Results for "일당15만원 탤례상담 peckpark 페크박컨설팅 여자고소득알바 제천시고페이알바일자리 40대주부알바 건설일용직일당"
(208 results)
Sort by
Filters
Results for "일당15만원 탤례상담 peckpark 페크박컨설팅 여자고소득알바 제천시고페이알바일자리 40대주부알바 건설일용직일당"
(208 results)Easy Ship Disaster!
Hello @Seller_GqPUALGRa4vus,
Thank you for sharing your experience with Easy Ship. I can see this has had a significant impact on your business, and I appreciate you bringing this to our attention.
When Easy Ship is enabled, Amazon handles customer service for those deliveries, which includes processing refund requests. If a customer contacts Amazon about a delivery delay, a refund may be issued automatically, even if the parcel is still in transit.
I understand you've already opted out of Easy Ship, which is a good step to regain control over your refund decisions. For the refunds that were already processed while Easy Ship was active, here's what I'd recommend:
- File SAFE-T Claims: Continue filing SAFE-T claims for orders where the customer received the item but was also refunded. Make sure to include tracking evidence showing successful delivery, and file within 15 days of the refund date.
- Select the Correct Reason Code: When submitting SAFE-T claims, ensure you're selecting the most appropriate reason code for delivery disputes, as choosing the wrong category can lead to automatic rejections.
- Review Your Refund Processing Window: Your refund processing window is 4 calendar days before automated refunds trigger. Processing refunds within this window helps maintain SAFE-T claim eligibility.
- Contact Seller Support: If you need assistance with specific refunded orders or SAFE-T claims, I'd recommend creating a case with Seller Support for a detailed review.
For more information, please review our SAFE-T Reimbursement Policy.
Regards,
Billy
Hermes UK Evri option greyed out in Amazon Buy Shipping menu
Hello @Seller_qRn4nbu2gOshu,
Thank you for sharing your experience with us. Here's what you can do to resolve this:
- Go to Settings → Delivery Settings → General Shipping Settings → Buy Shipping Preferences and verify that both Hermes UK Evri and Royal Mail are enabled and ranked in your preferred order.
- Ensure your shipping templates include the correct shipping methods for both carriers — sometimes a mismatch between shipping templates and Buy Shipping preferences can cause options to appear greyed out.
- Double-check that the package dimensions and weight you've entered for the order are within the accepted limits for Royal Mail services, as exceeding these can cause those options to be unavailable.
- If everything looks correct and Royal Mail options remain greyed out, please contact Seller Support directly so they can investigate your specific account settings. You can reach them here.
Additionally, please be aware that Amazon has announced some changes to Buy Shipping methods effective 15 October 2026, which may affect available carrier options. You can check your notifications in Seller Central for more details.
Angie
Amazon incorrectly refunded customer £560 for 1 parcel missing from a 16 parcel order. Customer kept all 15 parcels and also had full refund.
I need urgent help with a recent A-Z claim against us which resulted in a substantial and clearly incorrect seller funded refund.
Amazon approved a claim for a 16 parcel order of which 15 were delivered. The customer never claimed all 16 were missing, just 1. However they have been refunded for the entire order and our appeal with proof of this has been denied.
Order ID: 204-4729189-2318743
Seller Support Case ID: 13133252652 / 13154677422
Refund: £559.84 seller-funded
Correct disputed amount: £34.99
The order consisted of 16 separately tracked boxes of LVT flooring with a total value of £559.84.
The customer raised an A-to-z claim stating: “I ordered 16 pks but only received 15.”
They also messaged us on Amazon to say they got 15 parcels but one was missing in transit.
The customer therefore explicitly acknowledged receiving 15 of the 16 boxes.
Our courier admitted loss of the 1 parcel. However before we could offer a refund or a replacement the customer had filed an A-Z incorrectly for all 16 parcels (despite in their own claim comments admitting they got 15).
Fifteen separate tracking numbers show delivery on 29 July 2026 at 14:12 and signed receipt.
Only one parcel was not delivered and was subsequently confirmed lost by the courier.
We have never disputed the customer’s entitlement to a refund for that one missing box. Its value is £34.99.
However, the customer selected 16 of 16 units when submitting the claim and Amazon refunded the entire £559.84 order.
As a result, the customer has retained 15 delivered boxes worth £524.85 AND received a refund for those same 15 boxes.
We appealed and supplied:
• Customer acknowledgement that 15 of 16 boxes were received
• 15 separate tracking numbers confirming delivery
• Signed proof of delivery with GPS confirmation
• Delivery photograph
• Courier evidence showing only 1 parcel was missing
During the appeal, Amazon requested information from the customer. The customer did not respond. The appeal was subsequently CLOSED and the full £559.84 seller-funded refund remained in place.
