Re Case ID 17532523371

Hello all,

We’re reaching out in hopes that someone from Amazon or another experienced seller can offer insight or assistance regarding a reimbursement issue that doesn’t seem to align with the practical realities of our business model or Amazon’s stated policy.

The Situation:

We recently received a reimbursement for an item that was returned by a customer in “unsellable” condition (flagged as “customer damaged”) and subsequently lost by an Amazon fulfillment center. The reimbursement was automatically processed, but when we reviewed the amount during our regular audit, it was clear that it was substantially lower than our sourcing cost.

When we opened a case to dispute the reimbursement amount, Amazon Seller Support responded that since the item was marked “unsellable,” they applied a 50% reduction in value to determine the reimbursement amount.

The Problem:

This logic might make sense for new, retail-sealed items — but our products are renewed. Every single unit we sell has been previously used. As such:

• A returned used/renewed item marked “unsellable” does not automatically lose 50% of its value.
• More importantly, it has not devalued in any meaningful sense from the condition it was originally listed in.

What We’re Asking:

We understand that Amazon’s reimbursement policy allows for adjustments when items are lost or damaged in an unsellable condition. The relevant policy states:

"We will reimburse at a reduced estimated cost of the unit… and we may request additional information or documentation to help us determine this adjusted value."

The key here is that Amazon assumes a 50% devaluation without asking for documentation or understanding the business model. That may be acceptable in some categories, but in the used/refurbished space, this assumption is deeply flawed.

We are happy to provide documentation or sourcing cost proof, but we believe the 50% markdown was arbitrarily applied and not grounded in any real-world understanding of our inventory. It feels unfair that Amazon both lost our item and is now dictating its value without room for nuance.

Request for Help:

• Has anyone successfully appealed this kind of reimbursement markdown for a used/renewed item?
• Is there a clear escalation path or team that better understands the refurbished goods category?
• Can Amazon revise its blanket policy or make category-specific adjustments for renewed sellers?

Any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.