Is it reasonable for a logistics company's delivery failure to result in an A-to-Z claim, and for the seller's proactive handling of the issue to still be counted towards the ODR?
@Julia_Amazon @Ezra_Amazon @Winston_Amazon @Spencer_Amazon @JiAlex_Amazon @Roberto_Amazon@Sakura_Amazon_
I encountered a case of performance penalties caused by a third-party logistics error. I am now raising questions about the implementation of the policy and kindly request an official response:
Order number 203-6845144-2873913
Event Timeline
1 Logistics Delivery Failure
Carrier EVRi tracking number H01SRA0017365532 shows:
10 July 2025 at 08:55, notification: ‘Package delayed, delivery on the next working day’
No further delivery records were recorded, confirming carrier responsibility
2 Seller's Proactive Intervention
We emailed the buyer on 11 July: ‘The package may be delayed at the local hub. We recommend you contact EVRi directly for inquiries, and we will simultaneously urge the carrier to resolve the issue.’
Simultaneously, we urgently contacted EVRi to request an explanation of the situation
3 Buyer Ignores Negotiations and Directly Files a Claim
Despite our explicit request for the buyer to wait for the logistics investigation (with multiple updates provided from 11 July to 25 July)
The buyer still initiated an A-to-Z claim on 1 August, and Amazon promptly processed the refund.
Core points of contention
Please explain the following policy enforcement issues:
1. According to the Amazon Logistics Liability Policy: Sellers are not responsible for carrier operational issues.
We have provided valid tracking information and proven compliance with shipping requirements.
The logistics delay occurred during the final delivery stage (within EVRi's scope of responsibility).
Why is ODR still being charged to the seller's account?
2 When the seller proactively coordinates and requests the buyer to wait,
does the buyer's direct claim bypassing negotiation violate Article 3 of the A-to-Z Policy?
Why does Amazon support such claims?
3 How does the platform address the following systemic vulnerabilities:
Sellers bear the financial losses (refunds) caused by logistics provider errors
While also facing performance penalties (ODR)
Yet unable to hold the actual responsible party (carrier) accountable
Seller's requests
1 Request to remove the ODR record for this order
2 Establish a logistics liability exemption mechanism:
If logistics records prove the seller has fulfilled their obligations, end-to-end package loss/delays shall not be counted toward performance metrics
3 Require buyers to respond to the seller's negotiation request before initiating a claim
This case exposes the current policy, which makes sellers the sole party responsible for logistics issues. We comply with the rules yet suffer double losses. We earnestly request the team to re-examine the liability determination logic.
Other sellers facing similar carrier issues are welcome to discuss solutions.
Is it reasonable for a logistics company's delivery failure to result in an A-to-Z claim, and for the seller's proactive handling of the issue to still be counted towards the ODR?
@Julia_Amazon @Ezra_Amazon @Winston_Amazon @Spencer_Amazon @JiAlex_Amazon @Roberto_Amazon@Sakura_Amazon_
I encountered a case of performance penalties caused by a third-party logistics error. I am now raising questions about the implementation of the policy and kindly request an official response:
Order number 203-6845144-2873913
Event Timeline
1 Logistics Delivery Failure
Carrier EVRi tracking number H01SRA0017365532 shows:
10 July 2025 at 08:55, notification: ‘Package delayed, delivery on the next working day’
No further delivery records were recorded, confirming carrier responsibility
2 Seller's Proactive Intervention
We emailed the buyer on 11 July: ‘The package may be delayed at the local hub. We recommend you contact EVRi directly for inquiries, and we will simultaneously urge the carrier to resolve the issue.’
Simultaneously, we urgently contacted EVRi to request an explanation of the situation
3 Buyer Ignores Negotiations and Directly Files a Claim
Despite our explicit request for the buyer to wait for the logistics investigation (with multiple updates provided from 11 July to 25 July)
The buyer still initiated an A-to-Z claim on 1 August, and Amazon promptly processed the refund.
Core points of contention
Please explain the following policy enforcement issues:
1. According to the Amazon Logistics Liability Policy: Sellers are not responsible for carrier operational issues.
We have provided valid tracking information and proven compliance with shipping requirements.
The logistics delay occurred during the final delivery stage (within EVRi's scope of responsibility).
Why is ODR still being charged to the seller's account?
2 When the seller proactively coordinates and requests the buyer to wait,
does the buyer's direct claim bypassing negotiation violate Article 3 of the A-to-Z Policy?
Why does Amazon support such claims?
3 How does the platform address the following systemic vulnerabilities:
Sellers bear the financial losses (refunds) caused by logistics provider errors
While also facing performance penalties (ODR)
Yet unable to hold the actual responsible party (carrier) accountable
Seller's requests
1 Request to remove the ODR record for this order
2 Establish a logistics liability exemption mechanism:
If logistics records prove the seller has fulfilled their obligations, end-to-end package loss/delays shall not be counted toward performance metrics
3 Require buyers to respond to the seller's negotiation request before initiating a claim
This case exposes the current policy, which makes sellers the sole party responsible for logistics issues. We comply with the rules yet suffer double losses. We earnestly request the team to re-examine the liability determination logic.
Other sellers facing similar carrier issues are welcome to discuss solutions.
2 replies
Seller_MT8rt0A2OpbCx
I would imagine the vast majority of A to Zs and ODRs are due to non or late delivery. It is your choice of courier, probably because of price, and Every are cheap for a reason.
Seller_d8YGbIjNqwFxn
This is a tough one. The buyer has been very patient, seeing the last EVRI update was on the 11th July, the customer waited until the 1st August to file an A-Z.
From your position here you probably should have refunded earlier to avoid an A-Z.
However the problem you have is that whilst EVRI are investigating they may find the parcel and deliver it to the customer so by refunding earlier you could lose out.
To be honest none of the points you raised about an A-Z being raised are valid. In the case of non delivery the customer needs to make contact with you after the estimated delivery date. After 48 hours the buyer can file an A-Z, they don't need to make any further contact with you or follow up on any messages you send them.
I don't think Amazon or the buyer did anything wrong here. The buyer didn't receive their item so they are entitled to money back.
I would personally pursue a claim with EVRI for the lost item. I think after a month the item should be declared lost.
