[HN Gopher] Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refun...
___________________________________________________________________
Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him
Author : ProAm
Score : 317 points
Date : 2020-02-21 21:26 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (petapixel.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (petapixel.com)
| canada_dry wrote:
| This is such a basic issue that I don't understand why USPS or
| some other shipper w/ bricks-n-mortar haven't stepped up to offer
| some sort of package shipping certification.
|
| If I was the seller it could work as simply as me bringing the
| item to a shipper who would take their own photos and weigh the
| items being packaged up as well as some check that the item is as
| being described to the recipient. In turn the shipper would get
| an extra fee.
|
| For high value items (i.e. like OP's camera) it would certainly
| _be in everyone 's best interest_ and platforms like ebay,
| Facebook, Amazon could insist that all parties use this type of
| service or relinquish their ability to dispute.
|
| Too over simplified??
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| Sounds reasonable and it could be fairly automated too. You can
| already take amazon returns to UPS stores, Whole Foods or Kohls
| and they will box it for you. All they need is a camera system
| to video the boxing and then associate the shipping
| label/tracking number with that video.
|
| The boxing video could be made available on the courier's site
| for any interested party to see (when enabled by the shipper).
| Sure, it may not capture the quality of an item, but that's a
| fairly small detail that can be resolved with a return/partial
| refund and it would at least put an end to the rampant fraud
| that goes on.
| dharmab wrote:
| Isn't this a form of escrow service? Those are sometimes used
| when buying very expensive items via auction/real world.
| mjevans wrote:
| Sounds closer to a notory service combined with shipping and
| insurance to me.
| briandear wrote:
| That's exactly what this is.
| canada_dry wrote:
| > Isn't this a form of escrow service?
|
| Sort of, except the agent _wouldn 't be handling (receive
| and/or disburse) money_. They just certify and record a part
| of the transaction (i.e. shipment).
| clSTophEjUdRanu wrote:
| There is already registered mail via USPS. The Hope Diamond was
| delivered to the Smithsonian via registered mail.
| giarc wrote:
| At a Purolator (Canadian retailer) mailing centre near me, they
| have this system that weighs the box but also measures the
| dimensions. The whole rig is ceiling mounted (while the scale
| is on a counter). I suspect like this could also incorporate a
| camera that takes a photo of the inside contents.
| CamelCaseName wrote:
| Amazon has these as well, they are called cubiscans.
| 8note wrote:
| probably x-rays and not photos
| CobrastanJorji wrote:
| You know, I'm surprised that those mailbox stores don't offer
| exactly this sort of service. Buyer and seller give a deposit
| to a postal store, the seller mails product to the store, the
| buyer inspects the product at the store and decides whether to
| keep it, and, if so, pays the balance to the store and walks
| out with the product, and presumably there could be a process
| for undoing it by returning the product to that same store
| later if a serious problem has emerged. I guess it's a lot of
| overhead for buying a video game or something, but it would
| make sense for $500+ transactions.
|
| Those stores already have notaries, help with shipping, provide
| mailboxes, and the like. It'd fit pretty well into their
| wheelhouse.
| gen3 wrote:
| You just described exactly what Stockx does with everything
| sold on their site. I think it's good for everyone, because
| of the chance of getting fake items.
| S_A_P wrote:
| Ive just started putting a mental business plan together on
| this. A few obstacles I see:
|
| 1) in the high end, is a UPS store or equivalent going to
| have a staff member on hand with enough expertise to vouch
| for a product? 2) condition is sometimes a bit subjective.
| One persons "Mint" is another persons "Very Good". When you
| have quality disputes, what are going to do? cancel the
| transaction? that is an expensive and painful process for all
| involved.
|
| I think if you shoot for the least common denominator and can
| do the following there is some value to be added: a) is it
| not a brick (unless he is selling an actual brick :) ) b) is
| it the brand and model that the listing advertises c) if it
| is easy to do can you verify it is in working order when the
| item is packed and sent away.
|
| I still see some wiggle room for problems, but I do think
| that being able to prove you shipped the item is important.
| Furthermore, if the seller sold an expensive item, didnt he
| insure it? If the item "didnt arrive" then we have a
| different problem. The seller keeps his money, and the buyer
| works with the insurer(who has a vested interest in not
| paying so will likely investigate a bit) to get made whole
| again.
| Paul-ish wrote:
| I would guess that in 99.9% of purchases even over $500, both
| sides of the transaction are happy. Requiring the buyer to go
| to the store adds a significant transaction cost to the
| buyer, and is likely unnecessary.
