Man in S’pore spends 3 months fighting for Lazada refund, urges others to know their consumer rights

Redditor shares months-long refund battle with Lazada as a ‘guide’ for other consumers

A man in Singapore has shared his experience seeking a refund, after months of dealing with customer support, exchanging emails, and even going to court, in hopes that his ordeal will prove useful for others.

Published on Tuesday (16 June), the Reddit post quickly generated discussion, with the thread garnering over 200 comments.

In it, 35-year-old Dave Li explained that the whole ordeal began out of a simple act of love: he was planning to surprise his wife with a brand new iPhone 17 Pro Max he bought off Lazada for her birthday.

Hitting dead ends trying to refund

However, when he realised that she had actually wanted the smaller model, he quickly attempted to return the item.

According to a timeline provided by Mr Li, he placed an order on 6 March 2026 and received it the following day.

On 8 March, he requested a return, and the item was picked up around two days later.

After several days without an update on the refund, Mr Li sought an update from Lazada’s customer service.

They told him that the return had been rejected due to a “wrong serial number”, and the phone was returned to Mr Li.

“I then sent an email explaining how the issue likely traced back to a warehouse scanning error, and how it would be impossible for me to submit a fake iPhone box without committing fraud,” he wrote on Reddit.

However, further contact with Lazada customer support yielded no results.

“Your reply to this email will not be received as the concern related to this email message you replied on has already been closed,” Lazada customer support wrote in an email to Mr Li.

He told MS News that the email was “discouraging”.

“I was attempting to continue a discussion regarding an unresolved dispute, yet the communication channel had effectively been shut down,” he said.

Escalating the case

Despite the setback, he continued to pursue the case and eventually reached Lazada’s Escalation Management.

Although initially hopeful, he became less than impressed after seeing their response, describing it as being identical to the previous email he had just received.

“Different name, identical email,” he wrote. “Nobody had done any actual investigation.”

Mr Li then tried alternative means of escalating his case, starting with the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE). He submitted a complaint through them on 17 March.

CASE then sent two emails to Lazada on his behalf, which Mr Li said were met with silence, until he filed a complaint with the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT).

Although he did not have much success with CASE, Mr Li noted that it was still an important step.

“Going through CASE is a helpful step before you file with the Small Claims Tribunal, so do it, keep the records, and move on,” he wrote.

Filing at the SCT moved the case forward

Mr Li filed a claim at the SCT on 24 April.

He said that on 29 April, he received a second rejection from Lazada, once again stating that the serial numbers from his returned phone did not match Lazada’s records.

However, that tone changed once SCT proceedings began.

“What I found most striking was that on 30 April, one day after the rejection was repeated and after SCT proceedings had commenced, I received a new email stating that Lazada had initiated a ‘thorough investigation’ into the matter,” he told MS News.

At the first hearing, Mr Li said the Lazada representative admitted that the rejected refund was due to an error on their part.

“Lazada’s representative, to their credit, a good communicator, immediately acknowledged that the rejection was caused by a warehouse mis-scan on their end,” Mr Li wrote on Reddit.

After a second hearing, Lazada offered Mr Li a full refund on his purchase along with S$30 compensation for the trouble, which Mr Li negotiated up to S$100.

Letting his experience serve as an example for others

With the matter settled, Mr Li wanted to share his experience so it could help others.

“Writing this so that if someone encounters something similar in the future, it can appear in a Google search and serve as a rough guide for the CASE and SCT process,” he wrote on Reddit.

Along with the story, Mr Li shared advice for those who might go through a similar process.

He mentioned not letting representatives who ask for video evidence of the unboxing deter you from pursuing the case and encouraged others to get properly compensated for their time.

“Your time has real monetary value. The leave you take, the hours you spend compiling evidence, the trips to SingPost, the stress(,) none of that is free,” he stressed. “Push back. State clearly what you are claiming and why. I itemized (sic) every fee I paid as a direct result of their failure and added compensation on top for the time and inconvenience caused.”

How the experience changed him

Mr Li told MS News that the financial aspect of the matter was not his primary concern, but rather how much time and effort it took throughout the process.

“I also had to take leave from work to attend the SCT proceedings,” he added.

What frustrated him was that the whole mess could have been avoided had a proper investigation taken place when Mr Li first brought up his concerns.

“If a deeper investigation could identify the root cause once SCT proceedings began, why was the same investigation not conducted earlier when I was repeatedly requesting a review?” he questioned.

While the experience did not scare him away from online retailers, it did change the way he saw dispute resolution.

“What surprised me was how difficult it was to obtain a deeper review before formal legal proceedings became involved,” he said. “I was also surprised by how quickly consumers can find themselves being treated as though they are attempting to exploit a refund policy, rather than as customers raising a legitimate concern.”

This, Mr Li feels, demonstrates the importance of consumers understanding their rights and legal channels like CASE and the SCT.

“I believe the broader public-interest value lies in helping consumers understand the distinction between customer-service policies, consumer rights, CASE mediation, and SCT remedies,” he said.

Lazada says they take customer feedback seriously

In response to MS News’ queries, Lazada said they take customer feedback very seriously.

“While we will not comment on the specific details of individual customer cases, we regret that the customer was dissatisfied with their experience,” they said.

“The matter has since been resolved, and we have reviewed the case as part of our ongoing efforts to strengthen our processes and customer support.”

They also added that they remain focused on providing a trusted shopping experience and committed to improving the support provided to customers.

Also read: Woman buys S$800 East Coast salon package weeks before closure notice, ‘free’ facial deducted from refund