E-commerce return abuse: How to limit wardrobing without degrading the customer experience

aReturns are not a problem to be eliminated. They are an essential component of the e-commerce experience, particularly in fashion and footwear, where the customer cannot try on the product or verify its fit precisely before purchasing.

A clear return policy reduces perceived risk, provides reassurance at the time of ordering, and fosters loyalty. According to a study conducted by Sapio Research for Shipup by ZigZag among 2,000 French consumers, 60% consider the simplicity of the return process to be very or extremely important, while 65% place the same importance on free returns.

But this flexibility can be exploited. Wardrobing consists of intentionally ordering a product, wearing or using it, and then returning it to obtain a refund.

This is not a legitimate return caused by the wrong size, a defect, or an inaccurate description. It is an e-commerce return abuse that forces the merchant to bear the cost of a used product without any financial compensation.

The goal for brands should therefore not be to discourage all returns. It is to limit abusive behavior without penalizing the majority of honest customers.

What is wardrobing?

Wardrobing refers to the act of buying an item with the intention of using it temporarily before returning it.

The phenomenon mainly affects clothing, footwear, and accessories, but can also involve electronics, leisure equipment, or products intended for a specific occasion.

For example, a person might order an outfit for a wedding, wear it during the event, and then return it. Others buy a product to take photos or create content for social media before requesting a refund.

Wardrobing can take several forms, including:

• wearing a garment to an event before returning it;
• using an item for a few days and then requesting a refund;
• posting photos of the product on social media before returning it;
• removing tags and then attempting to restore the product to an apparently new condition;
• returning an item that is incomplete, damaged, or different from the one originally received.

This behavior is sometimes presented as a way to take advantage of a generous return policy. In reality, it is a deliberate misuse of that policy.

The consumer benefits temporarily from the product, while the e-retailer assumes the costs of delivery, return shipping, inspection, the refund, and the potential loss of value.

Wardrobing remains a minority practice, but its impact is real.

A Sapio Research study shows that the majority of French consumers do not engage in this type of abuse. However, reported behaviors remain frequent enough to have an operational impact, particularly in high-turnover categories.

These data do not mean that all young consumers abuse return policies. They do, however, show that wardrobing is more normalized among 18-27 year olds.

This shift is also reflected in perceptions. 31% of French people consider returning a product after use to be part of modern shopping behavior. This figure reaches 46% among Gen Z.

Yet, 72% believe that retailers should take firmer action against people who return used products.

Wardrobing should therefore not be presented as a simple evolution in consumer habits. It is an abuse that undermines the economic balance of returns and can lead brands to reduce the benefits offered to all their customers.

Wardrobing should not be confused with legitimate returns.

An effective strategy must clearly distinguish between abusive returns and returns caused by a genuine issue.

In fashion and footwear, the main reasons for returns remain related to the product itself:

• 54% of consumers cite an unsuitable size or fit;
• 50% mention a damaged or defective item;
• 48% state that the product did not match its description or expected quality;
• only 5% cite the fact of having ordered multiple items with the intention of returning some of them.

An increase in the return rate does not automatically mean that a brand is experiencing more fraud.

It may reveal an inaccurate size guide, unrepresentative photos, insufficient quality, a fulfillment error, or a gap between the website's promise and the product received.

Before tightening controls, e-commerce retailers must precisely analyze their return reasons. An e-commerce returns portal helps centralize this information, identify the products generating the most requests, and pinpoint recurring causes.

Why wardrobing costs more than a standard return

A legitimate return already involves several expenses: shipping, administrative processing, inspection, refunds, and restocking.

Wardrobing adds a major problem: the product is no longer necessarily resalable as new.

It may need to be cleaned, refurbished, repackaged, sold at a discount, or removed from sellable inventory. In fashion, a seasonal item returned late can also lose much of its value, even if it remains technically resalable.

The true cost of wardrobing includes:

• outbound and return shipping without a final sale;
• additional inspection time in the warehouse;
• loss of product value;
• inventory immobilization;
• customer service interactions;
• the risk of disputes or chargebacks.

Wardrobing also penalizes honest customers. When abuse becomes too costly, retailers often end up imposing fees, shortening return windows, or removing certain perks.

Why returns must remain simple

Treating wardrobing as a serious issue does not mean making all returns difficult.

Consumers today consider return policies an essential part of their purchasing decision.

