Not Received” claims. This lack of accountability enables certain individuals to exploit the system, resulting in repeated refunds or replacements—often at the sole expense of small businesses.
Sellers have limited recourse in these situations. Even when we provide evidence of timely fulfillment and confirmed delivery, we are frequently held financially responsible for outcomes beyond our control. The current policy framework leaves sellers vulnerable and creates an imbalance that favors dishonest claims over verified shipping data.
Amazon prides itself on being the most customer-centric company in the world. However, this commitment should not come at the expense of fairness and sustainability for the small businesses that help support the platform’s vast marketplace.
Amazon must also advocate for and protect its small business sellers.
Sustainable policy changes are needed to ensure fairness and support for the independent sellers who help power this marketplace!