Amazon seller threatening to sue me because I won a warranty claim

[Zigner]

I'm wondering why Amazon's requirements even state that you must contact the seller for information on returning the item:

From http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=hp_537868_warranty?nodeId=200783670#warranty

Claim Timeframes

• For seller orders made on the Amazon.com website, you must wait 3 calendar days past the maximum estimated delivery date for an order OR 30 days from the order date, whichever is sooner.
• If your order fails to arrive, you then have 60 days to file an A-to-Z claim.
• If you receive your item and it is damaged, defective, or materially different, you must contact the seller within fourteen (14) days of receipt to request return information.
• For purchases using Amazon Payments on a third-party website, you must wait 15 days from the order date to submit a claim. From that point, you have 75 days to submit the claim.

 

[BL]

I'm wondering why Amazon's requirements even state that you must contact the seller for information on returning the item:

From http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=hp_537868_warranty?nodeId=200783670#warranty

Claim Timeframes

• For seller orders made on the Amazon.com website, you must wait 3 calendar days past the maximum estimated delivery date for an order OR 30 days from the order date, whichever is sooner.
• If your order fails to arrive, you then have 60 days to file an A-to-Z claim.
• If you receive your item and it is damaged, defective, or materially different, you must contact the seller within fourteen (14) days of receipt to request return information.
• For purchases using Amazon Payments on a third-party website, you must wait 15 days from the order date to submit a claim. From that point, you have 75 days to submit the claim.

It gives the buyer and seller an oppurtunity to resolve the issue(s) first .

When the buyer goes to file an A-Z claim , a message will tell the buyer you must contact the seller first if they haven't already done so.

I have done this and received partial/full refunds without going through A-Z. Only one seller wanted a return of the item first. It was damaged.

 

[Zigner]

The point is that keeping something that doesn't belong to you is conversion.

 

[AmazonUser]

Using Amazon to purchase the item does not necessarily mean that you had no contract with the seller. That would only be the case if you reasonably believed that you had purchased the item directly from Amazon rather than from a third party. While I'm no expert on Amazon's policies, I have made a handful of purchases through Amazon over the years, and in each case it was clear to me in advance when the seller was a third party. But I'm not hear to argue the facts with you. If you can show that your only contract was with Amazon, then you may prevail if sued.

Amazon goes through a great deal of effort to make the buying experience seamless whether you purchase directly from Amazon or a third party buyer. It's all under the umbrella and support of Amazon.com. Not only would I have to prove that my only contract is with Amazon, the seller would have the burden to prove that his contract is with me and not with Amazon, the party who made the decision to honor my claim. I doubt if any court would side with the business and not the consumer in that question, but I'm not a lawyer. I certainly do have a contract with Amazon and he certainly does have a contract with Amazon. Even if he were to prove that he and I also have a contract, he would STILL have to convince the court that I am liable for not returning a misrepresented article... something that Amazon already ruled I am not liable for.

 

[Zigner]

Oh, you've already got the answer...why are you here again?

 

[AmazonUser]

The point is that keeping something that doesn't belong to you is conversion.

Then I guess Amazon is complicit in facilitating "conversion" to all the thousands of people who ever filed a claim for misrepresented merchandise and received a refund without being required to return said merchandise. I'm sure that Amazon has a vast team of lawyers who would not allow their business model to facilitate "conversion"

 

[Zigner]

Then I guess Amazon is complicit in facilitating "conversion" to all the thousands of people who ever filed a claim for misrepresented merchandise and received a refund without being required to return said merchandise. I'm sure that Amazon has a vast team of lawyers who would not allow their business model to facilitate "conversion"

At the risk of sounding redundant...

Oh, you've already got the answer...why are you here again?

 

[utmostpriority]

I know the process very well!

And you do not know Amazons processes .The buyer only gets to file a claim after contacting the seller and the issue is either not responded to or the response is unsatisfactory to the buyer from the seller.

Additionally,talking about refunds . If the seller has a refund policy,as said before,that avenue can be used.

You are correct on one statement A-Z claims should be the last resort.

It's not always the buyers fault .There are sellers out there that will hound you after making a claim ,instead of following amazons procedures/policy.

I am aware of the A-Z guarantee myself and have used it several times .

I know the Amazon claim process very well from my own experience.
There is no system at Amazon that keeps a buyer from filing a A and Z claim before making efforts to solve an issue with a buyer.
You can just file a claim without contacting the buyer for solving the issue and Amazon mostly stands on your side, since they value buyers more than third party sellers. I understand why they tend to do that, but their A and Z thing opens possibility of lots of different types of fraud by bad buyers.
Since you said that you yourself have used it several times, my only wish is that you have never abused it and victimized innocent sellers.

 

[AmazonUser]

There is no system at Amazon that keeps a buyer from filing a A and Z claim before making efforts to solve an issue with a buyer.

Yes there is. The system will prevent anyone from filing a claim until after they have contacted the seller first. In this case the seller demanded that I pay shipping and insurance to return the item, which mean I would have been out $$$ for his misrepresentation. Amazon reviews all buyer-seller communication before making a ruling on an A-to-Z claim.

 

[utmostpriority]

Oh you consider yourself as smart and informed consumer!

