This issue is affecting many sellers, including us, while certain insiders, such as Cocoblu, seem to remain unaffected. Sellers are increasingly facing returns after 4-5 months of product use, which blatantly violates Amazon’s stated return policies. Based on our analysis, these returns often do not originate from genuine buyers. Instead, they appear to be orchestrated by Amazon Transport Services (ATS) staff, potentially placing orders for their acquaintances to exploit the return system.

How can we substantiate this claim?

1) Amazon’s Return Policy: According to Amazon, returns are only valid if the product is unused and in its original packaging.

2) Selective Enforcement: When regular customers attempt to return items after the return window or in a used condition, ATS rejects the pickup, citing reasons like “used product” or “not in original condition.”

3) System Testing: To verify this inconsistency, we placed test orders from multiple accounts and locations. In every case, ATS refused to pick up used products during return attempts, often providing photographic evidence of the delivered product to justify their rejection.

These discrepancies strongly suggest that certain ATS staff might be enabling fraudulent returns for their acquaintances while enforcing stricter rules on legitimate customers.

Why doesn’t Amazon address this issue?

It seems Amazon may indirectly benefit from such practices:

a) Revenue from Sales: Amazon earns approximately 40% of the product price through direct sales. AND Ads revenue almost 20-25% . Total approx. 60%

b) Additional Earnings from Returns: Returns generate extra revenue via refund commissions and SAFE-T claim charges.

c) Dual Revenue from Fines: Amazon also fines ATS for product discrepancies, profiting from both sellers and ATS staff. These staff members may commit more thefts to cover up their losses, resulting in increased thefts and losses for sellers.

The same issue occurs with FBA, but on a larger scale, where thefts happen in bulk.

This systemic exploitation appears designed to maximize Amazon’s earnings at the expense of genuine sellers.

What can sellers do?

1) Analyze Profit Margins: Carefully review your actual earnings after Amazon’s deductions. Many sellers find they are not even recovering their product costs.

2) Raise Awareness: Collaborate with other sellers to share these issues and demand action. A united seller community can push Amazon to address unethical practices.

3) Document and Escalate: Keep detailed records of such incidents and escalate them to Amazon Seller Support, legal forums, or e-commerce advocacy groups.

The reality is that Amazon prioritizes its profits over sellers’ protection. Given the evidence, it seems unlikely that Amazon will address this issue effectively.

Sellers must reassess their dependency on such platforms and seriously consider ending business with these exploitative systems to protect their interests.