We understand that many UK sellers are having their Amazon accounts deactivated without warning, their funds frozen indefinitely, and their appeals ignored.

Lawdit Solicitors is actively pursuing claims against Amazon – and we are investigating potential litigation in the High Court via a Group Litigation Order to hold them to account.

The Problem

A Pattern of Conduct – Not Isolated Incidents

We are receiving an increasing volume of enquiries from Amazon sellers across the UK and Europe who share strikingly similar experiences. This is not a series of individual errors – it is a systemic practice.

Account Suspended Without Notice

Seller accounts are being deactivated overnight with no prior warning, no specific reason provided, and no opportunity to remedy any alleged issue before suspension takes effect. Amazon’s own Platform-to-Business Regulation obligations require them to provide a statement of reasons – yet sellers consistently receive nothing more than generic template notifications.

Funds Withheld Indefinitely

Settled funds – often tens of thousands of pounds – are frozen with vague references to Amazon’s “Funds Disbursement Eligibility Policy” but no lawful basis for permanent retention. In one case we are reviewing, over £87,000 has been withheld. In another, £12,000 of fully settled funds remains frozen despite no allegation of fraud, chargebacks, or regulatory breach.

KYC Verification Used as a Weapon

Sellers who are fully compliant are trapped in endless loops of document requests. Even when verification is confirmed complete accounts remain suspended and funds remain frozen. Amazon then pivots to new grounds (such as alleged Section 3 violations) without providing any evidence or specifics.

Appeals & Mediation Systematically Denied

Internal appeal mechanisms produce only automated template responses. Amazon’s own mediation process routinely refuses cases involving payment account disputes – the very cases that most urgently require independent resolution. Sellers who have submitted dozens of formal appeals receive identical rejection notices without any substantive engagement.

False Fraud Allegations Without Evidence

Sellers with clean compliance records and strong account health ratings are suddenly accused of “deceptive, fraudulent, or illegal activity” – often months after the original deactivation and for entirely unrelated reasons. These allegations are used to justify the permanent withholding of funds, with no evidence provided and no right of reply.

Business-Ending Consequences

The consequences for affected sellers are severe and escalating: trapped stock across multiple warehouses incurring ongoing storage costs, creditor pressure for stock purchased and sent to FBA ahead of peak season, total loss of trading income, destruction of years of investment in brands and seller metrics, and in several cases, a real and imminent risk of personal and corporate insolvency.

Your Legal Rights

The Law Is on Your Side

1. Platform-to-Business (P2B) Regulation

Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, retained in UK law via the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, requires Amazon to provide clear and specific reasons for any suspension or restriction of a seller’s account, fair notice before or at the time a restriction takes effect, and an effective internal complaint-handling system that is accessible and free. Amazon is routinely breaching Articles 3, 4, 8, 11 and 12 of the P2B Regulation. These breaches are directly actionable by individual business users as a breach of statutory duty under the Online Intermediation Services for Business Users (Enforcement) Regulations 2020 (SI 2020/609), Regulation 3.

2. Breach of Contract

Amazon’s Business Solutions Agreement contains both express and implied obligations of fairness, reasonable notice, and proportionate enforcement. Suspending accounts without reason, withholding settled funds without lawful basis, and refusing to engage with substantive appeals all constitute clear breaches of the contractual relationship between Amazon and its sellers.

3. Payment Services Regulations 2017

Amazon Payments UK Limited is authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority under the Payment Services Regulations 2017 (FCA reference number 799814). As a regulated payment services provider, it has statutory obligations regarding the handling and safeguarding of seller funds. The indefinite retention of settled funds without lawful justification may constitute a breach of these regulatory obligations.

4. Financial Ombudsman Service & FCA Routes

Amazon Payments UK Limited falls within the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service. We can advise on coordinating FOS complaints, FCA regulatory complaints, and civil litigation strategies in parallel to maximise pressure on Amazon.

How We Work

From First Contact to Resolution

Group Litigation Order

Strength in Numbers – The Case for a GLO Against Amazon

The volume of enquiries we are receiving tells us this is not a one-off failure by Amazon – it is a pattern of systemic mistreatment of sellers. A Group Litigation Order allows multiple claimants with common issues of fact or law to bring a coordinated legal action, sharing costs and massively increasing the pressure on Amazon to engage.

A GLO is applied for at the High Court under CPR Part 19. Once granted, it creates a Group Register of all claimants. Common issues of fact and law are tried together – reducing individual costs, streamlining proceedings, and creating precedent that benefits all participants.

The common issues across the cases we are reviewing include:

• Account deactivation without adequate notice or reasons (P2B Article 4 breach)
• Indefinite withholding of settled funds without lawful basis
• KYC verification processes used disproportionately and in bad faith.
• Failure to provide an effective internal complaint-handling system (P2B Article 11)
• Refusal to engage in mediation (P2B Article 12)
• False allegations of fraud or policy violation deployed retrospectively to justify fund retention.

We are also assessing After-the-Event (ATE) insurance options to protect claimants from adverse costs risk in the event that proceedings are unsuccessful.