Seller Support has now advised that the claim cannot be reopened or appealed and that Amazon cannot reverse the excess refund without the customer’s consent.
We have been instructed to contact the customer and ask them voluntarily to authorise reversal of £524.85.
This leaves us in an extremely unfair position. The buyer’s own statement and the carrier evidence both establish that 15 boxes were delivered.
Yet because the buyer has not responded, they are currently retaining both the £524.85 worth of delivered goods and the corresponding refund.
We respectfully request that an Amazon moderator review this case and, if possible, escalate it to the appropriate A-to-z or specialist team.
We are NOT requesting reversal of the £34.99 refund for the genuinely missing parcel. We are requesting reimbursement of the £524.85 that was refunded for 15 separately tracked parcels which were delivered, acknowledged as received and retained by the buyer. Can an Amazon moderator please assist with escalating this for manual review? Thank you.
@Seller_nEEe7zUuNBBx9 @Seller_FJwyF3iu5qxUY @Seller_Rv3kmJHEUMGJH @Seller_8hQgfj6OVZYse @Seller_GEZPMc4CeQfh6 @Seller_dnxnrsZIeTNo3 @Seller_hnDMgUKxMh1V4 @Seller_xkwDczt8sPSmx @Seller_FJMRkAyEboZYQ @Seller_5zI0wsS66MHFL
Hello,
I am requesting assistance from an Amazon moderator and escalation of the case concerning shipment FBA15MC74VVR, Case ID 13350004042.
A shipment containing 94 units of FNSKU X001VNSB27 was sent to Amazon Fulfillment Center KTW5.
We have an official Proof of Delivery from Raben, which clearly confirms for this specific shipment:
- Shipment ID: FBA15MC74VVR
- Amazon Reference ID: 5C7WQNFV
- 1 pallet
- 500 kg total weight
- Consignee: Amazon Fulfillment Poland KTW5
- Delivery date: 15 September 2026 at 15:01:49
- Status: Shipment delivered
After delivery, Amazon showed the following shipment statuses:
Delivered → Checked In → Receiving
The shipment was later closed with:
Expected: 94 / Located: 0 / Discrepancy: -94
We submitted the required documentation to Amazon, including Proof of Delivery and Proof of Inventory Ownership.
During the first investigation, Amazon denied reimbursement using the following figures:
- Expected shipment weight: 448 kg
- Carrier weight: 28,200 kg
- Difference: 27,752 kg
The problem is that 28,200 kg is not the weight of this shipment.
The official carrier document for shipment FBA15MC74VVR clearly states:
1 pallet – 500 kg.
After pointing out this error, we requested a new manual investigation and asked Amazon to explain where the 28,200 kg figure came from.
Selling Partner Support has not addressed this question. Instead, we received another standard denial stating that Proof of Delivery confirms only that the carrier delivered something to the fulfillment center, but does not prove the exact contents of the pallet.
We understand that a POD alone does not prove the exact quantity of individual FNSKUs.
However, this is not the main issue we are escalating.
We want to determine what happened to the specific 500 kg pallet which:
1. was confirmed by the carrier as delivered to KTW5,
2. was specifically linked to Shipment ID FBA15MC74VVR,
3. was subsequently marked by Amazon as Checked In and Receiving,
4. and was ultimately closed with 0 of 94 units received.
We are also requesting an explanation of the following:
Where did the 28,200 kg figure used in the first investigation come from, when the official carrier POD for this specific shipment states 500 kg?
I would greatly appreciate it if an Amazon moderator could escalate Case ID 13350004042 to the appropriate internal team and request a genuine manual investigation at KTW5, including, where available:
- dock / receiving records,
- pallet / handling-unit scans,
- internal warehouse movement records,
- receiving exception / damage records,
- verification whether the pallet was mistakenly associated with another shipment or inventory,
- and, if available, security footage related to the receiving of this pallet.
We are not asking Amazon to treat the POD alone as proof of the 94 individual units.
We are asking Amazon to determine what happened to the specific 500 kg pallet after it was delivered to KTW5 and entered Amazon's receiving process.
Any assistance from an Amazon moderator in escalating this case to the appropriate team would be greatly appreciated.
Case ID: 13350004042
Shipment ID: FBA15MC74VVR
Amazon Reference ID: 5C7WQNFV
FNSKU: X001VNSB27
Missing quantity: 94 units
KYC failure due to a potential bug or misuderstanding
Two months have now passed since this issue began, and to date I have not received a single human response to my emails—only automated replies. It makes no difference whether I submit documents or simply ask a question; I continue to receive the same generic automated response.
