4 ms·

Another anecdote from someone with ~20k orders: I bought two pairs of Airpods Max, returned one of them but mixed up the boxes with the two serials. Amazon disp

by marban 5y ago

Another anecdote from someone with ~20k orders: I bought two pairs of Airpods Max, returned one of them but mixed up the boxes with the two serials. Amazon disposed[!] the brand-new returned model and still charged me for both.

dylan604 5y ago
I mean, you messed up in a way that appears to Amazon like you tried to get one over on them. Mistakes happen, but the customer rarely wants to admit when they were the ones to make the mistake. This is a common scam in retail. Buy something, keep the something, fill the box with something else, return the item under extremely lenient return policies, get something for free. Next buyer shockingly gets box of rocks.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
  It's fine to refuse the return. It's not fine to steal the refused return.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    What are the logisitcs for majorCorp? Eat the cost of shipping the item they didn't authorize to send to them in the first place? It's not their fault user did wrong thing. To them, they are still out 2 items. According to the terms of the return, if you don't follow the terms, you eat the cost of both items. The terms were not followed to the point that it will cost seller even more money to return the unqualified item. Maybe a bit rambly mambly, but hopefully you can at least see the situation from a neutral point of view.
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      It's logistically annoying if you're sent something by mistake and now need to deal with it in some manner. But if they don't accept the return then it's not their property. Throwing it away is theft.
      - dylan604 5y ago
        Um, it was given willingly if perhaps mistakenly. Amazon did not sneak into their home and grab the wrong thing without the owner knowing. There were no weapons brandished, no threats made, nor any other menacing to provoke the taking of something unwanted to be given. I think your definition of theft is in need of adjustment. You might have something against Amazon, and might even be justified in that feeling, but it is misguiding your judgement in this case.
        Dylan16807 5y ago
        If you send the wrong item, or send an item to the wrong address, it's not a gift. Amazon taking possession isn't theft. Destroying something they don't own is theft. Specifically, it's conversion.
    - tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
      At most, they could charge reasonable shipping costs for shipping it back.
- actually_a_dog 5y ago
  But, that doesn't sound like what happened. The way I'm reading it, they bought 2 Air Pods (call them AP1 and AP2), that each came in their own respective boxes (BOX1 and BOX2). Then, they mistakenly returned one of them in the wrong box (maybe AP1 in BOX2). No box of rocks here, just an honest mistake that seems like it might have been easy to recognize, since Amazon has a record of selling both items to them.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    Yeah, sorry, wasn't trying to accuse that's what happened. The mistake was still on the original poster for putting the wrong item in the wrong box. I was just trying to make the conenction how Amazon could see it as potentially being scammed by claiming a return for AP1 but receiving AP2 in AP1 box. That's not the item agreed to accept as a return. Whether by mistake or knowingly, it was not what was agreed upon for the the return. What is the right thing to do? Eat the costs? Sure it's Amazon, they can afford. So let's ignore it is Amazon and think in more general and hopefully neutral tones. Is the person making the mistake willing to pay for the shipping to return the incorrect item? No? Then what is retailer suppposed to do? Put it on a shelf, or just chunk it as it is trash to them.
    - actually_a_dog 5y ago
      I would say what you choose to do in this scenario as a retailer depends on whether you want your (now possibly former) customer going on a web site and telling thousands of people about their bad experience. Surely that's worth the cost of shipping, isn't it? Another perspective: they've made 20k orders already. Surely, over that time, they've made you enough money in retail margin to make eating the cost trivial. Even without the 20k orders, we're still talking about someone who's bought two pair of $120 earbuds. The expected lifetime value of that customer probably exceeds the shipping cost. Hell, even the gross margin on one sale probably exceeds the shipping cost. I think it's pretty clear that not only should the retailer assume it was a good faith mistake, but they should also step in to help make it right.
      - 5y ago

by marban 5y ago

dylan604 5y ago

I mean, you messed up in a way that appears to Amazon like you tried to get one over on them. Mistakes happen, but the customer rarely wants to admit when they were the ones to make the mistake. This is a common scam in retail. Buy something, keep the something, fill the box with something else, return the item under extremely lenient return policies, get something for free. Next buyer shockingly gets box of rocks.

tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
It's fine to refuse the return. It's not fine to steal the refused return.
- dylan604 5y ago
  What are the logisitcs for majorCorp? Eat the cost of shipping the item they didn't authorize to send to them in the first place? It's not their fault user did wrong thing. To them, they are still out 2 items. According to the terms of the return, if you don't follow the terms, you eat the cost of both items. The terms were not followed to the point that it will cost seller even more money to return the unqualified item. Maybe a bit rambly mambly, but hopefully you can at least see the situation from a neutral point of view.
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    It's logistically annoying if you're sent something by mistake and now need to deal with it in some manner. But if they don't accept the return then it's not their property. Throwing it away is theft.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      Um, it was given willingly if perhaps mistakenly. Amazon did not sneak into their home and grab the wrong thing without the owner knowing. There were no weapons brandished, no threats made, nor any other menacing to provoke the taking of something unwanted to be given. I think your definition of theft is in need of adjustment. You might have something against Amazon, and might even be justified in that feeling, but it is misguiding your judgement in this case.
      - Dylan16807 5y ago
        If you send the wrong item, or send an item to the wrong address, it's not a gift. Amazon taking possession isn't theft. Destroying something they don't own is theft. Specifically, it's conversion.
  - tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
    At most, they could charge reasonable shipping costs for shipping it back.
actually_a_dog 5y ago
But, that doesn't sound like what happened. The way I'm reading it, they bought 2 Air Pods (call them AP1 and AP2), that each came in their own respective boxes (BOX1 and BOX2). Then, they mistakenly returned one of them in the wrong box (maybe AP1 in BOX2). No box of rocks here, just an honest mistake that seems like it might have been easy to recognize, since Amazon has a record of selling both items to them.
- dylan604 5y ago
  Yeah, sorry, wasn't trying to accuse that's what happened. The mistake was still on the original poster for putting the wrong item in the wrong box. I was just trying to make the conenction how Amazon could see it as potentially being scammed by claiming a return for AP1 but receiving AP2 in AP1 box. That's not the item agreed to accept as a return. Whether by mistake or knowingly, it was not what was agreed upon for the the return. What is the right thing to do? Eat the costs? Sure it's Amazon, they can afford. So let's ignore it is Amazon and think in more general and hopefully neutral tones. Is the person making the mistake willing to pay for the shipping to return the incorrect item? No? Then what is retailer suppposed to do? Put it on a shelf, or just chunk it as it is trash to them.
  - actually_a_dog 5y ago
    I would say what you choose to do in this scenario as a retailer depends on whether you want your (now possibly former) customer going on a web site and telling thousands of people about their bad experience. Surely that's worth the cost of shipping, isn't it? Another perspective: they've made 20k orders already. Surely, over that time, they've made you enough money in retail margin to make eating the cost trivial. Even without the 20k orders, we're still talking about someone who's bought two pair of $120 earbuds. The expected lifetime value of that customer probably exceeds the shipping cost. Hell, even the gross margin on one sale probably exceeds the shipping cost. I think it's pretty clear that not only should the retailer assume it was a good faith mistake, but they should also step in to help make it right.
    - 5y ago