| S_A_P wrote:
| I sell quite a bit of vintage music gear on Reverb. I initially
| had some struggles with customers, but they seem to have mostly
| kept riff raff out. I think the fact that its still slightly a
| niche site keeps the volume down low enough to keep humans
| involved. As they were recently purchased by ETSY, Im wondering
| if this sort of service will start to drop off. Fingers
| crossed, Im selling a vintage Oberheim right now that I would
| be sick if a similar circumstance happened...
|
| I stopped using ebay for the reason that most of the sellers
| just werent trustworthy enough. Amazon keeps trying to blur the
| line between marketplace and the company, which IMO is a bad
| move. I think they should run it in a similar manner than
| reverb, charge higher fees to pay for it(within reason) and
| actually do something to scammers on both sides of the
| transaction...
| brightball wrote:
| I worked for Audiogon a long time ago and I always wanted
| them to start a shipping escrow service for this reason. If
| you do it for a niche you have access to expertise.
| graylights wrote:
| Would that service be indemnifying the seller from fraud? Or is
| your assumption that the platform would just make the right
| call?
|
| Probably it's because the platforms don't want to make services
| to root out fraud because then they become more responsible for
| owning it. Outside services can't break in because the
| platforms aren't going to put trust in them. Those services
| would have to own the cost of fraud.
| kube-system wrote:
| > Too over simplified??
|
| Probably. These shipping services don't really have any
| expertise to accurately judge the quality of many of the items
| they ship. They just move boxes around.
|
| Some rando at FexEx Office doesn't really know how to determine
| that your DSLR has the advertised shutter count, nor do they
| know how to verify the SMART status of those hard drives you
| shipped, nor would they be able to validate the authenticity of
| your designer handbag.
|
| There _are_ specialized consignors popping up online that _do_
| have the ability to do these things, though.
| canada_dry wrote:
| > ...someone at FedEx doesn't really know how to...
|
| Yes, this is true. I think a basic service offering might
| just record the weight and photo of each item being packaged
| up.
| mgiampapa wrote:
| Even a low tech photo record weeds out a lot of fraud. Oh
| you aren't returning a thing that resembles the photo that
| was shipped to you? This won't eliminate fraud, but it will
| move the bar in a non trivial way. Combine this with a
| photo ID check at the store for the person doing the
| shipping and your halfway there.
| bcrosby95 wrote:
| Lots of objects have serial numbers or model numbers
| visible on the outside too. That would raise the bar even
| higher.
| sevenf0ur wrote:
| > If you're going to sell on Amazon or elsewhere, take an actual
| video of you packing the camera. You need all the defense you can
| get against items mysteriously disappearing.
|
| Isn't this evidence just as bad as the buyer's account that he
| didn't receive any accessories? One could just unpack the box
| right after filming.
| wtallis wrote:
| > Isn't this evidence just as bad as the buyer's account that
| he didn't receive any accessories?
|
| No, of course not. Buyer didn't provide any details about what
| was missing or what was received. This isn't a level he-
| said/she-said, it's one party being forthcoming and the other
| evasive. Both parties had equal opportunity to lie, but only
| one put in effort to appear honest. Amazon should at least hold
| their scammers to a higher standard.
| _underfl0w_ wrote:
| I think this every time someone suggests filming _part_ of the
| transaction. Nowhere does video of an action imply that it was
| not _immediately undone_ right after filming.
| durpleDrank wrote:
| Amazon FBA is a joke. I tried it for a year. Experienced a couple
| of instances like OP. Customer service at Amazon is an
| ineffective joke when it comes to these matters as well. Fees are
| too high etc. Believe the hype of YouTube "entrepreneurs" at your
| own peril.
| abbot2 wrote:
| I totally get the frustration and such, and not trying to protect
| Amazon, but: author's web site intercepting browser history to
| trigger "checkout this content before you leave" when back
| navigation is clicked is outright evil. Just don't do that, be
| kind to visitors.
|
| Edit:
|
| 1. Dictionary: evil, adj.: morally bad, cruel, or very unpleasant
|
| 2. To get the prompt you need to stay around on the page for a
| while, scroll around, pretend to read it. Triggers at least in
| mobile chrome browser.
| draw_down wrote:
| Come on.
| unreal37 wrote:
| Let's have some perspective on what "outright evil" really is.
|
| You didn't get hurt by this.