On June 25, I opened support case 12918271992, which was transferred to the relevant team. As of today, August 16, I have still received no response whatsoever.
In the meantime, we made the same company name update in our US and Canadian stores and successfully completed verification there without any issues.
I also found the complaint form for Amazon Payments. Unfortunately, the form is limited to 2,000 characters, which makes it extremely difficult to properly explain a complex issue that has already been ongoing for two months. Nevertheless, I submitted a complaint. According to Amazon, it should be reviewed within 15 days, although given my experience so far, I am concerned that this too may result in nothing more than another automated response.
UK deactivation: repeated IP notices after deletion - request for record review
Hello Amazon moderators,
Could an Account Health moderator refer this case for a joint account-enforcement and catalogue-history review? Related support cases: 13288716402 and 13289253842. The UK deactivation is dated 8 September 2026 and concerns ASIN B0GV5RHJ3L. My latest appeal was rejected on 25 September.
I accept responsibility for inadequate rights checks and publication controls. I do not hold permission for the affected artwork and am not asking to reinstate the product. I am requesting review of the account-level decision after withdrawal and clarification of the remaining requirements.
I repeatedly received notices for products I believed I had deleted. My workflow involved third-party publication and international distribution. I cannot yet prove whether these were new automated uploads, retained catalogue contributions, or further enforcement of historical events. I also recall an earlier acknowledgement/correction process, but its outcome and scope need verification. I am not claiming that an acknowledgement automatically cleared the account.
What has changed:
- The UK inventory was cleared on 15 September and checked at zero listings on 24 September and again on 6 October, without a search filter.
- As account owner, I confirmed by 24 September that all connections used to publish to Amazon were disabled. Exact historical feed and revocation timestamps have not been independently established.
- Our wider European cleanup recorded report entries not visible in sampled live searches and three German records persisting after deletion attempts. These are separate examples requiring reconciliation, not proof that the UK Star Wars product was re-uploaded.
- The affected artwork will stay withdrawn. Before any future listing I will personally document artwork rights, permitted products and territories, and approve the destination marketplace. Before any reconnection I will review source products, queued feeds and international targets. Future notices will trigger a stop to the affected publishing workflow and a check of all variants. These are operating commitments, not a claim that historical technical audits have already been completed.
Please review:
1. Whether subsequent notices followed new submissions or retained/historical records, and the outcome of any earlier acknowledgement.
2. The exact account-level basis and whether a repeat-violation threshold applies; correct only verified duplicate or misattributed events.
3. Whether withdrawn UK offers, item-data contributions or images remain, and the deletion-only route while suspended.
4. Whether the authorised team can consider account reinstatement with the product permanently withdrawn, and exactly which evidence remains missing if it cannot.
Relevant Amazon guidance:
Michelle_Amazon explains infringement notices involving previously listed products and full contribution removal:
https://sellercentral.amazon.com/seller-forums/discussions/t/4c6c0459-b82d-455c-bbe7-81d5becb9383
Troy_Amazon referred another seller's repeated-enforcement issue for further research:
https://sellercentral.amazon.com/seller-forums/discussions/t/8a286589-53a7-44a0-9f65-0801617d2572
Roxy_Amazon contacted the responsible team and requested specific corrective and preventive details:
https://sellercentral.amazon.com/seller-forums/discussions/t/dac05e6a-3d37-4596-92c6-2053ac4bc0fb
I recognise that these discussions do not establish an entitlement to reinstatement. I can provide the detailed chronology, current inventory screenshot and corrective-control record privately. Please review the existing cases and the 6 October supplemental appeal rather than treating removal of a visible violation as proof that the account issue is resolved. Thank you.
FBA Shipment delivered but never check in and now im being ignored
The date that decides your case is the delivery date. Since September 2024, claims for units missing from an inbound shipment must be filed no earlier than 15 and no later than 60 calendar days from the shipment's delivery date. Yours was delivered on 24 July, so that window closed at the end of September while support had you chasing a reconcile button that cannot appear: reconciliation only opens on a Closed shipment with units actually received. Put the dates in writing in the case now, and if you raised it inside the window say so with the date you opened it, because the delay from there is Amazon's and not yours; ask for a receiving investigation rather than a reconciliation, wording it as delivered with zero units received, and attach carrier proof of delivery showing box count and total weight plus the supplier invoice, in PDF, never Excel or Word. On the 5.99 figure: since March 2025, inbound units lost before a customer order are reimbursed at your sourcing cost, not the sale price, so if that amount does not reflect what you paid, correct it on the Manage Your Sourcing Cost page before the remaining 99 units are processed.
