Seller Notes #2: The 30 Units That Never Existed
A Typo Amazon Treated Like Contraband
Everybody makes mistakes, but not every mistake could cost someone their business.
A seller, whom I’ll call Evan, contacted our team because Amazon was indicating through Seller Central that 33 units of a video game deluxe edition were on their way to an FBA warehouse. The problem: only three units had actually been shipped.
Evan was relatively new to Amazon. He had purchased three units of the video game from the brand’s official online store and the order went directly to his prep center, which created the FBA shipment. His invoice showed only three units. The prep center only handled three units. But Seller Central showed 33.
That single extra digit turned a routine inbound shipment into an Unsuitable Inventory investigation. Evan was notified that his account was at risk of deactivation and Amazon gave him 14 days to verify the supply chain. During the review, his ability to sell, manage inbound shipments, make removals, and access any funds connected to the enforcement could be restricted.
For an established seller, this would be a serious problem. But for an account with only a handful of sales, it could completely end the business before it had really begun.
The Case of the Damning Digit
Part of the challenge with this case is that Amazon’s allegation was broad. The Unsuitable Inventory policy that was being referenced covers counterfeit, stolen, illegal, restricted, and otherwise risky goods. But in reality, all of the evidence pointed to one fact: the shipment record was off by one digit. It became our job to not only prove that the original three units were legitimate, but where these other 30 phantom-units actually came from.
We asked the prep center for a short statement tied to the exact shipment, ASIN, and FNSKU. The statement confirmed that the center had been contracted to send three units, that three units were actually sent, and that at some point during shipment creation, an error caused Amazon to believe the shipment contained 33.
That statement pinpointed the error inside a specific transaction and reconciled the invoice, payment record, order confirmation, tracking, and physical shipment all at once.
Two Appeals, One Version of the Facts
When preparing the appeal, the team realized the Account Health form would offer limited room to explain a 3-versus-33 discrepancy. So rather than risk a denial, we prepared two submissions.
The first, sent through Account Health, organized the sourcing and shipment records around the three real units and directly addressed the quantity mismatch. The second went to Amazon’s Executive Seller Relations team, laying out the full sequence in plain language for the escalation team. Evan submitted both appeal documents on August 13.
While we can’t know which submission moved the case forward, we do know Amazon received one consistent explanation through both channels. There was one legitimate purchase, one shipment of three units, and one documented shipment-creation error. There was no missing supply chain for those 30 additional units because those units had never actually existed.
Winning the Case Doesn’t Mean It’s Over
By August 16, Amazon had removed the policy warning, released the withheld funds, and removed the related account restrictions. At this point, it looked like the case was over. It was not.
The listing remained blocked. Despite the appeal approval, Seller Central still showed three units located and 33 expected. Amazon had accepted the explanation at the policy level, but the old operational data continued to keep the real inventory offline. Luckily, the listing was recovered a few days later and the original three FBA units were once again available for sale.
But that kind of false ending is exactly what can make Amazon cases so frustrating. A seller can win their appeal and still be unable to do business.
When Specificity Saves the Day
Keeping clean invoices, payment records, order confirmations, tracking, and third-party logistics documentation will always protect your business. Every unit should connect to a legitimate source and have a clear path through the supply chain, with multiple points of reference.
But even the cleanest record can’t protect you if Amazon’s record is wrong.
In this case, Evan didn’t need to prove the legitimacy (or lack thereof) of 33 units. He needed to establish why his three units were real, why Amazon thought there were 33, and why the difference was a data error rather than missing inventory.
If this happens to your business, don’t bury the contradiction inside a general defense of the business. Isolate the exact error, identify where it entered the record, then build a document trail that replaces it with a more coherent account of what actually happened.
I’ve seen numerous broad Amazon allegations become manageable once the team finds the one fact that doesn’t fit in the story. In this case, the path back was remarkably straightforward: one shipment, one source, and one digit that never belonged.
One of the most rewarding parts of my job is helping ecommerce sellers protect the businesses they spent years building. Seller Notes shares some of those experiences, along with the practical lessons other sellers can learn from them. This is the second story in that series.