| abbot2 wrote:
| evil, adj.: morally bad, cruel, or very unpleasant
| bcrosby95 wrote:
| I think your use of evil is about as evil as the pattern.
| Overblown rhetoric harms discourse.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| I did not get that prompt. I even tried disabling my ad blocker
| and did not get that prompt.
|
| EDIT: Also, I think "outright evil" is a bit strong. A dark
| pattern for sure, but not quite evil.
| abbot2 wrote:
| Try staying on the page for a while and scroll around.
| Pretend to read it. Triggers for me on mobile chrome browser.
| [deleted]
| amerkhalid wrote:
| This is why for high priced items, I sell locally using Craig's
| list, letgo, or Facebook. It may take longer and may not sell for
| as much as online but it is a lot less stressful. Also if you
| take online selling fees, packaging and shipping cost in account,
| you are probably breaking even.
| [deleted]
| matsemann wrote:
| Not the first time Amazon is on blast here for expensive camera
| gear scams: I Fell Victim to a $1,500 Used Camera Lens Scam on
| Amazon [0]
|
| [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14993216
| CamelCaseName wrote:
| Unfortunately, there are plenty of categories that are absolute
| breeding grounds for scammers. Camera lenses is definitely one
| of them.
|
| As a general rule, if the main differentiating feature of the
| product is hard to verify, or if the product is expensive and
| easy to resell, stay away.
| ebaySucks123 wrote:
| I had the same exact experience the last time I sold on ebay, in
| 2017. I sold an $800 item. One day before the claim window
| closed, the buyer filed a claim saying it had never arrived and
| claiming they emailed me several times and I never responded. I
| submitted proof of delivery from UPS and pointed out the simple
| fact that I had received no messages from the buyer through ebay
| messaging. Ebay gave them a full refund and refused to speak to
| me about it. When I called them and waited on hold for several
| hours, they literally just hung up on me. I closed my ebay and
| paypal accounts and I'll never use them again.
| pdxbigman wrote:
| Stories like this are why I've never bought or sold anything on
| Ebay. They just seem like a genuinely shitty experience and I'd
| rather shell out extra cash to buy new or meet someone off
| craigslist as a bank.
| JoshGlazebrook wrote:
| I have a similar story. I sold a brand new iPhone to someone on
| eBay who claimed it was reported as stolen and was not able to
| be used. Paypal refunded the buyer, and allowed them to keep
| the phone. Paypal account went negative, their internal
| collections started calling every day right away even though it
| was in dispute.
|
| Even after providing proof that the IMEI was not reported as
| stolen, and them waiting weeks for the buyer to provide any
| proof (they didn't), they still sided with the buyer. I called
| for weeks, and finally after about two months, somehow the
| person on the phone was able to just issue a refund. I've not
| sold anything on Ebay since.
|
| On top of that, when I had an issue with buying something
| through paypal, they used that ^ instance as a negative against
| me while on the phone. "Well I see you sold a stolen iPhone in
| the past..." was not something I was expecting to hear.
| amatecha wrote:
| Yeah, I've heard stuff like this for years and years and long
| ago decided I will never sell anything online. Craigslist in-
| person only.
| filoleg wrote:
| EBay in 2017 was a giant shitshow (and probably still is, but I
| don't use it anymore). Both their security and support are
| complete trash, even if you happen to be lucky (like me) and
| they reply quickly.
|
| I woke up one morning to get an email notification thanking me
| for purchasing a back bumper, a wing, and a few other parts for
| a 2012 Hyundai Genesis, which I obviously don't have and
| neither have I made that purchase. The fraudster even put their
| real delivery address and name less than 20 miles away from
| where I lived (which I reverse searched and confirmed that the
| name was associated with that address). I immediately notified
| eBay about this, they refunded me the purchase, and asked me to
| change my password. I did all that, removed the perp's address
| from the account, but eBay didn't have a legitimate 2FA
| solution, so I was kinda out of luck here.
|
| Lo and behold, the day after, I wake up to info on my account
| (name+address) changed again. They couldn't change the email,
| as I have 2FA on my email account, but they did everything they
| could aside from that with my eBay account. This repeated at
| least one more time afterwards. By the end of this saga, I just
| gave up and closed my eBay account after getting my refund.
|
| I just did some googling, and it seems like eBay STILL doesn't
| support any form of 2FA aside from SMS-based one (which is
| exactly how, I suspect, they got into my account in the first
| place, as I didn't get my email compromised). What a shame, but
| oh well.
