On Demand Grocery Missing Item Claims – Latest Retailer Insights

Missing Item Claims from Third Party Platform Grocery Deliveries

Our e-commerce loss working group recently met, with representation from twenty plus retailers including Tesco, Foodstuffs, Morrisons, Sainsburys, Walmart, Giant, Boots, etc, to reflect on the problem of missing items claims, and sometimes even missing deliveries.

In our 2024 research of over 6,000 shoppers, nearly 50% of the shoppers in the sample claimed to have made a false “missing item” claim, the frequency of these missing items claims is perhaps alarming, plus, its clear, that with incentives for pickers prioritising the speed of pick, mistakes can also easily happen.

The below summarises the key points that emerged from our review of the research, of four retailer presentations and then group discussion.

Key Insights:

1. Unique Challenges with Third-Party Platforms:
Retailers face significantly higher refund rates—up to 4x—which is circa 1.3% of all orders, when orders are fulfilled by third-party platforms compared to their own operations. These issues are compounded by:

• Lack of customer data ownership.
• Minimal visibility into repeated refund claims.
• Weak identification processes for couriers (often unauthenticated individuals pick up orders).
• Platforms allow refunds with minimal verification, enabling abuse.

2. Complexity in Accountability:
The delivery chain’s fragmentation makes it hard to pinpoint who is at fault—retailer, courier, or customer. Third-party platforms often make unilateral policy changes (e.g., adjusting refund thresholds), directly impacting retailers’ bottom line without consultation.

3. Fraud and Social Normalisation:
Survey and online community research show how common and normalised it is for customers to falsely claim that some food items didn’t arrive. Social media and forums even provide guides and memes about how to exploit refund systems, particularly with food orders due to their perishable and non-returnable nature.

What are the current interventions? The following interventions were discussed

• Photo proof of high-value items packed (e.g. tobacco, alcohol) – this would be undertaken by the store leader, but the limitation is that this relies on the store to follow the process and then to have a data system to store and then recover the photo when shopper makes the claim.
• Sealed and labelled bags to prevent tampering. This is an obvious solution but can be defeated and relies on the shopper acknowledging that the seal was present when they received the delivery. It is also an expensive option, especially when nearly 99% of orders do not have a missing item claim.
• In-store checks before hand-off to couriers. This relies on the courier and platform team accepting, linked to the SLA, the ownership of the order and its accuracy.
• Courier ID verification and order matching. This is in pilot for retailers, using NFC, or perhaps in the future biometrics, this can help ensure that the right delivery drivers are picking up the right orders.
• Standardised training for picking staff. Ensuring that orders are more accurate can provide the extra certainty the retailer and courier need to ascertain the veracity of the shopper claims.
• Dedicated courier pick-up zones with access control. This potentially removes tampering as a possible breakdown and the reason why items might be missing. There is also the potential for CCTV coverage to confirm driver tampering and pick up accuracy.
• Scanning every item into the bag to prove fulfilment. Most retailers in the meeting have now adopted this practice, so the retailer can be surer that if the product was scanned, that it was picked.

What are the planned future actions? The following were discussed

* Data sharing agreements with delivery platforms to challenge refund claims with proof from retailers’ systems.
* Sealed bag technology is under evaluation, though cost is a concern.
* PIN confirmation at delivery for high-value orders is being explored.
* Pressure for policy transparency and shared accountability with platforms.
* Joint retailer efforts to collectively push for changes and better policies from third-party platforms.

Finally, for retailers looking to reflect upon their own response to this problem, or about to start working with third party platform, here are five questions that might be helpful to ask of your business.

Five questions that might be helpful to ask of your business

1. Do we know much higher our refund claims are from third-party platform deliveries compared to our own?

2. To what extent do we have a robust evidence chain of custody capability (scanning, photo, ID checks) for every stage of the order journey?

3. Do we have the capability / data analytics that can allow us to identify repeat offenders, whether customers or couriers, and how easy is it to access that data?

4. Are the refund thresholds and policies for our third party platforms visible, clearly defined and monitored?

5. What could be the role of collaboration between retailers and third parties to help reduce losses, would we want to participate in any retailer share groups?

Any retailer, brand owner or academic can join our e-commerce loss working group, at no cost, please click here for the landing page and then sign up to the upcoming meetings.