When “refund only” becomes the standard, who is professionally “fleecing”?

After major e-commerce platforms launched the "refund only" rule, disputes have continued, and there have even been cases caused by "refund only". Let's take a look at these cases~

Since the end of last year, major e-commerce platforms have introduced the "refund only" policy, and disputes have continued to arise. Recently, courts in many places have made public cases caused by the "refund only" policy.

Among them, the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People's Court released such a typical case at a press conference on source of litigation management held in April. For the 20 yuan partial price of a dress, the merchant and the platform went to the second instance court; in the same month, the Huaishang District People's Court of Bengbu City announced the judgment results of the case related to "online purchase of instant noodles without return after refund".

The platform introduced the "refund only" rule originally to improve consumers' purchasing and after-sales experience and reduce the cost of returns and exchanges for some merchants, but this rule seems to have become a breeding ground for "malicious wool-pulling parties". Especially when "wool-pulling" has derived an industrial chain, not only merchants suffer, but the platform is also caught in a "dilemma".

1. Are merchants suffering for the sake of buyers?

On April 8, the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People's Court released a typical case at a press conference on source control: Mr. Chen, who runs a women's clothing online store on an e-commerce platform, found that a consumer reported to the customer service that one side of the dress was missing lace and had quality problems after purchasing it, and applied for a "refund only". The merchant was on break at the time and did not handle it. Only 3 hours later, the platform approved the consumer's application. Mr. Chen believed that it was unfair for the platform to directly intervene in the quick refund without communicating with the merchant. Mr. Chen asked the platform to compensate for the loss of 20 yuan for the "refund only" claim.

The Changning District People's Court supported Mr. Chen's claim in the first instance, and the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People's Court upheld the original verdict in the second instance.

On April 10, the Huaishang District People's Court of Bengbu City announced the verdict of a similar case: a buyer previously bought 30 packs of instant noodles for 9.19 yuan. After receiving the goods, he applied for a refund on the grounds that the instant noodles were broken. During the process of contacting the store customer service, the e-commerce platform intervened. The buyer successfully refunded 6 yuan but never returned the goods. A food company sued the court, demanding that the buyer return the purchase price and compensate for lost work time and material costs, totaling 539.77 yuan. In the end, the court ruled that the buyer should pay 6 yuan for the purchase price.

It is worth mentioning that after accepting the above case, the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People's Court noticed that such cases often involve small amounts and clear legal facts, but the number of cases received surges in a short period of time, and there are a large number of similar cases to be processed subsequently.

In fact, as early as March this year, there were rumors online that some Pinduoduo merchants were dissatisfied with the "refund only" policy and quickly refunded orders after placing them in "Pinduoduo self-operated stores" and "brand stores", causing a "store bombing incident". When Taobao and other e-commerce platforms followed this rule, some small and medium-sized individual merchants said that this attracted some malicious "refund only" wool parties.

"I didn't take it too seriously at first, thinking that no one would specifically ask for a refund." Dai Lin runs a Taobao clothing store. She told Zinc Scale, "Before, if the buyer asked for a refund after the goods were shipped, the seller's consent was required, and then the logistics could be intercepted. But now the refund is made within seconds. If you don't pay attention to after-sales service, you will lose both your money and the clothes."

Zinc Scale searched various social media platforms and found that many e-commerce merchants have complaints about the "refund only" rule.

Image source: Xiaohongshu

Among them, a merchant mentioned, "As a ten-year-old store, this year's Taobao is really an eye-opener for me. The buyer just said that he thought the product was a bit big, and the refund-only window popped up directly... I was forced to get a refund three times in one morning, and my multiple appeals were all unsuccessful." Another merchant posted a note on Xiaohongshu, saying, "Refund-only is so infuriating. Some of the leggings that I selected had some defects and were already sold at a loss, but today I received five refund-only orders at once, and they were all bought by the same person. Isn't this a naked wool-pulling?" "The consumer applied for a refund-only, but the product was not from my store, and the order number and product packaging were wrong. The customer didn't reply to my message or communicate with me. I don't know if he made a mistake by accident, or if the customer made a set of pictures himself. The customer order is also low, and he can only make 2 yuan at most for one order. Small merchants really don't make any money..." and so on.

It was even revealed online that some merchants printed a "Refund Only Notice" and shipped them together. The notice stated, "If you apply for a refund only without the merchant's consent, you will be sued directly and no further notifications or reminders will be given. The costs of the lawsuit and the compensation amount of approximately 2,000 yuan will be borne entirely by the purchaser. By purchasing, you agree to this clause." Regardless of the authenticity of this notice, it is at least enough to show the merchant's attitude towards "refund only."

2. The “薅羊毛” (buy for free) industry chain: from “zero-yuan purchase” to “earning compensation”

"I am a newbie in e-commerce who lost 8,000 yuan in 10 days. I am also disgusted by the refund policy. I set up a new store and a new link to give back to consumers with a big discount. But when I slashed the price, a group of people came to take advantage of me. They not only took my goods for free, but also frequently disturbed me and asked for money. If I didn't pay, they would give me a bad review or refund directly..." On Xiaohongshu, an e-commerce merchant said, "When I was packing and shipping on New Year's Day, I saw that more than 30 packages came from one community."