| _underfl0w_ wrote:
| This is really bad advice, but remember that two can play at
| this game. You have this idiot's real name and address, as
| well as the make and model of the car they drive. Food for
| thought.
| milankragujevic wrote:
| Similar thing happened to me with PayPal, buyer got to keep the
| item, and got a refund (by doing a chargeback on their CC) and I
| got billed the amount + 15% of fees and punishment. I provided
| exhausting proof of delivery and that there was no contact or
| complaints from the buyer, but they didn't care. They said, since
| it's a chargeback, they HAVE to give them their money back. The
| buyer was a client of Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
|
| Ironically, when I tried doing a chargeback on a transaction as a
| buyer, I got denied after waiting for 30 days for a reply, and
| had to pay a fee for an "untruthful claim". The bank is Erste
| Bank in Serbia. In my opinion my claim was valid, as the seller
| did not reply to me at all.
| nicolas_t wrote:
| Interestingly about chargeback, I've noticed the same. I tried
| to file a chargeback with my bank in France and got denied
| despite it being a valid claim and me providing all the
| documentation for it.
|
| But, when I used my US credit card to file a chargeback it went
| through fine and there was no issue. I wonder if some countries
| are more lax with charge backs?
| tus88 wrote:
| There is no perfect system that protects buyers and sellers.
| Change the rules and buyers will be complaining. The reason it is
| skewed towards buyers is:
|
| 1) who in there right mind would buy something online where there
| is no protection (sellers aren't the same as they _have_ to sell
| somewhere to make a living).
|
| 2) most buyers are honest who just want their item. Profiting
| from fraud as a buyer is a lot more work as they need to resell
| the item to gain currency, which is risky (both from exposing
| themselves to stolen item investigations as well as being a
| victim of fraud themselves as a seller).
|
| 3) imagine if sellers could just ship rocks to buyers instead of
| cameras without consequence. Every scammer and his dog would be
| in on the gig without 5 seconds. (1) becomes even more bleak.
|
| The general view is sellers need to take fraud into their overall
| operating expense budget, just like department stored do with
| shoplifting.
| briandear wrote:
| > The general view is sellers need to take fraud into their
| overall operating expense budget, just like department stored
| do with shoplifting.
|
| How's that work when selling a single item?
| leetcrew wrote:
| obviously not well, but a one-off sale is a relatively
| uncommon transaction, so it doesn't get optimized for.
| tus88 wrote:
| Well it becomes very difficult. Allowing sellers to cancel
| purchases from buyers without a strong and long history of
| positive feedback is a start - I believe eBay technically
| allows this.
|
| But naturally sellers are then cutting down their potential
| buyer pool - it's a dilemma they need to deal with.
|
| Of course one easy way to do this is cut out the entire
| online buyer pool altogether and sell your camera at a pawn
| shop - near-zero chance of fraud there.
|
| Why don't sellers just do this? Because they want more money
| than the pawn shop is willing to offer, so they take the risk
| of selling online.
|
| It's always important to remember what we are actually buying
| and selling a lot of the time is risk - the value of the item
| is often just a fraction of the overall purchase amount.
| bcrosby95 wrote:
| > 1) who in there right mind would buy something online where
| there is no protection (sellers aren't the same as they have to
| sell somewhere to make a living).
|
| Buyers also generally _have_ to buy somewhere, especially for
| necessities. The difference is that finding a place to buy is
| easier than finding a place to sell.
|
| > 2) most buyers are honest who just want their item. Profiting
| from fraud as a buyer is a lot more work as they need to resell
| the item to gain currency, which is risky (both from exposing
| themselves to stolen item investigations as well as being a
| victim of fraud themselves as a seller).
|
| You don't have to just resell to profit. Just buy stuff you
| want anyways then complain.
|
| > 3) imagine if sellers could just ship rocks to buyers instead
| of cameras without consequence. Every scammer and his dog would
| be in on the gig without 5 seconds. (1) becomes even more
| bleak.
|
| The current system works because there are many buyers and few
| sellers. Most people are honest. And everyone buys things. But
| most people don't sell things. Skewing in favor of the buyer
| makes it so the few sellers aren't overrun by fraudsters. If
| even 10% of the dishonest people in the world were actively
| selling stuff on Amazon, it would probably be a huge problem.
| tus88 wrote:
| > Buyers also generally have to buy somewhere, especially for
| necessities.
|
| Much of what gets sold online is discretionary purchases, not
| necessities. Like cameras. And necessities are cheap and
| readily available down the road - why wait for toothpaste to
| ship online when you can buy a tube on your way home from
| work?