A-to-Z Claims for Delivered Orders – How Are Other Sellers Dealing With This?
Hi @Kam_Amazon,
Thank you for your response.
Just to clarify, are you saying that if a customer places an order on Amazon, and the parcel is delivered to the address provided on the order, with photographic proof of delivery and a signature obtained at the delivery address by Royal Mail or Parcelforce, the customer could still file an A-to-z claim and potentially receive a refund?
Is that Amazon's official policy?
If so, what level of delivery evidence is considered sufficient to protect a seller when using a third-party carrier rather than Amazon Buy Shipping?
I have been selling on Amazon for over 15 years, and I find it difficult to believe that photographic proof of delivery and a signature at the delivery address would not carry significant weight when reviewing an "Item Not Received" claim simply because Amazon Buy Shipping was not used.
I would appreciate clarification on Amazon's official policy regarding this point.
Thank you.
A-to-Z Claims for Delivered Orders – How Are Other Sellers Dealing With This?
Hello everyone,
I'm interested to hear how other sellers are handling situations where an order is clearly marked as delivered, yet an A-to-Z claim is still granted to the buyer and refunded from the seller's account.
In our recent case:
The order was dispatched on time using a fully tracked service. - Royal mail - PF48
Tracking showed the parcel was delivered to the exact address provided by the customer.
The carrier provided:
Delivery confirmation
Signature
Delivery photograph
Confirmation of the person who accepted the parcel
We responded promptly to the customer and provided all tracking information.
Despite this, the customer opened an A-to-Z claim stating that the parcel had not been received.
Amazon's decision stated that:
The tracking confirms delivery.
The claim would not affect our Order Defect Rate because valid tracking was used.
However, the customer was still refunded and the amount was debited from our seller account.
This leaves me wondering:
How often are you seeing A-to-Z claims granted when tracking clearly shows delivery?
Do you appeal these decisions?
Are appeals successful when you have:
Signature
Photograph
GPS-tracked delivery
Delivery scan
Is this simply becoming a cost of doing business on Amazon?
Do sellers who use Royal Mail, Parcelforce, DPD, Evri, or Amazon Shipping see different outcomes?
Has anyone successfully recovered funds through a SAFE-T claim or appeal in similar circumstances? - we are here 15 years never - successfully recovered funds through a SAFE-T
I completely understand that Amazon wants to protect customers, and that's important for the marketplace.
However, it feels difficult when:
Sellers ship on time.
Sellers purchase tracked delivery.
Carriers confirm delivery.
Sellers respond to customer enquiries.
Yet the financial responsibility still appears to fall on the seller, even when there is strong proof that the parcel reached the delivery address provided by the customer.
I'm interested to know whether other sellers are experiencing an increase in these cases and what processes you have put in place to protect your business.
Are there particular carriers, shipping methods, or appeal strategies that seem to work better?
I'd appreciate hearing your experiences and any advice.
Thank you.
Moderator Assistance Requested – New Evidence Not Reviewed – 125 Units / 40 Full Cartons Missing After Amazon Freight Delivery – Case 13214485052
Dear Amazon Moderators,
We are requesting moderator assistance with an unresolved FBA inbound shipment issue.
Shipment ID: FBA15LWHXQY7
Case ID: 13214485052
Fulfillment Centre: LBA4
Carrier: Amazon Freight – Shipment 2240145301
We have repeatedly contacted Seller Support and have now submitted a complete evidence package, but the latest response on September 15, 2026 repeated the same standard reimbursement denial without addressing the new evidence.
Key facts:
- Amazon Freight records the shipment as 73 boxes / 3 UK pallets / 1,075.53 kg.
- The CMR states that the shipper counted and loaded the freight and that the driver confirmed there were no changes to the shipment details.
- Amazon Freight confirmed delivery to LBA4 on August 10, 2026.
- We also obtained written confirmation that the goods were unloaded on August 10.
- Amazon’s earlier investigation reported 169 units missing.
- Amazon’s latest investigation now reports only 125 units missing.
Therefore, 44 units previously classified as missing are no longer classified as missing, but Seller Support has not explained what happened to these 44 units or why Amazon’s receiving records changed after the previous investigation.
The remaining 125 units correspond to 40 full cartons, not random individual-unit shortages.
We have specifically asked Seller Support to investigate the receiving records and the 44-unit discrepancy, but the responses continue to repeat only that POD does not prove the exact quantity received.
We are not asking Amazon to rely solely on the POD.
We are requesting review of the complete evidence and Amazon’s own changing receiving records.
Could an Amazon moderator please help escalate Case 13214485052 to the appropriate FBA Inbound / LBA4 Receiving investigation team for a substantive review?
Thank you.
