Total Posts:1|Showing Posts:1-1
Jump to topic:

Dark Side of Amazon

Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2015 6:22:28 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Does any company have the right not to pay to another company for the services/goods provided just based on company"s believes?
Amazon didn"t disburse funds as promised after mistakenly closing selling account

I would like to share with you the way huge Giant "amazon" treats their partners and companies that helped amazon to be one of the biggest selling platforms in the world. It is known to everybody that amazon has come up with a brilliant idea to become a selling platform for smaller companies to post their products on sale for amazon customers. Thanks to that amazon got a rapid boost up in variety of products offered that led to a huge increase of sales and recognition among US buyers. But when we look deeper in the company"s way of conducting their business it becomes shocking that nowadays such business practices may take place. For years USA was creating a set of business laws that guaranteed equal business rights for all companies, no matter of the size, starting capital, products or services new companies were bringing to the market. Just recently I came across the problem that one small company had with amazon. Amazon has built a huge trust among buyers, but did do that well with sellers of amazon platform. Recently we encountered the situation that amazon mistakenly closed the selling account and promised to disburse $96k owed in 90 days. Those funds were never disbursed, WHAT A SHOCK!!!
If I would say that amazon could make their own decision to take a product of another company, to sell it and never pay back that company, lots of people would probably tell me "are you crazy?" But this is really what happens nowadays that we feel has to be brought to the public. Amazon, as a huge business giant, follows their own judgment on making decisions to pay or not to pay the company that is selling on amazon. Law first "Law firm of Alex Gortinskiy" took a case to fight with amazon for money disbursement that amazon promised in writing to pay off in 90 days.
The company was selling on amazon for more than 2 years and then amazon removed selling privileges stating "We have removed your selling privileges, canceled your listings, and placed a temporary hold on any funds in your account. We took these actions because the items you are offering on our site may be counterfeit." Can you imagine the frustration of the small company to have their funds being frozen for 90 days with unreasonable explanation that doesn"t have any legal basis? After reading the participation agreement with amazon over and over again we realized that amazon has the full right to remove selling privileges because of any reason. It was their right to choose whom to let to sell on their platform and whom not to. The company tried to contact them several times trying to resolve the issue, but amazon was remaining silent. After 90 days past no funds were disbursed to account as amazon promised. After calling the lawyer Alex Gortinskiy and looking thru the agreements that amazon has, it turned out that amazon has several agreements, one that you need to sign when you are registering on amazon, another, more absurd, is on the website that probably nobody ever looks at. Who would imagine that the agreement contains a clause that amazon has the right to forfeit all the funds just upon their own judgment and believes. Amazon claims that agreement allows them to keep undisbursed funds without a court order if they determine that company was engaged in illegal activity. How is that possible nowadays? According to the Fifth amendment U.S constitution: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Isn"t it something we were going away for hundreds of years, isn"t it the situation that all business laws are fully restricting? Does any company have the right not to pay to another company for the services/goods provided just based on company believes? Does amazon have the right to have that rule in their agreement and to make it binding?
We would want to bring the attention of all damaged sellers who used to sell on amazon and to encourage fighting for their constitutional rights all the way to the end. The law should never permit such business ethics, and should set fair reimbursement for damages involved.