|
| > You don't have to just resell to profit. Just buy stuff you
| want anyways then complain.
|
| Well you really do, if your goal is to acquire currency.
| Having a garage full of stolen items is a liability, not
| profit.
|
| > The current system works because there are many buyers and
| few sellers.
|
| It works because buyers are willing (and able) to spend
| money. It's the only ingredient necessary for a market.
| Demand will always create supply one way or another.
|
| > Most people are honest.
|
| There is little evidence of this outside of Japan. Drop $50
| in a carpark and see how many people return it to the store.
|
| > Skewing in favor of the buyer makes it so the few sellers
| aren't overrun by fraudsters.
|
| I am not sure what this means. Skewing in favor of buyers
| creates conditions where there _are_ buyers in the first
| place, allowing for the market to exist. I suspect the reason
| sellers aren 't swamped by fraudsters is as I said in a
| different comment - profiting from fraud as a buyer is
| difficult, dangerous, and requires a lot of effort and work.
| Most buyers just want their items. ALL sellers want to make
| money, and a fair percentage are happy to ship sub-quality
| garbage for over-inflated prices (a kind of fraud in
| itself?).
| freepor wrote:
| A seller can absorb fraud when they're doing hundreds or
| thousands of transactions. If each person is doing one
| transaction the people hit will have life altering consequences
| for some items.
| Paul-ish wrote:
| I wonder if seller insurance is viable. Pay $50 for an item,
| company does a background check on the seller and maybe does
| escrow.
| CamelCaseName wrote:
| Wrong takeaway.
|
| If you're going to sell on Amazon, use FBA.
|
| A-z claims cannot be filed on FBA orders.
|
| If this is in fact your last sale on Amazon, and you no longer
| intend to do business with them, email Jeff@Amazon.com as a last
| resort.
|
| Keep in mind, that email should not be used lightly. Be succinct
| and stoic. Provide proof that you have done everything else to
| resolve the matter.
| csours wrote:
| Can you use FBA for one-off, used items?
| giarc wrote:
| You can, but you pay storage fees. So you have to consider
| whether your items are going to sell quick enough and warrant
| the storage fees.
| kube-system wrote:
| I've done FBA for used books, not sure about cameras.
| CamelCaseName wrote:
| You absolutely can.
| lucasmullens wrote:
| Does emailing the CEO really work? If I contact regular Amazon
| support, I end up talking to a bot presumably since their
| employee time is so valuable. But I can just hit up Jeff like
| it's no big deal?
|
| Honestly asking, there might be some special team to go through
| the jeff@amazon.com emails.
| fossuser wrote:
| There's a history where people email Bezos and he'll forward
| that email along to someone responsible for that thing with a
| single '?'. [0]
|
| https://www.inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/5-years-later-jeff-
| bezos-...
| CamelCaseName wrote:
| >Does emailing the CEO really work. ?
|
| Yes it does. It goes to his executive team. Granted, I
| haven't used that email in almost 2 years. I hear response
| time is way longer nowadays.
|
| >But I can just hit up Jeff like it's no big deal?
|
| No, you'll get ignored if your issue is not substantial or if
| you haven't gone through every other possible method of
| resolution. This is the "supreme court" of Amazon support,
| akin to the Ombudsman's office.
| cptskippy wrote:
| Lots of places have special teams to respond to the "CEO's
| emails".
| zippergz wrote:
| Regular Amazon customer service is not a bot, it is staffed
| by a large number of people. They aren't necessarily great
| (or empowered to be great), but they are humans.
|
| If you email the CEO, it goes to a team of people who handle
| those messages, not just to him personally. It's not
| guaranteed to work, but it sometimes does.
| toasterlovin wrote:
| Yes, this does work sometimes. It's a pretty commonly cited
| measure of last resort among Amazon sellers.
| freepor wrote:
| There's an entire team at Amazon to deal with jeff@amazon
| mails. It's not emailing the CEO, it's another customer
| support channel that may or may not solve your problem.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| It's too bad ... I remember setting that email account up
| for him (he was uid = 3), and for a long time, it really
| did actually remain as his own personal email.
| politelemon wrote:
| FBA = Fulfilment By Amazon
|
| https://services.amazon.co.uk/services/fulfilment-by-amazon/...
| GuardLlama wrote:
| Meta takeaway, probably:
|
| A popular PetaPixel post that gets coverage on additional
| social platforms is your only form of recourse against Amazon.
