Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon refused to refund $7k after shipping an empty box instead of a Sony A1

petapixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 647 posts

Re: Amazon refused to refund $7k after shipping an empty box instead of a Sony A1

#521

Post by letitbeirie »

wayoutthere wrote: post #302
neiman wrote: post #168

I used to live for many years in a "bad" area of Berlin, where my packages were constantly disappearing, not arriving, taken by neighbors (who put an X as a signature), or left by the delivery people outside our building door. After a few such accidents, each of it super tiring on its own to get things reshipped or reimbursed (and often I failed), I decided all this modernity is not for me. Nowadays I rather buy what…

I live in an “up and coming” neighborhood in a major US city and it’s the same. Amazon has package lockers within a half-mile (~1 km) walk for the small ones, and the big ones are usually expensive enough I’ll just WFH for the day. Part of the problem at least in the US is that retail stores don’t have the selection or availability that Amazon does, never mind the price. There are also some things that just aren’t so…

> retail stores don’t have the selection or availability that Amazon does

Largely the same situation in Germany, except stores in the US are much more likely to be open past 18:00.

Re: Amazon refused to refund $7k after shipping an empty box instead of a Sony A1

#522

Post by LorenPechtel »

inapis wrote: post #229
onli wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon in Germany can also go very wrong. This is why I stopped ordering there: I ordered a bunch of small electronics stuff, about 100€. In the order process Amazon selected an expired credit card (which I'm sure I had replaced in the settings already). They then split the order in parts and for each order part demanded an additional late pay fee, because the card was expired. This is despite me calling them to stop…

Why would an order go through with an expired credit card? Is this something like cash-on-delivery or card-on-delivery?

Amazon doesn't charge your card until it's about to ship your order. Thus an order with an invalid card will go through but won't ship.

Re: Amazon refused to refund $7k after shipping an empty box instead of a Sony A1

#523

Post by numpad0 »

donkeyd wrote: post #214
marban wrote: post #44

I've placed approx. 15k orders with Amazon Germany in 20 years and have probably had less than 100 issues, mostly with FBA sellers. I get an answer from CS within 10 minutes and 1-day shipments are on time ~98%. Refunds are issued as soon as I drop the package in the return box. Call me a fan. The best experience is still Amazon JP but returns are a little more complicated (Even within Japan) — Obviously b/c you more…

> Obviously b/c you more or less do not return stuff in JP Not so obvious to me. Could you elaborate on what you mean here, sounds intriguing.

Can't back up with data other than with random howto articles, but you just don't return items in Japan without a "valid" cause like product defects.

Re: Amazon refused to refund $7k after shipping an empty box instead of a Sony A1

#524

Post by procombo »

wyager wrote: post #396
simonsarris wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. After getting clearly-open-box (used? counterfeit? returned?) Makita batteries on Amazon I only buy tools from Home Depot, only buy camera equipment from B&H, etc. No more pricey tools or electronics from Amazon, or food for that matter (years ago, bought box of protein bars, came expired!)

I bought an $800 winch from Amazon, shipped and sold by Amazon, in “new” condition. When it arrived, not only was it clearly used, but it had been damaged by improper use and would have been extremely dangerous if I tried to use it. If I hadn’t known what to look for, I probably would have used it and been at risk of serious injury. Amazon is clearly marking returns as “new” if their clueless returns staff thinks the…

Yeah, me too. I imagine it's a process that is difficult to scale without error.

I like buying Amazon Warehouse deals when the item makes sense to me. With larger items I think their quality control is higher, and the saving tend be bigger. The box may arrive super beat-up, but item is just fine.

My motivation is probably less about overall savings, but more about me feeling like I'm doing Amazon a favor. Weird, isn't it? I'm conditioned.

As a tangent: I've also purchased used that ended up being a return of a similar looking, but much less expensive item. So I just re-return it. In this case I assume it was fraud on the original return. With my patterns I doubt Amazon thinks -I- returned them the wrong item. Without customer context their job figuring stuff like that out would be much more difficult.

