An order that never arrived
Ranks in the middle because it is common and usually recoverable. What decides whether it is recoverable is almost entirely in your hands.
- How often
- Common
- Typical size
- One order
- Recoverable
- Usually
- Cost to prevent
- Not preventable, only survivable
What decides the outcome
The record rather than the argument. A panel matches claims against dates, the message thread and whatever delivery evidence exists. Submissions built on how unfair it feels are the ones that lose, and they lose to submissions that are shorter and duller.
| What wins | What loses |
|---|---|
| Order reference and dates at the top | Background and context first |
| The message thread unedited | Selected quotes, which read as selected quotes |
| One specific outcome named | A complaint with no remedy, which invites somebody else to choose one |
| Short and factual | Long, which gets skimmed |
| Prompt replies during the process | Silence, which is weighed against whoever went quiet |
Which situation you are in
| Situation | Recoverable? | First move |
|---|---|---|
| Window still open | Yes, entirely | Wait. Nothing you do now improves it. |
| Window closed, nothing arrived | Usually | File with the reference, dates and unedited thread. |
| Arrived, not as described | Often, partly | Document first, then file naming a specific remedy. |
| Vendor has gone quiet | Usually | Silence is weighed. Let the record show it. |
| Paid outside escrow | No | There is no mechanism. |
What limits the size
Order sizing, which is the only variable here entirely under your control. Everything else in this table reduces how often something goes wrong. Sizing reduces what it costs when it does, and it is the reason this entry sits at medium rather than high despite being common. See sizing orders.
What is normal and what is not
| Observation | Reading |
|---|---|
| No status change for days | Normal. States are entered by hand, not observed. |
| No reply to a message | Normal for most of a window. |
| Tracking that never registers | Weak signal on its own, meaningful once the window closes. |
| Vendor account disappears | Meaningful. File as soon as the window allows. |
| Vendor asks you to close the order early | Refuse. Closing the order releases the funds. |
The last row deserves emphasis because it is the most expensive misunderstanding in this entry. A request to confirm receipt before receipt is a request to give up the only leverage you have, and it is often phrased as a favour.
What the record consists of
The order reference, the dates, the unedited message thread, and whatever delivery evidence exists. That is what an arbitrator reads. Anything else you write is competing with the record for their attention rather than supporting it, which is why short and dull submissions beat long and aggrieved ones consistently.
The part that is nobody's fault
A share of these are not fraud at all. Things are lost, intercepted, delayed past any reasonable window, or sent to an address transcribed wrongly. The mechanism does not care about intent and neither should your submission, which is another reason to keep it factual: you do not need to prove anybody acted badly, only that the thing did not arrive.