[aaadg]

does any one happen to know if amzn knows if a product is supposed to have shrink wrap upon return?

[mothered]

What Item are you referring to, and how Is It originally packaged?

[aertergaery]

What Item are you referring to, and how Is It originally packaged?

Sorry for the necropost, but I'm faced with the same question - I don't think the item matters in this case; he was most likely asking this to discern whether or not adding a shrink wrap layer to an already perfectly resealed box, would arouse any suspicion - or whether amzn employees would simply restock it without noticing or questioning the shrink wrap.

Also, in case it wasn't obvious, the purpose of the shrink wrap layer is to deter a worker from potentially opening the SE'd box to reveal the enclosed SE.

[mothered]

Also, in case it wasn't obvious, the purpose of the shrink wrap layer is to deter a worker from potentially opening the SE'd box to reveal the enclosed SE.

Given It was not returned In Its original factory state by adding a layer of film, It would raise suspicion and not circumvent checking the returned product.

That Is, It will demonstrate signs of Inconsistencies, whereby the packaging Is not In Its original condition.

[aertergaery]

Given It was not returned In Its original factory state by adding a layer of film, It would raise suspicion and not circumvent checking the returned product.

That Is, It will demonstrate signs of Inconsistencies, whereby the packaging Is not In Its original condition.

Surely it would be safe to assume that workers are not trained to that degree? They process hundreds of returns each day, so surely it's unlikely that they'll be able to tell the difference - especially with an item that is not purchased often(?).

[mothered]

Surely it would be safe to assume that workers are not trained to that degree? They process hundreds of returns each day, so surely it's unlikely that they'll be able to tell the difference - especially with an item that is not purchased often(?).

If that's the case, why add a layer of film, and not simply remove the original and wrap It thereafter?

Never assume and underestimate the caliber of a given return/Inwards goods center. There's been countless SEs that have failed due to an Inconsistency of a "2 Inch" seal In diameter. You're referring to an entire box being rewrapped. The equation pretty much speaks for Itself.

[aertergaery]

Never assume and underestimate the caliber of a given return/Inwards goods center. There's been countless SEs that have failed due to an Inconsistency of a "2 Inch" seal In diameter. You're referring to an entire box being rewrapped. The equation pretty much speaks for Itself.

Yeah, that's logical when you put it that way; I'll probably do it that way..

If that's the case, why add a layer of film, and not simply remove the original and wrap It thereafter?

It might be my pea sized brain, but I didn't get what you meant by 'the original' and 'wrap' (wrap in what?)

[mothered]

but I didn't get what you meant by 'the original' and 'wrap' (wrap in what?)

I'm referring to this:

adding a shrink wrap layer to an already perfectly resealed box, would arouse any suspicion - or whether amzn employees would simply restock it without noticing or questioning the shrink wrap.

If you're going to go through the trouble of rewrapping the box (over the existing film) to not show any signs of Inconsistencies whatsoever, then you may as well remove the original film and wrap It with the new one.

A single layer of film that's perfectly wrapped, significantly avoids suspicion, as opposed to two layers that Is not factory packed as such. Also, If the barcode Is on the box Itself and depending on the grade of the film, some scanning machines cannot read through twin layers, hence when the company scans the return, It will give them every reason to check It.

[aertergaery]

If you're going to go through the trouble of rewrapping the box (over the existing film) to not show any signs of Inconsistencies whatsoever, then you may as well remove the original film and wrap It with the new one.

A single layer of film that's perfectly wrapped, significantly avoids suspicion, as opposed to two layers that Is not factory packed as such. Also, If the barcode Is on the box Itself and depending on the grade of the film, some scanning machines cannot read through twin layers, hence when the company scans the return, It will give them every reason to check It.

Maybe I unnecessarily used the word 'extra,' but I never meant adding a second layer of shrink wrap, but rather adding a single well sealed layer of shrink wrap to the box that did not originally arrive shrink wrapped - with the idea of making it look 100% unopened, and with the assumption that it would go unnoticed.

[mothered]

Maybe I unnecessarily used the word 'extra,' but I never meant adding a second layer of shrink wrap, but rather adding a single well sealed layer of shrink wrap to the box that did not originally arrive shrink wrapped - with the idea of making it look 100% unopened, and with the assumption that it would go unnoticed.

Okay, let's put all that behind us and focus on your single objective as per below.

whether or not adding a shrink wrap layer to an already perfectly resealed box, would arouse any suspicion

My question Is, given It's a perfectly resealed box, why would there be a need to add a layer of film? It already appears to be 100% unopened, so I don't see how wrapping It In film would be of benefit.