I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon • Hacker News Board

Re: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon

#421

Post by QuestionTopic » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 6:19 PM UTC

We're hearing the Complainer's version, and not Amazon's. Lady Justice carries a balancing scale, with both sides being weighed.

Whenever I see blotted out information, I wonder why...., so let's look at the evidence carefully.

Notice the ship to address on the Amazon invoice-- the green-blotted-out portion with the ship to address beginning with a 4 and then green-- possibly holding another 8 to 10 characters.

Then look at the the USPS confirmation ship to address "Glenbrook Cir" with 13 characters and erased number preface.

The number of characters in the Amazon invoice and USPS confirmation are probably different. Complainer claims Amazon did not "see" or refuse to acknowledge the incorrect ship-to-address. Difficult to believe. And according to Complainer's writing on Amazon's response, Amazon stated the ship-to-address is correct. If Complainer wants to make a better case, remove the blotting. The Courts will never allow for this type of deliberate blotting as evidence, and I don't think we should either.

I've never had problems reaching Amazon support by phone or chat (my choice), and the delay is usually 30 seconds or less. An easy-to-understand scam as this would be critical to Amazon's business. Difficult to believe Amazon staff had trouble understanding Complainer's complaint.

What I see so far is a Complainer who blots out unique identifying person or address information, and gives photos of various documents, which are partially related. Partial relationship, not total.

Lady Justice's scale has two weigh pans. The Complainer's weigh pan already has some holes.

Re: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon

#422

Post by pvaldes » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 6:44 PM UTC

jaclaz wrote: post #385

pvaldes wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What we need is maybe a species of md5 for mail packages A formulae that mix weight + dimensions + sender data + receiver data + followed route + category of contents. In several parts. Some parts (buyers adress, weight, category, etc...) can be verified for buyer, other for seller. The total formula is available only for the postman and would be easily verifiable. When the package is sent, a mobile app sends the buy…

>What we need is maybe a species of md5 for mail packages Or maybe just more honest people?

Having honest people would help. But they can decide at some time not to be honest anymore, or can have their accounts hijacked by other people, giving the buyer a false sense of security.

Re: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon

#423

Post by pvaldes » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 6:48 PM UTC

jaclaz wrote: post #392

exergy wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And where do you propose we find more such "honest people"?

No ideas, most probably it will be many years in the making, you have to start with children ... It was just an alternative (jokingly) to the idea of the "MD5 for mail packages". The actual issue is not with the Postal Service or the delivery, it is with Amazon checks on it. The package was sent to address B instead of address A, it was delivered by the post/courier to address B, and properly signed for by a valid re…

> It is the Amazon checks that failed to detect that the order was intended for address A and that having it delivered to address B does not represent a fulfillment of the order

Of course. But maybe this should be automatized and solved in advance instead to allow it and solve (or let fall the customer) later, at least for most valuable items

Re: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon

#424

Post by jaclaz » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 7:10 PM UTC

pvaldes wrote: post #423

jaclaz wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No ideas, most probably it will be many years in the making, you have to start with children ... It was just an alternative (jokingly) to the idea of the "MD5 for mail packages". The actual issue is not with the Postal Service or the delivery, it is with Amazon checks on it. The package was sent to address B instead of address A, it was delivered by the post/courier to address B, and properly signed for by a valid re…

> It is the Amazon checks that failed to detect that the order was intended for address A and that having it delivered to address B does not represent a fulfillment of the order Of course. But maybe this should be automatized and solved in advance instead to allow it and solve (or let fall the customer) later, at least for most valuable items

Well whilst a directive "check that the address is exact" to the people providing assistance for issues at Amazon would be fine and cost very little, revolutionize the whole way packets are sent, courier/postal service procedures, etc. to have the "MD5 for packets" seems too much.

I mean, it's not like the number of this kind of frauds is that large, probably somewhere there is an Amazon report stating that they have a fulfillment rate with full satisfaction of customers of 99,9999%, the whole issue (not only Amazon's of course, most "remote" or "call center based" assistance is terrible) is about how poorly this (minimal) 0,0001%is managed.

If the numbers are so small, I believe these large firms could well put in charge of these cases someone with some more capabilities than the "standard" call center guy/gal just reading a script and incapable of solving (or not allowed to solve) these cases.

Re: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon

#425

Post by jacquesm » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 8:21 PM UTC

tombrossman wrote: post #399

jacquesm wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't prefix with the vendor? So they mix the stock of all their suppliers? That's pretty unbelievably sloppy, is there some public proof of this?

This has been widely reported, is ongoing for years, and is the source of frequent complaints from both users and manufacturers. Here are a few examples, starting with Amazon's own website explaining commingling: https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeI... https://cblr.columbia.edu/amazons-war-on-counterfeits/ https://www.wsj.com/articles/on-amazon-pooled-merchandise-op...

Thank you for digging that up. Amazon should really not do this, it opens them up to all kinds of scams and has the potential to harm their brand in ways that will not be easy to repair.