The amount of detailed knowledge a person has of their rights and guarantees as a consumer when visiting a site such as Amazon does not equate to abuse nor to whether they are a "good person" or not. I have educated myself on the rights I have when using a credit card. That research makes me informed consumer, not a thief. I am a high volume purchaser and have had to utilize the credit card chargeback system on very rare occasions, but when I have it's been a very effective recourse and I'm glad that I am smart and informed consumer.

The Amazon A-to-Z "thing" is a guarantee that goes beyond just what most purchasing sites offer. It is a "coverage" service according to Amazon that the buyer receives automatically when purchasing on the site. You may think that it's "nonsensical" but it's one of the reasons I purchase on Amazon and not somewhere else. It gives me the security that if something goes wrong Amazon will guarantee the purchase. The seller has an agreement with Amazon to fulfill orders according to their seller agreement. If the seller violates Amazon policy, they are subject to their agreement. Sellers should abide by this and not falsify their listings.

"We want you to buy with confidence anytime you purchase products on the Amazon.com website or use Amazon Payments. That is why we guarantee purchases from Amazon Marketplace sellers when payment is made via the Amazon.com website or when you use Amazon Payments for qualified purchases on third-party websites. The condition of the item you buy and its timely delivery are guaranteed under the Amazon A-to-z Guarantee.

Buyers are covered at no cost. We're committed to creating a safe buying experience on the Amazon.com website and when using Amazon Payments on third party websites."

http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?ie=UTF8&nodeId=537868

This isn't an Amazon forum. There are many Amazon forums where buyers and sellers can debate the merits and sense of the Amazon A-to-Z guarantee. My only reason in posting here is to find out if there is any legal basis for the seller's threats and I couldn't care less if you think I'm a "good person" or not. Maybe you should consider that your habit of trolling sites like this to flame others who only came here asking for help doesn't make you such a "good person".

There is nothing wrong with being a smart and informed consumer, but my last question is this:

Have you ever considered to return the camera to the owner after getting your money back?

This is my whole point: Your detailed knowledge of Amazon policies has led you to conclude it is totally OK to take someone's property without paying a penny, since I did follow their rules.

Ok, have a happy life with the money or whatever you got from getting rid of that bloody camera!

 

[AmazonUser]

There is nothing wrong with being a smart and informed consumer, but my last question is this:

Have you ever considered to return the camera to the owner after getting your money back?

That would mean I would be out money to pay shipping for a mistake that was not mine. Perhaps if the seller had sent me a pre-paid mailing label instead of demanding that I pay shipping and insurance, he wouldn't be in this predicament now. Perhaps if he hadn't made excuses and feigned ignorance of Amazon's listing policies as well. Retail sales is all about customer service and this seller had none. Anyway this is getting way off topic.

Thanks much to those who contributed to help to clarify the legal aspects of this.

 

[CameronNewport]

Not only would I have to prove that my only contract is with Amazon, the seller would have the burden to prove that his contract is with me and not with Amazon,

Here's what Amazon says (in part):

4. Amazon's Role. Amazon provides a platform for third-party sellers ("Sellers") and buyers ("Buyers") to negotiate and complete transactions. Amazon is not involved in the actual transaction between Sellers and Buyers and is not the agent of and has no authority for either for any purpose.

I don't think that Amazon shares your views. It looks like Amazon considers itself nothing more than a party who brings buyers and sellers together (like eBay).

Even if he were to prove that he and I also have a contract, he would STILL have to convince the court that I am liable for not returning a misrepresented article... something that Amazon already ruled I am not liable for.

That would be as easy as telling the court that he sent you the item, that you were given a refund, and that you never returned the item. Unless you try to make things more difficult by perjuring yourself, I don't see the problem. The judge would surely rule against you unless you have a legitimate argument as to why you were not obligated to return the item. And now we've come full circle back to my original remarks ... you're going to need to show that the warranty governs more than just whether Amazon grants you a refund.

 

[Zigner]

I happen to agree that the OP can reasonably expect to not have to pay for the return shipping. Unfortunately, the OP can't even offer to return the item on his dime at this point, because he already got rid of the item.

 

[utmostpriority]

How much worth was the camera?

That would mean I would be out money to pay shipping for a mistake that was not mine. Perhaps if the seller had sent me a pre-paid mailing label instead of demanding that I pay shipping and insurance, he wouldn't be in this predicament now. Perhaps if he hadn't made excuses and feigned ignorance of Amazon's listing policies as well. Retail sales is all about customer service and this seller had none. Anyway this is getting way off topic.

Thanks much to those who contributed to help to clarify the legal aspects of this.

If you can tell us honestly how much worth the camera was, all of us participated in this thread would have a clue for judging whether you deliberately abused the claim service or it just happened.
So, please tell us how much worth the camera was. Around $ ??

 

[justalayman]

Buyer purchased camera from Amazon. Amazon delegated duty to fulfill order to seller. Seller has a contract with Amazon. Buyer has a contract with Amazon.

Seller does not have a contract with Buyer. Seller has no standing to sue buyer. Seller's recourse is with Amazon.

Buyer should tell seller to pound sand.

I'm not seeing that anywhere in their literature. As well CameronNewport has posted something that argues the exact opposite. I see the purchase of a used item through Amazon basically the same as eBay. As such, unless somebody can show something that obligates a buyer to not having the item returned, I see no reason the seller cannot demand the item be returned.