YES YOU READ RIGHT GOT A TO Z AND ODR AFTER I REFUNDED I GUESS ITS A FIRST. THERE IS ZERO RULES OR POLICY WHEN AMAZON SEES THE PUNNISH SELLERS.

I am asking for moderator assistance, because this A-to-Z claim should never have existed and is damaging my ODR unfairly.

Order ID: 206-9326319-8547518

Courier: Evri

Estimated delivery: 9 December 2025

Actual delivery: 8 December 2025 (EARLY)

Proof: Courier photo + GPS confirmation

Facts (no opinion, only evidence)

• The parcel was delivered one day earlier than the estimated delivery date

• Evri provided delivery photo and GPS confirmation

• The customer later stated the parcel was stolen after delivery

• This is not “not received”, it is post-delivery theft

The customer literally confirms this in writing.

Critical issue

Despite all of the above, Amazon Customer Service instructed me to refund, which I did in full on 10 December.

AFTER I refunded, Amazon systems allowed the customer to open an A-to-Z Guarantee claim anyway.

This should not happen.

Amazon policy is clear that A-to-Z claims are not valid once a seller has already refunded the order.

Yet:

• The claim was opened

• The claim was closed as “refunded by seller”

• A defect was still applied to my ODR

This makes sellers look like a freebies shop with unlimited stock, where customers get:

Delivery

Theft after delivery

Refund

A-to-Z claim on top

And sellers pay twice.

Why this is wrong

• Delivered early, not late

• Confirmed delivery with photo + GPS

• Customer admits stolen after delivery

• Full refund issued before A-to-Z

• No seller fault, no breach, no delay

This is purely an Amazon process failure, not seller performance.

@Seller_Udi0JNbTrsmUV @Seller_ZyGdB49sb7An4 @Seller_XUNeUuvrQDpgP @Seller_j9Bd91CW3ZVpr @Seller_YeWcEeTwlVO93

@Seller_l3eCP9f1PtJXC @Seller_lmwzklfLOK2Ob @Seller_DNQGSsdC7DccM @Seller_z3k8APxGfbQEK @Seller_TSXM2A5nxWSuH @Seller_fgtTzyHQfOM1x @Seller_XUNeUuvrQDpgP @Seller_VJ4XoAkjDpjPH @Seller_b91S9zQ2eKxLt @Seller_Rv3kmJHEUMGJH @Seller_gAhPNiLrkfTcr

it was 'transferred' yesterday it was launched early january, says last amazon reply 17 Jan 2026, 06:20 am GMT, cheers, 12125370472

Hi,

I’m looking for assistance with a VAT compliance case that appears to be stuck in the wrong review workflow.

We previously held a French VAT registration which was formally deregistered effective 31/10/2022 after ceasing inventory storage in France. We have provided Amazon with confirmation from our tax agent, VIES status, and inventory reports showing no stock in France.

However, our case continues to receive responses related to VAT exemption / SME eligibility, which does not apply to our situation.

Would an Amazon moderator be able to help route this case for manual VAT compliance review under VAT deregistration / no longer required?

Thank you for any guidance.

@sellersupport

Hi Amazon Team,

This situation is completely unacceptable.

I have sent thousands of units across more than 10 listings to the Doncaster, UK fulfilment centre, and every single unit is stuck in “Reserved” status. It has been over two weeks with zero progress, zero activation, and zero accountability.

This inventory is SEASONAL. Because of Amazon’s failure to process stock, the season is now ending, and I am facing serious and irreversible financial loss.

If Doncaster warehouse is experiencing operational issues, WHY is Amazon still allowing sellers to create and route shipments to this fulfilment centre? Why are sellers being forced to suffer losses caused by Amazon’s internal problems?

Support responses have been useless. I am repeatedly told that Amazon “needs more time for investigation,” with no resolution, no deadline, and no ownership of responsibility. This is not a solution, it is avoidance.

Let me be very clear:

This delay is NOT the seller’s fault

The inventory was delivered successfully

Amazon is holding stock hostage without activation

Sellers are being financially damaged due to Amazon’s operational failure

Who is responsible for compensating sellers for these losses?

I am formally requesting FULL REIMBURSEMENT for the affected inventory if Amazon is unable to activate the stock immediately. This level of service is embarrassing for a company of Amazon’s scale.

If any Amazon manager or operations team member is reading this, contact me immediately. This issue requires urgent escalation, not scripted replies.

Hi all – and Amazon, please address this.

Vine reviewers can be outrageous, and sellers are increasingly fed up with it.

One of our ASINs received a Vine review from a customer who got the product for free. The item was received exactly as advertised: an oversized loofah. The reviewer then left a negative review stating that it was “oversized and too big” and that her husband thought it would be better used on a car. Seriously?

Is there no mechanism for Amazon to check or suppress reviews when they get this unreasonable? We did our part. The product was as described, with no issues and no misrepresentation. Because this ASIN only had two other reviews, this single Vine review dropped the rating from 5 stars to 3 stars, damaging the product’s visibility, pricing position, and sales.

What makes this more frustrating is that the identical 3-pack version of the same product is performing very well. The difference is not quality — it is the impact of one careless Vine review, which has effectively suppressed this listing.

It’s hard not to take this personally when Amazon allows this to happen and sellers absorb the damage.

For a paid service (£72 for 10 reviews), the least that should be expected is some level of quality control — especially where reviews contain misleading claims or inappropriate language. We have reported Vine reviews before where no action was taken.

One example involved a reviewer who did not read our instructions (which clearly state to use soap to soften a natural sea sponge) and instead wrote that the sponge was “rougher than my dog’s ***” — word for word. Amazon has allowed this to remain live on our listing, yet the same language cannot even be typed in your own systems.

Another Vine reviewer failed to read the packaging, which clearly states that the SeaSponge is vacuum sealed. They left a negative review saying it arrived “flat as a pancake and went in the bin.” Again, no action was taken. For context, this is equivalent to leaving a negative review on a new mattress because it arrived rolled and compressed.

I am not asking Amazon to fix poor judgement in customers.

I am asking for Vine reviews to be monitored and moderated properly, especially when they are based on:

Failure to read listings or instructions

Misunderstanding clearly stated product features

Use of profane or inappropriate language

I am fully confident there are sellers with far worse stories and far greater damage than ours.

Personally, I’ve always believed that if you have nothing constructive to say — especially when receiving a product for free — then it should at least be based on correct use and understanding. Vine reviewers are becoming increasingly entitled and disconnected from how a genuine customer would assess a product.

At this stage, I am requesting:

Removal from the Vine programme

A refund of the Vine fee

Removal of Vine reviews on our listings that contain profanity or violate Amazon’s review guidelines

Thanks,

Atlantix Accessories Group LTD

Frankie Canterbury

Managing Director