The item arrived broken. She reported it within a day. Amazon customer service offered a partial refund of about a quarter of the value. She refused. They offered a replacement. She refused. They stopped answering.
The problem wasn't her case. It was clearly a genuine faulty-goods claim within the 30-day short-term right to reject. The problem was that the words she was using looked like the words fifty other angry customers used that week, and the algorithm routing her messages had heard them all before.
The letter Fightingback drafted didn't sound like an angry customer. It cited section 20 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 - the short-term right to reject - and the A-to-Z Guarantee's specific clause on faulty goods, and explicitly named the escalation route (the Financial Ombudsman if the transaction was card-funded, and small claims court as a backup). It gave Amazon 14 days to respond.
Full refund landed on day 8. Every penny back.