Unordered Amazon packages pile up in San Jose home for over a year
A woman from San Jose, Calif., faced hundreds of Amazon packages of the same product being delivered to her home for over a year, even though she never ordered them.
Article content
Under a pseudonym, 'Kay' told ABC 7 News that for over a year packages containing a set of faux-leather car seat covers from the brand Etkin sold by a Chinese company called Liusandedian on Amazon have been delivered to her doorstep. The issue is she never ordered them, and they were all actually returns from real customers.
Article content
Article content
Article content
Liusandedian had put Kay's address in San Jose as the return address, without her knowledge, until packages started piling up on her front door. It started with just one package, which Kay thought must have been a mistake, even asking her neighbours about it but no one had ordered it. The products kept being delivered for weeks and months to come.
Article content
Article content
Amazon's policy states that international sellers need to either provide a U.S. address that the product can be returned to, agree to a 'returnless' return where the product doesn't need to be shipped back, or provide a prepaid international shipping label within two days after the return is requested. If the business can't provide any of that, Amazon refunds the customer and charges the international seller for the return shipping, in this case to China.
Article content
What happened with Liusandedian is that they did include a U.S. address, but that was Kay's, who didn't even know the company existed. And because the company did provide an address as requested by Amazon, the customers returning the car seat covers were being forced to pay for the return shipping, which oftentimes was more than half of the original price they paid for the product, and never receiving a refund because the products were shipped to the wrong address provided by the company.
Article content
Article content
Meanwhile, the Chinese company was not losing any money since refunds were not being issued because the products were not being shipped back to the company, but rather to a random house in California that was listed as their 'return center.' It also didn't help that the company didn't have any contact information, or even anything online that proves it existed.
Article content
Article content
'This is thousands of dollars they've paid to send these boxes back to my house!' said the San Jose woman to ABC 7 News.
Article content
Because of that, the boxes started taking up space in Kay's property, blocking her driveway, mail box and doorway, making it even more inconvenient for Kay and her 88-year-old mother, who is also disabled.
Article content
The woman had been trying to contact Amazon to solve the issue for the past year, which resulted in six tickets filed with the tech giant and none of the problems solved. She also said that Amazon suggested that she could fix the issue herself, by either giving the packages away, donating the products or taking them to USPS or FedEx.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Calgary Herald
an hour ago
- Calgary Herald
OPEC+ agrees big output hike as focus shifts to its next move
Article content Russia's Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak made a rare visit to Riyadh on Thursday to discuss 'cooperation between the countries' with Saudi Arabian Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman. The two countries have jointly led OPEC+ since its creation almost a decade ago. Article content The meeting was intended for Saudi Arabia to show unity with Russia and bridge any gaps in their points of view ahead of the meeting, one of the delegates said. Article content Price Crash Article content OPEC+ sent oil prices crashing to a four-year low in early April when it announced a sudden acceleration in its plan to unwind the current tranche of cuts, with markets still reeling in the wake of Trump's dramatic 'Liberation Day' tariff announcements. Article content The alliance has followed with a series of bumper monthly increases, and sped up even further in July as it sought to capitalize on strong summer demand. Bloomberg reported at the time that the group had a provisional plan to complete the current supply revival with the September hike. Article content Article content The latest decision was taken 'in view of a steady global economic outlook and current healthy market fundamentals, as reflected in the low oil inventories,' OPEC said in a statement on Sunday. Article content Crude prices have clawed back losses in recent months, with Brent futures in London trading just below $70 a barrel on Friday — down 6.7% this year. Article content The market's resilience was partly driven by the fact that OPEC+ supply increases — at least in their initial stages — fell short of the amounts promised, as the Saudis pushed countries that had previously over-produced to forgo their allotted hikes in compensation. Article content However, analysts have warned the market faces a mounting surplus later this year, when seasonal consumption weakens and as supplies increase and slowing global growth weighs on demand. Article content World oil markets face a surplus of 2 million barrels a day in the fourth quarter as Chinese consumption cools and new supplies swell in the US, Canada, Brazil and Guyana, according to the International Energy Agency in Paris. Forecasters on Wall Street, including JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc., expect prices will sink towards $60 a barrel by the end of the year. Article content Article content OPEC+ officials have offered a range of explanations for the accelerated supply revival, from punishing the group's over-producing members to placating Trump. Article content People familiar with the matter have said Saudi Arabia's main objective is to recoup the market share OPEC+ has ceded to rivals like US shale drillers during years of output cutbacks. Riyadh's OPEC+ quota for August, at 9.756 million barrels a day, would roughly put its production at the highest level in two years. Article content The pivot in oil strategy by Saudi Arabia and its partners, which had spent much of the past decade laboring to shore up crude prices, has also come at a cost for the cartel. Downward pressure on prices stands to widen an already-soaring budget deficit in the kingdom, which needs oil above $90 a barrel to cover government spending, the International Monetary Fund estimates.