| asdfman123 wrote:
| Other meta takeaway: it's really easy to scam sellers on
| Amazon if you're unscrupulous.
| 1024core wrote:
| Real takeaway: Amazon doesn't give a shit.
| allovernow wrote:
| Similar story on eBay. I shipped [?]10k worth of goods to a
| buyer. He tore a hole in the box and claimed half of the contents
| were missing, _after signing for the package_. Despite this eBay
| refunded his money and refused to listen to our story until we
| took it to Twitter and pinged some high level manager.
| node1 wrote:
| I have heard many stories online where customers bought new
| graphic cards/cpus/camera gear from 'Sold by Amazon.com' but
| instead receive used ones. Or receive different cheaper (older
| generation) products.
|
| It does not seem to be a good place to buy or sell expensive
| items.
| simmers wrote:
| I've received two used products from Amazon (bought as "new")
| in just the last year. First was an espresso machine. It wasn't
| even cleaned - coffee grounds were everywhere. The second was a
| robot vacuum that had a full dust bin. After turning it on, I
| could see the previous owner's home layout in its memory. In
| both cases, the product still worked and it wasn't worth the
| hassle of returning. Whenever I buy something, I make sure to
| check for non-Amazon alternatives, even box stores.
| monomad1 wrote:
| I bought a lamp for a rear projection tv a couple years ago. It
| burned out after a month. Amazon let me return it, but charged
| a restocking fee. That would've been fine, but I haven't been
| able to review the product for over a year now.
|
| Fuck amazon - newegg is cheaper anyway.
| jseliger wrote:
| I can't imagine buying or selling most high-value items on
| Amazon: the buying side has already been covered in various
| places (https://seliger.com/2017/01/09/tools-continued-careful-
| buy-a...). I've sold cameras and lenses on Craigslist, which can
| have its own challenges, but never one as expensive as an A7R IV.
| koolba wrote:
| At least on Craigslist you can restrict the sales to meatspace.
|
| Asking to meet on the steps of a police station does a great
| job of filtering out scammers.
| Ididntdothis wrote:
| And you can ask for cash. They can't ask for a refund of
| that.
| cortesoft wrote:
| Sucks as a buyer though, if the item turns out to have
| issues (or it was stolen).
| cortesoft wrote:
| I spend tens of thousands of dollars on Amazon every year,
| buying everything from electronics to groceries to paper
| towels, and have never had any issues that were not resolved to
| my satisfaction.
| ghufran_syed wrote:
| Yes, you're the buyer. As the discussion above mentions,
| Amazon is biased in favor of the buyer, possibly for good
| reason
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| Which is why his/her comment is a valid response to the GP,
| who said (paraphrasing) "I can't imagine buying or selling
| expensive items on Amazon."
|
| There's not much need to worry about _buying_ on Amazon.
| jfim wrote:
| Wouldn't that be a good small claims court case? There's good
| documentation that the item has been shipped, and the seller is
| out of both the money and the camera.
| TomMckenny wrote:
| Thief's last name is just an initial.
|
| I say "thief" because that's how it looks to me. But how can I
| or Amazon be confident given the evidence I've only just read
| about?
|
| What would help is posting up front a list of evidence that
| would convince Amazon in case of a dispute. If Amazon does not
| provide this then perhaps a third party could figure it out and
| post it.
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| But when you use Amazon you agree to binding arbitration...
| tzs wrote:
| There's been at least some effort in Congress to reign in the
| overuse of binding arbitration [1]. It only covers
| employment, consumer, antitrust, or civil rights disputes, so
| probably would not help in a dispute between an Amazon seller
| and Amazon. Still, it at least shows some in government
| realize forced arbitration agreements are getting out of
| hand.
|
| That passed the House, but almost certainly will die in the
| Senate considering that in the House it only had 2
| Republicans vote for it and 183 against it (14 not voting).
| Democrats were 223 for, 2 against, 9 not voting.
|
| [1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-
| bill/1423
| forrestthewoods wrote:
| OP should go through arbitration and blog the process/result.
| milankragujevic wrote:
| Presumably there's an NDA involved.
| kyleblarson wrote:
| TOS likely also stipulate an NDA
| kube-system wrote:
| Why not take the buyer to small claims? Or at least, have a
| lawyer draft them a nice letter.
| tedivm wrote:
| How? All they have from Amazon is a last initial.
| kube-system wrote:
| And an address. That's probably enough.
|
| https://www.whitepages.com/reverse-address
| qwertox wrote:
| But wouldn't this become an issue between the seller and the
| buyer, if Amazon is "just adhering" to what is stipulated in
| the contract?
|
| To me this sounds like Amazon is saying "this is too
| complicated for us, and we don't see how to deal with it,
| because we don't know who's telling the truth". Like "If
| you've got a problem and a case, go to the police; not
| against us, but against the buyer".
