Requesting Moderator Escalation – A-to-z Over-Refund (Case ID: 17962237571)
Dear Moderators,
@Ricardo_Amazon@Christine_Amazon@Lucre_Amzn@Sunnie_Amazon@Daryl_Amazon
We respectfully request your help escalating Case ID 17962237571, regarding an A-to-z Guarantee claim (Order ID: 701-8311329-4722605) where we believe policy was misapplied and the seller unfairly penalized.
The item — a robot vacuum — was returned used but fully functional after 4 cleaning cycles (1h22 runtime, 46 m² cleaned). The customer admitted dissatisfaction, not defect.
We issued a 50% refund, fully in line with Amazon’s policy for used, non-defective items:
amazon.ca/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=GKQNFKFK5CF3C54B
However, Amazon later debited us an additional 32.6% ($332.61) (Which is 30% + taxes twice, I assume the agent did not know that putting an amount in the refund will auto calculate the refund amount automatically later), and after our appeal, Amazon issued a third refund (17.4%) funded by Amazon, bringing the total refund to 100%. The fact the third refund was Amazon-funded, clearly shows it was not due to our error and we should have not been financially or ODR liable.
As a result, we were held liable for 82.6% of the refund, which directly contradicts Amazon’s stated policy limits for this type of return.
We appealed the decision with detailed evidence (usage logs, return photos, test results), but the appeal was denied without addressing the over-refund or why it counted against our ODR.
We kindly request moderator intervention to:
- Escalate the case to a senior investigator.
- Reimburse the 32.6% (CAD $332.61) charged beyond policy.
- Remove the A-to-z claim’s impact from our Order Defect Rate.
Thank you for your time and support in correcting this.
Requesting Moderator Escalation – A-to-z Over-Refund (Case ID: 17962237571)
Dear Moderators,
@Ricardo_Amazon@Christine_Amazon@Lucre_Amzn@Sunnie_Amazon@Daryl_Amazon
We respectfully request your help escalating Case ID 17962237571, regarding an A-to-z Guarantee claim (Order ID: 701-8311329-4722605) where we believe policy was misapplied and the seller unfairly penalized.
The item — a robot vacuum — was returned used but fully functional after 4 cleaning cycles (1h22 runtime, 46 m² cleaned). The customer admitted dissatisfaction, not defect.
We issued a 50% refund, fully in line with Amazon’s policy for used, non-defective items:
amazon.ca/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=GKQNFKFK5CF3C54B
However, Amazon later debited us an additional 32.6% ($332.61) (Which is 30% + taxes twice, I assume the agent did not know that putting an amount in the refund will auto calculate the refund amount automatically later), and after our appeal, Amazon issued a third refund (17.4%) funded by Amazon, bringing the total refund to 100%. The fact the third refund was Amazon-funded, clearly shows it was not due to our error and we should have not been financially or ODR liable.
As a result, we were held liable for 82.6% of the refund, which directly contradicts Amazon’s stated policy limits for this type of return.
We appealed the decision with detailed evidence (usage logs, return photos, test results), but the appeal was denied without addressing the over-refund or why it counted against our ODR.
We kindly request moderator intervention to:
- Escalate the case to a senior investigator.
- Reimburse the 32.6% (CAD $332.61) charged beyond policy.
- Remove the A-to-z claim’s impact from our Order Defect Rate.
Thank you for your time and support in correcting this.