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Amazon's Earnings: What Comes Next and How to Play It
Shares of tech giant Inc. (NASDAQ: AMZN) finished Thursday's session up nearly 2%, only to tumble more than 6% in after-hours trading following the company's Q2 earnings release. This sharp reversal underlines just how high expectations had gotten after the 40% rally from April's low. The stock's multi-month move meant anything less than a near-perfect report risked triggering a wave of profit-taking, and that appears to be exactly what's happening already. As we'll see below, however, this is also creating a couple of interesting plays for investors to consider depending on their belief in Amazon's potential over the long run, and their near-term appetite for risk. Let's jump in and take a look. The Report Looked Good, But It Had to Be Great At first glance, Amazon seemed to deliver. The company's earnings per share came in more than 25% above expectations, while revenue was up 13.3% year-over-year. Both metrics landed hot and were well above analyst expectations, adding to Amazon's impressive track record of delivering strong headline numbers quarter on quarter. But investors weren't satisfied based on the after-hours price action. As anticipated earlier in the week, any sign of weakness in last night's report could send the bulls running and the bears raging. And Amazon's weaker-than-expected guidance for operating income and some free cash flow concerns seem to have done just that. The range shared by management on the former was notably conservative, while the latter figure is now at its lowest in two years. In that context, it's perhaps not all that hard to see what investor sentiment would swing from risk-on to risk-off so quickly. It remains to be seen how long this switch will last, but in our view, there's little to be worried about regarding Amazon's long-term potential. What the Market Might Be Missing While the overnight sell-off might feel sharp, it's also arguably overdone. This was still an impressive report for Amazon, with revenue growth accelerating across the board and profitability improving at the same time. Overall growth remains strong despite ongoing infrastructure investments and competitive pricing pressures. The bears will point to growing concerns around the company's ability to stay in the lead group of the artificial intelligence (AI) arms race, but CEO Andy Jassy was not overly concerned. He spoke about this on the post-earnings conference call, saying, "I don't believe that we will have fully resolved the capacity we need for the amount of demand that we have in a couple of quarters. I think it will take several quarters, but I do expect that it's going to get better each quarter". Taken in total, there's a strong case to be made that Amazon is still in the early innings of its next growth phase, and Thursday's after-hours drop is more about positioning than fundamentals. 2 Ways to Play It For those of us on the sidelines, what kind of plays should we be looking for? Option one might be to sit back and let the correction play out. A move down to around the $220 level would take the stock back to a key area of support, and, given how one-directional the recent rally has been, would actually be quite healthy. If that $220 level were to hold, and or if we were to see a fresh bullish crossover in the MACD, it would likely mark the start of the next leg higher. Waiting for confirmation here gives you better risk/reward and protects against a deeper pullback. The other option is to start accumulating right away. This argument rests on the idea that Amazon's core thesis remains intact and the bears' concerns are already, or at least close to being, priced in after last night's drop. For big-time believers and long-term investors, this dip could be a gift - especially considering the company's strength across multiple verticals and its growing strength in high-margin, AI-driven businesses. Remember, multiple firms have been reiterating their Buy and Overweight ratings all through 2025, and even as recently as this week. The most recent price target from the team over at UBS Group sees the stock trading north of $270, a move that points to additional upside of around 15% from current levels. Don't expect their bullishness, and that of their peers, to change anytime soon. Before you make your next trade, you'll want to hear this. MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street's top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. Our team has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on... and none of the big name stocks were on the list. They believe these five stocks are the five best companies for investors to buy now...
