Share your ideas with us

There's quite a few couriers where the 'View on Carrier Website' doesn't take you directly to the trracking page, and instead requires you to enter the tracking number.  These can be easily fixed by correcting the URL.   For example, for Cainiao the link takes you to; https://global.cainiao.com/   This needs correcting to; https://global.cainiao.com/newDetail.htm?mailNoList=   Please submit any further examples below.

In our business we refund direcly in Shopify for our returns that are made from our online website. It would be nice if the status of Shopify shows refunded or partically refund that Aftership would show the return as resolved. Some of the tracking information has to be put in manaully and we have multiple people on our team and if they do not do it correctly our customers receive emails that their return was not send and is expiring when they have already been refunded. 

I want to be able to mask certain words such as 'flight'and ''import'', or ''customs''. As for EU customers this is not relevant infromation and they faster think goods are from china and want to return faster. When they see basic info and a EDD they are assured everything is good. They dont neem more info.

I would find it very useful if I could pull the SMS communication metadata using an API. Currently it is only available as a download from the portal which makes automation impossible.

I would like to include the RMA number barcode on the returns label. This way, upon receiving the returns label at my warehouse, I can simply scan the barcode to retrieve the RMA number. Subsequently, I can use this number to efficiently locate the corresponding RMA information within the returns system. This process will significantly enhance the operational efficiency of our RMA procedures.

Brand noted they’d like to be able to clearly communicate why certain Products are on the Blocklist - instead of the general text we have in place, without specifically making the customer review the Policy as a whole. Asking if we could define the error at the Blocklist Product Tag entry level. If the value is left blank, use default content.   Current state: After end consumer logs in with Order, non returnable items are greyed and out and we show at the line level a message that states "Does not comply with our return policy."   Desired State: After end consumer logs in with Order, non returnable items are greyed and out and we show at the line level a message from a configurable setting within RC where we can pass SKU or Product Category specific messages that state why an item is nt returnable like "Digital Goods are not returnable" or "Bundled Item cannot be returned" or "Last years models are not returnable but warranty available".   We'd like to be able to configure our own blocklist message for order item display when the end consumer logs into RC.

We'd like the ability to restrict which order-editing options are available on a per-country basis, rather than applying the same set of options globally.   Many merchants work with regional checkout or fulfillment partners (e.g. Global-E) that prohibit certain order changes after an order is placed in specific countries. For example, a merchant might need to limit editing to only "apply discount code" and "cancel order" for a subset of countries, while keeping the full set of editing options available everywhere else.   Being able to configure order-editing permissions by country/region would help merchants stay compliant with regional partner restrictions without giving up flexibility in other markets.

As a business owner, I am seeking a system that can facilitate risk level scoring for each RMA (Return Merchandise Authorization) and enable my staff to input risk assessment findings based on actual RMA inspections. This system will enable us to assess risk levels effectively and respond accordingly. Moreover, the system will allow for the reporting of any detected fraud instances.   Implementing this system is crucial for mitigating fraud occurrences, as well as proactively preventing future fraudulent activities. Such measures are instrumental in safeguarding my business's profitability in the long term.

As a loyal Aftership customer, I am extremely disappointed to learn that integrating a new carrier requires an additional fee—a neither transparent nor customer-friendly policy. Carrier expansion should be a standard improvement to Aftership’s platform, not an extra cost passed onto paying customers. Why This Needs to Change: Improving Aftership Should Be Your Priority, Not an Upsell Adding new carriers benefits all Aftership users. Expanding carrier integrations should be part of Aftership’s ongoing development efforts, not a hidden fee imposed on individual customers. Hidden Costs Undermine Customer Trust Nowhere in Aftership’s pricing model is it clearly stated that carrier integration comes with additional fees. This lack of transparency frustrates users and creates an unexpected financial burden. Loyal Customers Deserve Better Customers who have trusted Aftership for their business operations should not have to pay extra to access a fundamental feature like carrier support. Proposed Solution: Aftership should eliminate extra fees for new carrier integrations and invest in expanding its platform instead of charging individual users. This would be part of its commitment to improving service for all customers. Clear, upfront disclosure of costs should be required if Aftership maintains this fee structure. If Aftership truly values its customers, this change must ensure a fair, transparent, and customer-centric experience.

I want all orders over $30 to show a shipping fee of only $2, because this is subsidized by TikTok.