3 ms·
That doesn't mean that you should test each diaper before they go out though.
by arghwhat 2y ago
That doesn't mean that you should test each diaper before they go out though.
- smt88 2y agoIt does, however, mean that Amazon should inspect every single return and err on the side of selling something "used" rather than "new" even if it looks new.
- rtkwe 2y agoThey wouldn't need to do that if they properly checked their return streams. In some cases they're only checking the weight of the items being returned.
- normie3000 2y agoYou'd think a weight check would have been sufficient in the OP's case.
- rtkwe 2y agoThere's also the annoying other side where Amazon shipped a clearly underweight package but refuses to acknowledge their own equipment's measurement for a return. The person bought a 7-8 pound graphics card and the package only weighed a little over 1 pound according to the package's own shipment info. Amazon is still giving the guy the run around demanding police reports etc when it clearly left the depot without the gpu.
- arghwhat 2y agoDoes depend on how heavily the item was… “Tested” before it was returned. Many products will also have inconsistent weight, not only between units (not everything is made to NASA specs, and anything handmade or harvested will have huge variations) but also after shipping (labels on box, seal tape or cellophane removed, cardboard absorbing moisture, …).
- gdilla 2y agoQC can be a visual inspection, doesn't just mean a functional test.
- arghwhat 2y agoI feel that the sarcasm was lost - what went out here was an, ahem, “functionally tested” diaper. QC before restocking is fine. On the shipping side you just check that it’s the right product and that the packaging is intact and not indicative of damage.