Re: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon

#426

Post by snowwrestler » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 9:02 PM UTC

stryk wrote: post #353

snowwrestler wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have shifted all my budget and used buying from Amazon Marketplace to eBay. At this point it seems like there are new stories about Amazon Marketplace scams almost daily. Does anyone think Marketplace is a priority for Amazon leadership these days? Does Bezos even know it is still operating? It's not getting the A team, obviously. Meanwhile connecting sellers and buyers is all eBay does. They don't make devices, pr…

If you're buying eBay is great. If you're the seller however, it's an entirely different story. eBay heavily, heavily, heavily favors the buyer in almost all disputes -- so much so that at times it seems as if it's automatic to the buyer's favor. I guess that's how they get people to spend money on the platform, and of course take their cut of the transaction. There are tons and tons of seller horror stories, especia…

Once upon a time, strong protections and support for customers (buyers) is what Amazon was known for.

So many stories were shared like "the thing arrived damaged, and when I called Amazon I talked to a person and they shipped a replacement out right away no questions asked."

Where is that now?

"Amazon gives better protections to sellers" is not a compelling story for attracting customers.

Re: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon

#427

Post by thedufer » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 10:58 PM UTC

Simon_says wrote: post #249

thedufer wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would just contact amazon and find out where the money went I like to think that Amazon won't give its users bank details to random people. A federal officer could force them give it up.

Maybe I'm Pollyannaish, but I'd hope Amazon would not give bank details to a federal office and instead hold out for a subpoena or search warrant or court order.

Yes, I intended "could force them to" as a description of a court order.

Re: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon

#428

Post by mikeash » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 11:18 PM UTC

didibus wrote: post #344

mikeash wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm being persuaded by personal experience. I haven't actually been the victim of any fraud on Amazon, but the other problems with third-party sellers are already enough to make me shy away.

Personal experience is anecdotal by definition. What are the other problems? Anyways, I'm not defending, just surprised the HN crowd accepts a few anecdotes which are statistically insignificant given the Amazon volumes. I see questions like, how do people still trust to buy on Amazon? Aren't they aware of all the fraud? And the answer is no they are not, because they've never been frauded through Amazon, and know no…

Should I not evaluate things based on my personal experience...?

The other problems are: third-party sellers pollute the listings with unobtainable low prices, long delays, and shit products I'd never want to buy. It's common for me to find a product on Amazon only to discover that the low price I thought I was getting isn't actually available, and I have to pay some absurd shipping fee with a third-party seller. Or the cost is correct, but it'll take two months to ship. (This just happened to me yesterday with a "Prime two-day shipping" entry!) Or I have to dig past the first page of the search results because the first page is filled with nonsense from third party sellers.

These are the reasons I use Amazon less and less. Stories about fraud (and more importantly, Amazon siding with a scammer for no good reason) just add more weight.

Re: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon

#429

Post by mikeash » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 11:20 PM UTC

lsaferite wrote: post #200

mark-r wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it will be trivial to detect - once double-checking the address becomes part of the procedure for verifying package delivery. If checking the address isn't part of the procedure, then the procedure needs to be modified. Low-paid support people are expected to follow the procedure exactly, so that the company can obtain consistent results.

Unless there's something I'm unaware of, they have no way to check the actual shipping address based on the tracking number without direct cooperation from the shipper. The reason they use the shipping city is that most shippers provide that information about every tracking number. To get more information you have to be the one who shipped the package. In this case amazon was not the one who shipped the package. It w…

In this particular case, the customer was able to get a proof of delivery from USPS which included the recipient's address. Amazon had both the customer's address and the address the package was delivered to, for some reason they just would not or could not notice that they didn't match.

Re: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on Amazon

#430

Post by didibus » Sun, Aug 13, 2017, 1:09 AM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #428

didibus wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personal experience is anecdotal by definition. What are the other problems? Anyways, I'm not defending, just surprised the HN crowd accepts a few anecdotes which are statistically insignificant given the Amazon volumes. I see questions like, how do people still trust to buy on Amazon? Aren't they aware of all the fraud? And the answer is no they are not, because they've never been frauded through Amazon, and know no…

Should I not evaluate things based on my personal experience...? The other problems are: third-party sellers pollute the listings with unobtainable low prices, long delays, and shit products I'd never want to buy. It's common for me to find a product on Amazon only to discover that the low price I thought I was getting isn't actually available, and I have to pay some absurd shipping fee with a third-party seller. Or…

Make sense, you might be seeing a real trend, but maybe not. You can evaluate things from personal experience, and even a small amount of negative individual experience can hurt a business, because of word of mouth. You should also calibrate your experiences once in a while though. A restaurant you had a bad experience at when you went might still be the best restaurant in town.

If fraud was a huge part of their business, they'd kill the 3rd party sellers from their platform, but I doubt it is. I think it's a net positive as a whole, but a small number of customers hate it. What they need to do now is improve those quirks you mentioned. That's much more reasonable then killing the whole marketplace.