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| Hmm, my first thought is: contacting a buyer outside of
| Amazon is against Amazon's TOS.
|
| But if the author isn't interested in using Amazon after
| this incident, Amazon's TOS don't matter much.
|
| I'd be interested to hear from someone with a bit more
| legal knowledge how this might go. It's a good thought for
| sure.
| qwertox wrote:
| Why would he contact the buyer outside of Amazon? He
| would go to the police to point out his issue with the
| buyer, there's absolutely no need to contact him outside
| of Amazon.
|
| I'd rather think that Amazon would be forthcoming in
| assisting any demands an investigation would make, like
| provide all the information regarding the seller and
| buyer on this issue to the police.
|
| Sure, it would be nice if Amazon would withhold the money
| from the buyer until it is proven that the seller has
| obtained the item, but how does this get proven?
| paxys wrote:
| You are not suing Amazon but rather the person who defrauded
| you. You have no agreement with him/her.
| bagacrap wrote:
| ... you're going to travel to another state for this
| purpose?
| briandear wrote:
| You would need to file in Federal court.
| kirykl wrote:
| Claim must be over $75k for federal
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_claims_court#United_S
| tat...
| freepor wrote:
| Ultimately when you mail something there is no way to prove what
| you mailed. You can mail a brick and say it was a camera or you
| can mail a camera and the buyer can say it was a brick. There's
| an opportunity here for companies with big real estate footprints
| like UPS store or Office Depot to offer verified shipping and/or
| receiving, where you hand them the items and they pack them up
| and ship them with a certification of what's inside.
| onemoresoop wrote:
| Good but not scam-proof, there can be a brick in a camera case
| in a box. The verified shipping says camera in a box. I don't
| really mean brick here but the item could be a defective item,
| a different model or something the verification process could
| miss.
| zxcmx wrote:
| That would be great and raise the bar, but the same dispute
| issues would exist, just with authenticity of goods.
|
| Scammy buyer would purchase say, 32GB sticks of RAM and ship
| back 1GB sticks with the stickers swapped.
| saurik wrote:
| Is Amazon even supposed to be a reasonable place for small scale
| sellers to try to operate? The entire mechanism of credit cards
| and large scale markets is based on the idea that you reduce user
| friction in order to get more sales en aggregate. Can you imagine
| Best Buy caring "Visa let a fraudster keep the refrigerator they
| purchased from us and even refunded them $3000"? Something like
| that probably happens every week. If you care about every
| individual sale you need entirely different sales apparatus and
| pipeline than something like Amazon, for whom we have also heard
| stories recently here on HN of them shipping multiple items to
| someone and just telling the customer not to bother returning it
| as it will be more trouble for everyone than it is really worth
| it to them.
| deadmetheny wrote:
| Sounds about right. Amazon's return policies have always heavily
| favored customers, even after creating the marketplace.
| jacquesm wrote:
| No, _especially_ after creating the marketplace. Before that
| Amazon would had a much stronger incentive to treat the
| customers and themselves in a more balanced way.
| akurilin wrote:
| Startup idea: create a high quality camera gear buying and
| selling experience for the web, with many protections and
| conveniences built in. Selling your gear on Craigslist and
| meeting with random strangers at McDonald's and Starbucks is
| pretty much the only real alternative right now and gets old
| pretty fast.
|
| This was an issue for music gear too, but somehow reverb.com
| managed to address it and make it a pretty painless experience.
| Their customer service is excellent, and if one of the two
| parties are unsatisfied, they'll intervene and try to find a
| compromise. They send you boxes to ship your gear in, they set up
| shipping for you, they automatically track the shipment as it
| gets picked up etc. I've been hoping to find something similar
| for camera gear, but have had no luck so far.
|
| The only downside is that the prosumer camera equipment world
| seems to be rapidly shrinking, so it might be not a great idea to
| step into this space right now. Whereas there doesn't seem to be
| a dearth of people buying guitars, drum kit pieces and effects
| pedals.
| y2bd wrote:
| Keh (https://www.keh.com/) is sort of like this, except that
| they function more like a second-hand shop--you sell them your
| gear, and they hold inventory that other people can buy,
| meaning you never actually interact with the eventual buyer.
