> So this makes me wonder, if amazon are bundling-up returned items into pallets and selling them in bulk, how did clearly returned items get sold back to an end user?
If the item is (looks) unopened and pristine, Amazon will usually sell it again as new.
They could catch it multiples ways. Simple precise weight measurement would catch basic scammers. They could X-ray the package and use cv to determine if the contents have been modified or not.
Cost of multiple shifts at multiple locations + cost of implementing verification process + cost of security and oversight + cost of extra inventory loss due to employee theft
vs
Cost of negative image (deferred via simple returns) + cost of inventory loss duo to fraud + cost of inventory loss due to employees
I'm no legal expert, but I imagine it would be very difficult to prove that Amazon is committing fraud.
In Washington State, Fraud has a very specific meaning, and requires me (the victim) to prove 9 elements of fraud.
These elements include proving Amazon intentionally mislead me by stating false facts, and that as a result of the fraud, I suffered damages.
As other threads have mentioned, the sheer scale at which Amazon operates means they deal with logistical issues differently than other retailers. To ensure 100% rate for returns would increase the cost to Amazon, which would either be eaten by the company, or passed along to the consumer.
If the item is (looks) unopened and pristine, Amazon will usually sell it again as new.
Some switcharoos are caught, some are not.