It’s common knowledge that in many suspended account cases nowadays, Amazon will withhold the seller’s funds indefinitely (and will likely only release them if it goes to arbitration).
Often times, the reason they give is because they believe there was some issue with the seller’s products. This in itself might be reasonable.
But… here’s the really f’ed up part. In these cases, do they reach out to those seller’s customers, and let them know that there may be a product quality issue and offer a refund? NO! Apparently the product was good enough to keep the customer’s money, but not good enough to pay the seller?
I seem to remember posts on the OSFE from sellers who had automatic refunds issued by Amazon to their customers who bought recalled products.
Needless to say, the sellers were upset because their funds were used for the refunds. (And it was compounded by Amazon issuing refunds for all product not just the recalled lots).
My suspicion is there is no general rule, not that there is no rule. There may be an adhoc rule or process depending on the seller and the products. and whether Amazon legal is involved, and who on their staff is representing Amazon legal.
Actually I have seen that happen more than once. I’ve worked with sellers who have had as much as $10,000 refunded to buyers. Granted I’ve only seen it a few times myself, but I do know it happens sometimes.
I would agree though that Amazon holds funds for the majority and that only through Arbitration can you get access to the funds. Amazon will make all the “side” money that they can!
I’ve heard about a seller’s buyers being refunded as well, but it does seem to be a rare occurrence. In most cases they just keep the money from themselves. In which case they’re stealing from someone.
Either the product had an issue, and they’re stealing from the customer who received a subpar product and isn’t being told about it.
Or the product meets all standards, in which case they’re stealing from the seller who should be paid even if they’re no longer allowed to sell on the platform.
There is one rule: minimize Amazon’s liability. Everything else comes second. When you have some of the deepest non-governmental pockets on the planet, this is not unreasonable.
Admitting to customers that they received a product that - in Amazon’s opinion - was defective in any way, greatly increases Amazon’s liability.
So Amazon very deliberately avoids forming an opinion about the product itself. Sellers are decapitated for faulty process, not faulty products.
I have received an automatic refund on a recalled product. Item was purchased after recall (I did not know) and a full refund was issued about 2 weeks later with an email from Amazon explaining the recall and why the refund happened.
I’m not saying this happens all the time, just that I have experienced it.
Ironically, in cases of a product recall usually the seller doesn’t get suspended for that. They’re held liable for the cost of the recall, but usually there’s no suspension involved if there was no other wrongdoing on the part of the seller.
@lake and @oneida_books when you saw/heard about Amazon contacting and refunding Buyers on behalf of a Seller, were those cases all official product recalls? Issued by the brand or government agency? (@Pepper_Thine_Angus mentioned that theirs was.)
I took @GGX to mean situations where the Seller’s funds are withheld due to suspected product issues that could range from prohibited items, to improperly sourced, to suspected counterfeit, etc.
And the idea is that the products are somehow questionable enough to suspend the Seller/ASIN and/or seize FBA items, yet somehow not questionable enough that Amazon also preemptively notifies Buyers and issues refunds in the absence of an official product recall.
Nope. All the refunds were for the same product and the seller was suspended at the time for selling the brand. The brand which they had received an Authenticity Complaint and suspension over.
I’ve seen this at least twice. I can’t recall the brands off hand but they were major ones.
Of note though, I’ve seen hundreds of Authenticity Suspensions over the years and only a couple times where this ever happened. I can’t explain what was different in these circumstances other than LOTS of sales.
ETA - I can’t discount the possible recall because I never looked further into things
See… this is what I think: Amazon does have a policy related to official recalls (contact and refund Buyers) but would do anything rather than give withheld money to the suspected Seller or Buyers when it’s not that.
I wonder whether, if there’s not an official recall, refunding Buyers preemptively would create product liability for Amazon and/or set up a libel/slander/tortious interference with the Seller?
I’m trying hard to give Amazon any plausible reason for not refunding Buyers unless forced, other than “it’s our money now”.
For many, many years, the CHC (“Customer-facing Help Content” as opposed to ‘SHC’ for “Seller Help Content”) page still linked on that 2nd SHC page - “Product Recalls” @ https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=565166, later re-titled as “About Product Safety at Amazon” - was assiduously maintained w/ notices of current recalls issued by both manufacturers themselves and a variety of governing entities (including some Third Party ‘watchdog’ orgs, typically those employed by some OEMs).
At the height of the COVID-19 Crisis scare, during the next biz quarter after the Goods Prioritization Initiative came into play, I noticed (081620) that that particular CHC page was no longer being updated, and simply redirected to the infamous red-eyed pug (aka “Louis The French Bulldog”)* Error 404 ‘dog page’ - just as it does now, @ least when I myself navigate there.
I’ve experienced the same thing to which our friends Pep & Lake allude upthread, re: Product Recalls, over the years - but I leave it to the gentle reader to ascertain why Amazon saw fit to deprecate the afore-mentioned Customer-facing Help Content page…especially in light of the launch of the Recalls Logistics Service (link, SHC) Program.
There’s a reason why some of us consider Amazon to be a sociopathic greed machine…
After conducting a deeper dive into the details of this matter of deprecating the afore-mentioned & long-extant CHC page, I believe I may’ve found the answer as to why it was removed.
As I recall (pun intended ) the infamous Hoverboard (Loomis) & Dog Collar (Oberdorf) lawsuits - which, among others, probably went far in effecting the removal of previously-available (Section 230) “Safe Harbor” protections - I am not pleased to find that the searchability is so limited - but I’m constrained to admit that it’s better than nothing.
May I ask if that previous incident still appears on the “Your Recalls and Product Safety Alerts” Dashboard @ https: //www.amazon.com/your-product-safety-alerts for the Buyer Account in question?
) the infamous Hoverboard (Loomis) & Dog Collar (Oberdorf) lawsuits - which, among others, probably went far in effecting the removal of previously-available (Section 230) “Safe Harbor” protections - I am not pleased to find that the searchability is so limited - but I’m constrained to admit that it’s better than nothing.