| Because of this though, I imagine they take a larger cut than
| Reverb does (and certainly more than eBay).
|
| As a buyer I've had zero problems with Keh the couple of times
| I've used them.
| hrdwdmrbl wrote:
| Amazon is awful for sellers. Buyers can return items used,
| including underwear and single-use items as well. There are no
| question asked. A person could live their life buying toilet
| paper from Amazon, using it, and then literally returning it and
| Amazon would never stop this behavior. The same goes with
| clothing or anything else you can use within the return window
| provided by Amazon.
| freepor wrote:
| If reading this story makes your blood boil, and you need some
| catharsis, there's a story online that I can't find right now
| about a guy who went to the address of the fraudster and beat him
| with a piece of rebar giving him a permanent limp.
| onemoresoop wrote:
| Maybe that was an innocent person. Scammers are known to use
| other people's addresses, they know when the person is not at
| home and when the package arrives and just go loot it.
| BooneJS wrote:
| I got ripped off on eBay where the fraudster kept my gas RC car
| and got the refund. It was only $300, but I haven't sold anything
| on the internet that I wouldn't be uncomfortable giving away
| since.
| crmrc114 wrote:
| Did you sell it as used? If you opened the package and touched
| the product it can no longer be sold as new. I have called out
| sellers on this crap before and gotten my money back. When I
| order new I expect a factory sealed box. (Also illegal in the US
| https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/16/20.1 )
|
| So assuming you sold this as used, that sucks I feel for you.
| However if your one of those scumbags who sells used things on
| Amazon as new I have no sympathy and I would happily report you
| for my money back. (I have encountered this maybe twice in all
| the electronics I buy on Amazon)
|
| If you want to sell used things you have opened, flag them as
| such on Amazon or go to Ebay. I buy from both places and will
| always take a deal on a cheaper gently used item if its disclosed
| up front.
|
| Edit: For clarity, FTA > "To this day, I have no idea what he
| claimed was "missing" from the package. I even included all the
| original plastic wrap!" He opened a factory box and unwrapped the
| product. How else would he photograph all the parts with the kit?
| jacquesm wrote:
| That could very well be but then the 'buyer' should return the
| goods.
| OrgNet wrote:
| > I sold a mint-in-box Sony a7R 4
| [deleted]
| crmrc114 wrote:
| RTA > "To this day, I have no idea what he claimed was
| "missing" from the package. I even included all the original
| plastic wrap!"
|
| He opened a factory box and unwrapped the product. How else
| would he photograph all the parts with the kit?
| Ensorceled wrote:
| When this happens, and you get your money back, do you keep the
| product?
| crmrc114 wrote:
| Once yes, I was sent a "new" hard drive. SMART showed 4000
| something power on hours. They let me keep it and refunded
| me.
|
| Also damn on the downvotes. Guess as someone buying online I
| should just enjoy getting used shit sent to me at a new
| price?
| unreal37 wrote:
| No, but you should be a decent human being.
|
| The guy got scammed thousands of dollars and you're "that
| guy" saying it's probably his fault with no evidence.
|
| Just say, "sorry this happened to you, that sucks" or say
| nothing.
| MeltySmelty wrote:
| unrealDUMBO37
| NikolaNovak wrote:
| >>Just say, "sorry this happened to you, that sucks" or
| say nothing.
|
| Umm, I had you until that line...
|
| That line of unquestioning sympathy may be polite, but it
| leads us to nowhere. Or more precisely, to insular groups
| of internally self-validating comments with no sanity
| check or objective truth.
|
| Tone, hey, sure, maybe OP could've been a bit more
| reserved.
|
| But I will defend vehemently against attempts to sanction
| people with questions and wanting to know details before
| committing their moral outrage one way or another.
| grawprog wrote:
| No I think it's more your tone and your insinuations
| against the op that have nothing to do with the actual
| issue discussed in the op.
| tempestn wrote:
| Does Amazon not have a "New, open box" option?
| sarakayakomzin wrote:
| see also: "used"
| CamelCaseName wrote:
| Almost. The correct condition would be "Used - Like New" [0]
|
| The reason why this matters is because "New" items are
| grouped in a separate tab/link on the product detail page.
|
| Frankly speaking, selling anything other than sealed products
| in perfect conditions as "New" opens you up to misery.
|
| [0] https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?node
| Id=...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-02-21 23:00 UTC)