If it is still bearable for merchants that ordinary consumers apply for "refund only", then the "wool-pulling" industry chain created by professional "wool-pulling parties" is a headache for merchants. In fact, on major social media, there is no shortage of "pxx return without refund tutorial" and "refund only guide", and they often not only "refund only", but also make a "compensation".

Zinc Scale searched on major social media and found that most of these projects are called "compensation projects" and target major e-commerce platforms such as Pinduoduo, JD.com and Taobao. These projects are mainly carried out through social groups. After joining the group, you follow the tutorials and place an order for delayed delivery or products with loopholes, or question the merchant for selling fakes, so as to return the goods and contact customer service to earn compensation. The former compensation is generally 100 yuan per order, and if you question the sale of fakes, you may be compensated three times for one fake. Ordinary people generally have two ways to "get on board", one is to pay a tutorial fee ranging from 38.8 yuan to 188 yuan, and the other is to "get on board" for free, but each order of income must be paid to the group administrator as a commission, ranging from 30% to 50%.

According to a tutorial on the specific dispute steps of "JD.com pays three times", the tutorial is detailed on how to take a video when receiving the goods, how to communicate with JD.com customer service, how to upload photos, etc. It emphasizes that "it is recommended to play each account only once, because the first time is stable, and the second time has a 90% chance of failure."

Some "payment" tutorials

In another compensation group, its group announcement mentioned that "the investment for one order is about 2 or 3 (yuan), and the minimum compensation for one order is 5 yuan. If you place 20 orders at a time, you will get a compensation of 100 (yuan), which means you only invest 40 and get a net profit of 100, a small profit and a big return." It also stated, "Unlike dead Taobao, the biggest advantage is that it does not violate the rules and will not be blocked."

Zinc Scale noticed that the "dead Taobao" mentioned here refers to stores that have not been taken care of or even forgotten for a long time, so they often cannot ship goods in time, which allows professional wool parties to take advantage of loopholes and earn compensation. On major social platforms, there is even "dead store collection", that is, the links of stores that have not been logged in for a long time are automatically collected through scripts, and selling these links has also become a way to make profits. In addition to earning commissions by distributing links, single links are also sold on second-hand e-commerce platforms such as Xianyu, and the price is about 5 yuan.

However, relevant departments have already noticed this gray industry chain. According to Jiemian News, Shanghai once cracked a case in which a company suffered huge losses by taking advantage of a loophole to "pick up the wool". At that time, the Jiading Public Security Bureau in Shanghai received a report from an online e-commerce company that it had found suspicious transactions among its users that took advantage of a service loophole to "pick up the wool", causing the company to suffer a cumulative loss of 1 million yuan.

After combing through the platform orders, the police found that about 43 accounts not only applied for refunds quickly after repeated orders, but also uploaded fake photos of quality problems. Many photos did not show the problems of the purchased goods as required, and some photos did not match the purchased goods at all, but also applied for returns and received 100 yuan in compensation. In the end, the police locked in and arrested 20 criminal suspects including Wang and Wang who were scattered in multiple provinces and cities and committed "薅羊毛" fraud.

3. The platform dilemma: from questioning Pinduoduo to becoming Pinduoduo?

Since merchants are complaining and even the gray industrial chain is difficult to stop, why do major platforms still introduce the "refund only" rule?

Looking back at the process of implementing the “refund only” rule on major e-commerce platforms, it is not difficult to find that this is a path from questioning Pinduoduo to becoming Pinduoduo.

Pinduoduo launched the "refund only" rule as early as 2021. Although merchants have always had many complaints about this, Douyin announced the "refund only" rule in September 2023, Taobao and JD followed suit at the end of the year, and in January 2024, Kuaishou also joined the "refund only" team.

However, it is worth mentioning that according to the refund experience of many consumers, it is often easier to get a "refund only" option pop-up on Pinduoduo. "There have been several times when I received something with a little defect, and I contacted customer service just to discuss whether I could exchange the goods, but the platform automatically popped up a refund only window." Hong Ya is an old user of Pinduoduo. On the one hand, she feels that the experience is good, "because it does protect the rights of consumers to a greater extent", but on the other hand, she is also worried about "whether the merchant will take advantage of me?" At present, Taobao's refund only process often requires consumers to actively click "refund only", and the seller can refuse, and at this time, it is necessary to apply for platform intervention.

Alibaba Performance

In fact, major e-commerce platforms and short video live streaming platforms have successively introduced "refund only" rules, which has also somewhat exposed the anxiety of e-commerce giants.

You know, as early as the end of 2021, Pinduoduo's annual active buyers reached 869 million, which was very close to Alibaba's 979 million Chinese market consumers. Although the buyer data is no longer public, it is hard to say that Alibaba can rest easy when Pinduoduo's market value exceeds Alibaba at the end of November 2023. For this reason, in addition to launching "refund only" in after-sales service, major e-commerce platforms are also constantly "competing for low prices" in terms of price.

However, as merchants’ dissatisfaction with the platform continues to accumulate, can the platform truly achieve healthy development?

Author: Li Xuanqi

WeChat public account: Zinc Scale (ID: znkedu)