This really is rubbish as we all know Amazon won’t get in touch with them to “discuss” the matter.
I would email them back and and advise that Amazon have made it clear that their contract with Evri states we must claim from them direct. I would ask for the relevant paragraph from their contract with them that contradicts this. Maybe even quote Amazon’s paragraph that states we must claim directly. Ringing them may get you a different result.
Done, I seen this on another post so have added this one and sent them the original email as posted on here but with the correct references and tracked information.
I can’t decide if something has been decided with Amazon and Evri or if there is an argument brewing.
I have sent Evri the email below in response so tackling the issue from both sides and trying to blow the issue wide open. Unfortunately you cannot speak to them on the phone, it is just a bot message and then you eventually get routed to the online chat… Both the Evri online chat and the telephone numbers are not fit for purpose. We all know this. It is sad because if either side would listen and resolve it then this would be good for all parties involved including the customer, the seller, Evri and Amazon.
My message to Evri…
Thanks for your message, has something changed in the past week as I was informed by Amazon that this was not the case and you are basically batting this issue backwards and forwards?
In principal i am not happy with your response, I want this issue resolving and investigating further. It is not acceptable to not look into the whereabouts of my parcels in which you have lost a few of them as this has not been an isolated incident.
I would also like to inform you that in addition to your investigation, I will be taking an active part in adding this response to inform the well read Amazon forums to which I am a very active member so trust Amazon will look into this matter seriously in the hope that you as a responsible parcel courier should be taking loss of claims seriously and having a sensible procedure rather than just fobbing off claims.
Ever since Amazon forced us into using their returns system most of the returns for me are being delivered in the city of London (I am in Northern Ireland) when I put in safe-t claim Amazon wash their hands of it and say nothing to do with them go to Evri and they say go to Amazon they are responsible.I am so sick of theft and fraud on Amazon. Amazon in the last 18 months account for 100% of theft and fraud from my online sales channels.
and Amazon will tell you its Evri you need to claim off of.
Been there many times and heard the same story, simple answer do not use Evri, their record, of recent, has been nothing short of appalling to the extent that it has been discussed in the House of Commons whether they should be investigated by the government regarding their poor service.
The communication we had back from Royal Mail 02/08/2022 concerning a loss prepaid return is as follows:-
On this ocassion I am unable to accept your claim for compensation as this service used was a prepaid contract service and all claims must be made by the contract holder. I do recommend you contact them to discuss this issue further.
We informed Amazon we would like to make file a claim for loss and was advised we need to contact Royal Mail. You can see how frustrating it is for the seller.
They originally did and I had success in doing it this way but found it quite labour intensive and I would personally prefer it if Amazon claimed off Evri for all failed deliveries. It would make the claims process easier and Amazon have the clout to use or not use their services.
I was using the letter from Evri which was only dated the day before yesterday saying this is the latest procedure, actually giving Amazon and Evri the benefit of the doubt that somewhere Amazon has very recently addressed this issue perhaps rolling something out. It is only recently that Amazon are using Evri for more returns and you would think that they are both big enough to have exclusive managers that work on both sides to agree something to deliver a coherent message
Contact Evri, no joy? Decide who is responsible Amazon or Evri for any losses (literally buyer’s choice). If anyone can find an Amazon policy doc that states claims for loss must be made directly with Evri, RM (good luck with that btw, I don’t think the omission is an error) quote it to Evri etc, still no joy, then LBA.
If you decide Amazon are responsible, as you purchased the service via Amazon, then LBA them instead. I’d suggest a pro-forma letter would be handy as it’s likely to be well used 
What other choice do you have to obtain redress if both companies don’t want to play ball? Enough sand in the corporate oil and you might get some proper attention.
Sometimes our hosts manage to surprise even me with the egregious nature of their behaviour. But then race to the bottom and all that.
This up until now would have been a typical quote from Evri, the reason I raised this forum is that Evri are stating and naming Amazon as the actual contract holder rather than making it generic.
Amazon are aware of how frustrating this is and they should be aware that this could lead to a much darker place if this is not dealt with in the short term. If it was to get legal in years to come and a serious review, claims will then start pouring in from years gone by. I am making these statements now to try and nip it in the bud to the benefit of all parties.
With all Evri lost orders we contact the MD who resolves the matter quickly saying that these are not high value items. Sellers need to be cautious about the claim limitation.
This is the point, nothing from what I have had in the past has changed other than Evri have given in and they would be my target as I know I won’t get anywhere with Amazon. Now they have stopped and basically wrote a letter saying to go to Amazon, I was wondering if something has changed. I am making the assumption so far that it hasn’t but at this stage who knows. I am giving the benefit of the doubt.
To be fair, it is not about the amount of compensation, most of my deliveries are low value and wouldn’t cost Amazon or Evri that much to resolve. I think it should be limited to £20 or options to pay more to have it covered. It is just annoying when you purchase a label through Amazon and then you get penalised when it has not been delivered and then you have to pay the very same company again to send a replacement or face the recompense. Amazon also still benefit from keeping the fees.
The current system works that the only person who loses out from a failed delivery is the seller, the buyer is neutral. Amazon still retains fees, the buyer gets a full refund or another item, Evri then get the benefit of a repeat sale.
Its time amazon pulled there business from them then things might have to improve. Every return I get has come with damaged packing and most removal orders come via evri and arrive damaged too. Amazon must put massive amounts of business their way and must have the buying power to influence service if they wanted to. If I was sending something worth £99 out to a customer I wouldn’t use evri so why should I be forced to when it comes back to me
This is where I agree with Evri that Amazon should be dealing with them and making the claims process straight forward especially if we have bought the product through Amazon.
When customers don’t receive a product through the fault of the courier, it should be that Amazon raise the case with the courier rather than entering an A-Z against the seller.
This where this whole thing falls down. As we know, you can exempt items over £100 from refund on first scan, but what about items between £20 and £99 ? - it is ridiculous and wrong.
This is the reason why I am popping the question to Amazon, we need to be put in the picture and we need to have the same message coming from Amazon and Evri. If they cannot agree then they shouldn’t have the service in place. Simple as that.
it is ridiculous, wrong, and designed in. Corporates don’t implement such changed without months of endless meets. Someone signed this off, because it was in Amazon’s interest to implement it; I honestly don’t think they care about the fall-out, it’s of little consequency to them.
I think we should be able opt out completely. I don’t buy postage via this platform, I can still opt out - why should I be forced to accept a substandard inappropriately insured service for a CR? If they’re picking up the tab for the consequential loss between £20-99 and adminstering the system, even better. It’s deeply anti competitive-market practice. I’d be very interested to know if is indeed strictly legal. Amazon should not in any way be able to tell me what third party supplier to use, my business is my business, ie it should be self-determining. If they want to offer a service an an option fine, all good. Although no one has voiced the thought why doesn’t Amazon offer it’s own collection service via it’s in-house logistic services.