Re: Amazon refused to refund $7k after shipping an empty box instead of a Sony A1

#526

Post by letitbeirie »

neiman wrote: post #168

I used to live for many years in a "bad" area of Berlin, where my packages were constantly disappearing, not arriving, taken by neighbors (who put an X as a signature), or left by the delivery people outside our building door. After a few such accidents, each of it super tiring on its own to get things reshipped or reimbursed (and often I failed), I decided all this modernity is not for me. Nowadays I rather buy what…

> "special" part of Berlin

A few years ago this could have described half of Mitte tbh

Re: Amazon refused to refund $7k after shipping an empty box instead of a Sony A1

#527

Post by numpad0 »

goodpoint wrote: post #289
marban wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

90% private, 10% business. Literally anything from iPhones to a single duct tape. Food only for shelf-stable stuff since I live next to a grocery store.

It still does not explain the amount of orders, by far.

> Literally anything from iPhones to a single duct tape.

I think this explains it. Cheapest ducktape on Amazon is like $3.48 with free shipping for Prime users. Ordering one such tape every other day only costs $52.20. At some point you stop caring how much externalities it might be causing by clicking "Order Now" in Tuesday 3:40 AM just for a single M4x20 screw you forgot to add earlier in the day.

Re: Amazon refused to refund $7k after shipping an empty box instead of a Sony A1

#528

Post by _xerces_ »

toss1 wrote: post #301
reikonomusha wrote: post #3

I do not trust Amazon to ship anything safely and securely anymore. Almost everything I receive is damaged, late, or mis-delivered. Books are especially abused somewhere in Amazon’s fulfillment. (They’re always bent, creased, or dirty.) Items that are supposed to be 1-day shipping typically take >=3, and Amazon’s tracking mostly says “oops! it’ll come trust us”. (Not verbatim, obviously.) Amazon’s return process is b…

Yup, ironically, books coming from Amazon are far more likely to arrive damaged - two decades later, and they still can't get it through their heads that they can't just toss a book in a box and expect it to be not crunch the corners every time. I don't think that it is even smart enough to be a scheme to encourage Kindle and Audible sales... For returns, I was surprised to see only drop-off options, but I found that…

A box? You must be a favorite, premier customer! Most of my stuff comes in a flimsy paper bag these days.

Re: Amazon refused to refund $7k after shipping an empty box instead of a Sony A1

#529

Post by LorenPechtel »

massysett wrote: post #209
amelius wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to agree with damaged books. It seems Amazon is using lower quality packaging material today than they did a few years ago.

What’s changed is that they don’t care about packaging books anymore. Previously they would ship books inside of an airgap in a box, or at least inside of a tight box that would prevent damage. Now they will just throw it into a Mylar envelope that offers no protection against bending.

Yeah, Amazon loves those bubble bags and even just the mylar ones. They aren't careful enough about what sort of items go in them. Many items are fine that way but more than once I've gotten completely destroyed packaging around an intact item. Fine if I was simply going to use the item anyway, not so good if I was ordering it for someone else. I've also had a couple of cases where I was surprised it survived.

I suspect they are playing the odds, accepting that they will have to refund a few items that got smashed from inadequate protection.

Re: Amazon refused to refund $7k after shipping an empty box instead of a Sony A1

#530

Post by mlyle »

jquery wrote: post #518
mlyle wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"LTV model of 'justice' here is, in my opinion, a lot lot better" Sure, it is, when you're rich. If you're some poor bastard who's scrimped up a whole lot of money to buy an expensive item, and Amazon figures you won't spend much money in the future, you get ripped off. There's a couple of externalities you've left out, too, because your LTV doesn't predict them: * Reputational costs * Risk of adverse legal outcomes,…

If a rich person went onto Amazon and bought something 50 times more expensive than anything else they’d ever purchased and claimed it didn’t arrive, Amazon would drop them like a hot potato. You’re talking like there’s no legal recourse (or even financial, like a chargeback). There simple aren’t enough resources to track down the source of every sob story, the hard truth is this “inhuman” efficiency is a huge boon f…

A bare minimum level of diligence is required before denying a claim. Else you -should- run into bad faith, punitive damages, action from regulators, etc. It's not some super magical extensive investigation to realize that you shipped a box that weighs much less than the item and that there's likely a big problem.

There may be very valid reason to shortcut claims and to grant dubious claims of high value customers. But you really shouldn't just ship an empty box and say "sorry, you're not getting your money back unless you sue us". (And worse, break the customer's existing digital content if they do, because you can hold it hostage).

I mean, I get that it's financially appealing to externalize the costs of in-warehouse and in-transit shrinkage to random low-value customers, but brah-- that's just not right.

Post reply on HN