Canada News.Net
3 hours ago
- Canada News.Net
Heres why the EU keeps losing to China
The summit Brussels-Beijing economic summit spotlighted the blocs mounting strategic confusion and accelerating drift toward isolation The China-EU summit held in Beijing late last month could have been a celebration of 50 years of diplomatic relations between two of the world's largest economic powers. Instead, it served as a sobering reminder of the EU's growing strategic confusion, and its inability to capitalize on the immense opportunities offered by cooperation with China. The summit came at a sensitive moment in global politics. What was once hailed as a mutually beneficial partnership has now become entangled in geopolitics, internal divisions within the EU, and the enduring shadow of Washington's influence. The global turbulence of recent years - the pandemic, and the war in Ukraine - has not only strained relations but also reinforced the EU's dependence on the United States. Rather than renewing a partnership that once stood as a pillar of global economic integration, the EU leaders arrived in Beijing with a familiar agenda: accusations over trade practices, warnings about "security threats," and renewed calls for China to "rein in" Russia. Predictably, no breakthrough was achieved. The deterioration of China-EU relations cannot be understood without revisiting the European Commission's strategic shift in 2019. Under Ursula von der Leyen, Brussels officially categorized China as not just a partner but also a "systemic rival" - a move that introduced suspicion into virtually every area of engagement. Since then, an ideological lens has increasingly shaped EU policy, replacing the pragmatism that once underpinned economic cooperation. The consequences have been stark. Brussels has launched measures to restrict Chinese investment, imposed high tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, and - most recently - barred Chinese firms from public tenders worth over €5 million. Further escalation came when the EU included two Chinese banks in its latest sanctions package against Russia, signaling that Europe is willing to weaponize economic tools for political purposes. These steps are justified by the EU as "de-risking." By pushing for reduced interdependence in strategic sectors - raw materials, high-tech supply chains, and digital infrastructure - Brussels has aligned itself with Washington's containment playbook, even as European leaders publicly insist on independence. In Beijing, von der Leyen struck a conciliatory tone, declaring the EU's openness to Chinese investment and cooperation. But such statements ring hollow when juxtaposed with her recent warnings at the G7 summit about a looming "China shock" and accusations of Beijing "weaponizing trade." Similarly, the head of EU diplomacy, Kaja Kallas - also present in Beijing - has accused China of fueling the war in Ukraine and waging hybrid operations against Europe. These mixed signals undermine credibility and reinforce perceptions in Beijing that the EU lacks a coherent, autonomous China strategy. More fundamentally, Brussels' approach is internally contradictory. The EU dreams of "strategic autonomy," yet ties its foreign policy to transatlantic priorities. It seeks economic resilience, yet undermines its own competitiveness by disrupting supply chains and limiting market access. It aspires to global leadership, yet isolates itself from the rest of the world by clinging to zero-sum geopolitics. By contrast, China's position at the summit was clear: focus on complementarity, promote free trade, and pursue win-win cooperation in areas that matter for global stability - digital transformation, green development, and infrastructure connectivity. Beijing emphasized its willingness to deepen exchanges in artificial intelligence, clean energy, and scientific research, seeing these sectors as essential to both sides' modernization. For China, the EU remains a strategic partner, not an adversary. Beijing has long supported European integration and consistently encourages the EU to play an independent role in global affairs. From China's perspective, a strong, autonomous Europe is a counterweight to unilateralism and an anchor of multipolarity. This vision aligns with Europe's own interests - but diverges sharply from Washington's preference for a subordinate EU within the transatlantic alliance. From Beijing's perspective, the EU's current challenges - economic slowdown, energy insecurity, and geopolitical vulnerability - are not caused by China. Rather, they stem from internal divisions and policy choices that tether Europe to US strategies. China fears that Europe's drift into a hardline camp could destabilize the international order, a scenario contrary to Beijing's vision of stability and connectivity across Eurasia. The single most contentious issue remains the war in Ukraine. Brussels insists that China's ties with Moscow "destabilize" Europe, while Beijing argues that it is maintaining an independent and neutral position aimed at facilitating a peaceful settlement. EU leaders, however, continue to press China to "use its influence" to end Russia's military operations - effectively asking Beijing to abandon a key strategic partnership. This is neither realistic nor conducive to diplomacy. For now, this geopolitical deadlock overshadows other areas of potential cooperation. So long as the EU views the Ukraine conflict through an existential lens - and equates neutrality with complicity - China-EU relations will remain constrained, regardless of shared economic interests. Despite political frictions, economic ties remain robust. The EU is China's largest trading partner, and China ranks second for the EU. Together, they account for over one-third of global GDP and nearly 30% of global trade in goods and services. Chinese investment in Europe has surpassed $100 billion, and annual flows are roughly balanced with EU investment in China. These numbers underscore a basic truth: the China-EU relationship is too significant to be defined by ideological posturing. Global supply chains, green technology cooperation, and digital innovation cannot advance without mutual engagement. The question is whether Brussels will recognize this before further damage is done. The EU portrays its current trajectory as "rebalancing" and "de-risking." In reality, these policies risk strategic isolation. By securitizing economic ties and subordinating its diplomacy to US priorities in relation to China, the EU undermines its own competitiveness and alienates partners across the globe. The result is an inward-looking bloc that struggles to influence global norms as it dreams of geopolitical power. For China, the lesson is clear: The EU is not ready for a genuine reset. Beijing will continue to engage constructively but will not expect rapid progress. In the long run, the revival of a balanced partnership may depend on a political shift within Europe - a leadership willing to replace ideological rigidity with pragmatic cooperation. The Beijing summit, rather than rekindling optimism, has confirmed the structural divergence between China and the EU. However, it also highlighted what remains at stake: two economic giants whose cooperation - or confrontation - will shape global stability for decades to come. China stands ready to pursue a future based on multilateralism, open trade, and shared development. Whether the EU can free itself from delusions and anxieties and rediscover the value of partnership with Beijing remains an open question. Until then, the EU's fixation on "de-risking" may turn into what it fears most: self-inflicted decline.
