For cross-border e-commerce sellers, returns themselves are not the primary concern; the real challenge lies in refund requests that are difficult to verify.

While some consumers return items for legitimate reasons—such as incorrect sizing or the product failing to meet expectations—others exploit platform return policies by providing false justifications or fabricated evidence to secure refunds. The proliferation of AI tools has introduced new dimensions to this type of refund abuse.

According to the "Refund Abuse Report 2026" by Ravelin, 27% of online shoppers admit to having exploited return policies to obtain improper refunds—a figure that rises to approximately one-third among UK consumers. For cross-border sellers operating in the US and UK markets, the surge in order volume during peak seasons necessitates heightened vigilance regarding the risks inherent in the return verification process.

With 27% of consumers admitting to abusing return policies, what should sellers watch out for?

Refund abuse is not identical to traditional return fraud. It can manifest in various ways: consumers may repeatedly request refunds by leveraging platform rules, exaggerate product issues, or demand refunds when the actual condition of an item does not align with the stated reason for the return.

The report indicates that among consumers who admit to abusing return policies, 46% claim they succeed every time. Frequent abusers gain an average of approximately £754 (or €754) annually through these actions.

These figures highlight a critical issue for sellers: when return requests lack robust verification, merchants may struggle to identify irregularities in a timely manner, ultimately incurring unnecessary losses in both inventory and refund payouts.

Naturally, sellers must distinguish between legitimate returns and malicious abuse; a high frequency of refund requests alone is not definitive proof of misconduct.

Why is refund abuse more prevalent during Black Friday and the holiday shopping season?

Peak promotional periods typically bring a surge in order volume, while holiday-related shopping introduces more complex return scenarios.

The Ravelin report notes that refund abuse is particularly likely to occur in contexts such as promotional offers, holiday gift-giving, and major shopping events like Black Friday and Cyber Monday. Of these, 29% occur when merchants offer promotional incentives, 28% during holiday gift-giving periods, and 25% during the Black Friday/Cyber Monday (BFCM) season.

This is partly due to consumer behavior patterns during peak shopping seasons.

On one hand, the increased frequency of purchases during major sales events—including impulse buys and repeat purchases—naturally leads to a higher likelihood of subsequent returns. On the other hand, returns of holiday gifts often involve multiple parties (the gift-giver and the recipient), making it difficult for sellers to quickly verify the circumstances under which an item was purchased or how it was actually used.

When a large volume of return requests arrives simultaneously, relying solely on the consumer’s written description to assess the issue can make the verification process significantly more challenging.

AI is changing how refund abuse occurs—how can sellers effectively verify returns?

In the past, refund requests typically relied on consumers to describe the issue themselves and provide supporting images or documentation. Today, AI tools have lowered the barrier for generating content and processing materials; they can be used to draft complaints, structure arguments for a refund, or even assist in creating fraudulent evidence.

A report by Ravelin indicates that 56% of frequent abusers have either used or are considering using AI tools. While this does not mean that everyone is using AI to fabricate evidence, it serves as a crucial reminder to sellers: the text and images provided in a refund request may not always offer a complete or accurate picture of the item’s actual condition.

Therefore, sellers should prioritize the physical verification of returned items, focusing on the following three steps:

1. Unboxing inspection: Confirm the actual condition of the item.

Upon receiving a return, inspect the item for clear signs of use, damage, or stains, and compare its actual condition against the issues reported by the consumer.

2. Photographic documentation: Maintain an objective record.

Take photos of the item’s appearance, its packaging, and any irregularities discovered. Creating a comprehensive record of the return inspection provides a solid basis for subsequent handling.

3. Inventory check: Verify the completeness of the item.

For products that include multiple components or accessories, verify that everything is present. This helps prevent additional losses resulting from missing parts or incomplete packaging. For cross-border sellers targeting the U.S. and U.K. markets, having returned items shipped back across borders is not only time-consuming but also makes it difficult to stay informed about the actual condition of the products.

Sellers may want to consider utilizing local return warehouses. U-Speed’US return warehouses and UK return warehouses offer services including local receipt of returns, unboxing inspections, photographic documentation of items, and inventory checks of accessories. These services help sellers stay informed about the specific condition of returned goods, providing a basis for making decisions regarding refunds and the subsequent handling of the items.

Tightening return policies is not the only solution; sellers must strike a balance between mitigating risk and ensuring a positive customer experience.

Faced with the risk of refund abuse, some sellers might consider raising the threshold for returns or implementing stricter review processes. However, overly rigid return policies can negatively impact the shopping experience for legitimate customers.

A more balanced approach involves establishing a robust return verification process—one that evaluates returns by cross-referencing order records, logistics data, and the customer’s stated reason for the return against the actual condition of the returned item.

For suspicious refund requests, sellers should maintain detailed records and handle each case according to platform policies and specific circumstances. Conversely, for returns that meet standard criteria, sellers should strive to ensure an efficient processing turnaround.

As AI tools become more widespread, the nature of refund requests may grow increasingly complex. Yet, the core priority for sellers remains the same: do not rely solely on the consumer’s account—verify the actual status of the product itself.

Especially during periods with high return volumes—such as Black Friday, Cyber Monday, and the Christmas shopping season—proactively managing local return receipt, product inspection, and evidence documentation allows sellers to maintain better oversight of returns and minimize operational losses stemming from a lack of clear information.