Amazon Marketplace Refunds

unholyangel

Mysearch wrote: »

Again, thanks for feedback in posts 8 & 9.


In practice, the Amazon marketplace seller can presumably control the delivery service on offer, i.e. basic delivery with no tracking. Likewise, if the product is delivered to a neighbour or simply thrown over the fence, it has been known, then once in receipt of the product, I assume the buyer is then stuck with the problem of returning the product at their cost, probably requiring a registered post, if a refund is predicated on the return.


Thanks this is really useful information to understand. While I am assuming that the 30 day limit is the default, as "undue delay" sounds a bit vague, is there not also a 30 day limit on the return of defective goods – are these synchronised?

undue delay is in addition to the default period of performance rather than instead of it.

If there is a time agreed between the parties at the time of entering the contract, then that period counts as the period for performance. Where no such period is agreed, its the 30 days.

However this appears to be moot in your circumstances - even if they failed to perform within the 30 days, you'd have to give them a further opportunity (unless as above you told them time was of the essence/it was obvious from the contract itself) and it only really allows you to treat the contract at an end - something you can do anyway at any point up to 14 days after receiving the goods.

The period for performance is really only useful in contracts where you may not have the right to cancel (such as a contract for personalised goods/goods made to your specification).


What you could try is arguing that you withdrew your offer before they accepted it.

Mysearch

Thanks for the clarification in post 11. I was attempting to cut & paste your references, but as a newbie I am not allowed to include links and mistakenly hacked the meaning of post 9. Also appreciated the updated in post 12. In an attempt to consolidate what I ‘think’ I have learnt I want to first outline some of the details in “The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013” and “Consumer Rights Act 2015 – Part 2”. See post 9 for links. Starting with CCR 2013 covering the ‘Time for delivery of goods’

“(2) Unless the trader and the consumer have agreed otherwise, the contract is to be treated as including a term that the trader must deliver the goods to the consumer”

“(3) Unless there is an agreed time or period, the contract is to be treated as including a term that the trader must deliver the goods, (a) without undue delay, and (b) in any event, not more than 30 days after the day on which the contract is entered into.”

“(4) In this regulation, (a) an “agreed” time or period means a time or period agreed by the trader and the consumer for delivery of the goods, but (b) if there is an obligation to deliver the goods at the time the contract is entered into, that time counts as the “agreed” time”.

Now I am not a lawyer, but when you place an order with Amazon, the order confirmation states an ‘arriving’ window – in my case this was 10-14 Sept. It did not say, this is only an estimate that we can change at any time, although I suspect there are probably caveats in either Amazon’s or the seller’s T&Cs. Whether such details in the small print could be considered ‘fair’ to the consumer might be argued. Therefore, despite the clarification in post 12, ‘undue delay’ still only appears to be a general statement preceding the 30-day default limit, if there is no agreed time associated with the contract. However, while it may only be wishful thinking on my part, I believe that it is not unreasonable for the consumer to believe that the ‘arriving’ date specified in the order confirmation might be seen as a contractual commitment. If so, the seller should not be able to simply change the delivery date without, at least, asking for the customer’s agreement and giving some reason for the delay. CCR 2013 also states:

“(8) If the consumer specifies a period under paragraph (7) but the goods are not delivered within that period, then the consumer may treat the contract as at an end. (9) If the consumer treats the contract as at an end under paragraph (6) or (8), the trader must without undue delay reimburse all payments made under the contract.”

Of course, the interpretation of this statement appears to be predicated on the ‘agreed time’ discussed above being a contractual commitment, but would presumably include all return postage costs? In respect to the scope of Consumer Rights Act 2015 – Part 2, it initially appears to be written and design only to be read by lawyers, as such I will only table what I believe to be the general gist of this reference.

First and foremost, contract terms and notices are required to be fair, presumably to both buyer and seller, that is also only fair. It is also reasonable to assume that both Amazon and its 3rd party sellers want to be fair. However, I believe there is also an implicit caveat to their definition of fairness, when it appears to jeopardize their profit margins.

In terms of Amazon, their marketplace T&Cs allows them to distance themselves from any subsequent problems and they will simply tell you through essentially pre-formatted emails that you, as the buyer, have to sort out the issue with the seller. However, in this arrangement, the seller then appears to be able to change the delivery date, provide no proof of dispatch via tracking information and place a requirement on any refund based on the return of the product, the cost of which is on the buyer. Should the product go missing on this round-trip process, the buyer appears to have to prove the loss was not their fault. Is that fair?

I know this might be starting to appear extremely pedantic in the not unreasonable assumption the both Amazon and the seller actually want to provide a good service, it is necessary to their business model. However, when things go wrong, they appear to want to have the ability to invoke myriad of T&Cs details that they know the consumer will never have read. In this respect, they have an ‘unfair’ advantage over the average consumer. Is that fair?

unholyangel

Nearly every company will have similar T&C's designed to protect them. The consumer has the choice of entering into a contract on those terms or finding another retailer. Just as the retailer cannot force you to buy from them on their terms, you cannot force a retailer to sell to you on your terms.

However what you've probably missed in the T&C's is that no contract is formed until dispatch (most online retailers will state that no contract is formed until dispatch).

Which is why I said you'd be better off arguing that you withdrew your offer before they accepted it.

Mysearch

I agree and thanks for the education.