According to the Sapio Research study for Shipup by ZigZag:

An overly restrictive policy can therefore cost more in lost revenue than it protects.

The right approach is to maintain a seamless journey for legitimate customers while tightening controls on truly suspicious behavior.

To learn more about the operational management of these flows, also check out our article on reverse logistics in e-commerce.

1. Reduce avoidable returns starting with the product page

The first step is to prevent returns caused by a lack of information.

When a customer orders multiple sizes because they don't know which one to choose, the problem isn't necessarily their behavior. It may stem from an inadequate size guide or an imprecise product page.

Brands can reduce these returns by improving:

• product-specific size guides;
• the measurements and dimensions displayed;
• photos on different body types;
• videos showing how the product drapes;
• notes specifying whether the item runs small or large;
• descriptions of materials, colors, and cuts;
• size recommendation tools.

Customer reviews can also help future buyers make more accurate choices. More reliable information reduces multiple orders and makes it easier to distinguish legitimate returns from truly abusive behavior.

2. Identify abuse using multiple signals

A high return rate is not enough to prove wardrobing.

Some customers order frequently but still maintain a high net value for the brand. Others may return several items after a fulfillment error or a quality issue.

Detection must therefore rely on a combination of signals:

• systematic returns at the end of the allowed period;
• missing original tags or packaging;
• signs of wear, odors, or damage;
• frequent returns of items linked to specific events;
• large orders followed by nearly complete returns;
• repeated behavior across multiple orders;
• discrepancy between the product sent and the one returned;
• use of multiple accounts or addresses to bypass rules.

These signals should trigger additional review, not automatic penalties.

A decision based on a single indicator risks unfairly penalizing a legitimate customer. Context, purchase history, customer lifetime value, and incident frequency must also be taken into account.

3. Segment your return policy

A one-size-fits-all policy is easy to manage but rarely optimal.

According to the study, 76% of French consumers believe it is fair to maintain free returns for those with reasonable return rates, while limiting or charging for returns from the most frequent returners.

‍

A segmented policy can distinguish between three levels.

Customers with normal behavior

They should continue to enjoy a simple process, with a self-service portal, multiple drop-off options, return tracking, and fast refunds.

Customers with high but explainable return rates

The brand can offer more pre-purchase support, encourage exchanges, or improve size recommendations.

Profiles showing repeated abuse

Stricter measures may be applied:

• paid returns ;
• refund after inspection ;
• exclusion of instant refunds ;
• manual review ;
• formal warning ;
• account suspension in the event of documented repeat offenses.

The Shipup by ZigZag returns portal allows you to customize the options offered, encourage exchanges, and apply different rules based on the situation.

4. Use paid returns strategically

Return shipping fees are a particularly effective deterrent.

54% of French consumers state that having to pay fees would discourage them from returning an item.

However, applying these fees to all customers can also reduce conversion. Paid returns should therefore be targeted.

For example, a brand can keep returns free for defective or non-compliant products, for loyal customers, and for those with reasonable return behavior. Conversely, it can charge for returns from customers whose return frequency becomes abnormally high.

Other options are available:

• offer free in-store returns while charging for certain shipping methods;
• offer the first return per order for free;
• reserve free returns for loyalty program members;
• clearly display fees before purchase confirmation.

When consumers have to choose a method to pay for returns, 72% prefer to pay a flat fee of €2.50 covering the entire order, rather than seeing the price of each item increase by €2.50.

A clear, capped cost is generally better accepted than a diffuse price increase.

5. Strengthen inspection of returned products

Receiving inspection plays a central role in combating wardrobing.

Operators must follow standardized criteria to check the condition of labels, the presence of makeup stains or wear, odors, the condition of soles, missing accessories, or damaged packaging.

Decisions must be documented with photographs and a specific reason. This traceability protects the brand in the event of a dispute and reduces inconsistencies between warehouses.

For the most exposed categories, some companies also use:

• security tags that are difficult to remove discreetly;
• seals;
• pre-shipment photographs;
• serial number logging;
• weight checks upon shipment and return.

These measures must remain proportionate. Their goal is to protect high-risk products, not to treat every customer like a potential fraudster.

6. Tailor refunds to risk levels

Instant refunds improve the customer experience, but they expose the brand when the product has not yet been received or inspected.

A tiered approach helps better balance speed and security:

However, inspection should not cause excessive delays.

The consumers surveyed believe that a refund received in about 4 days is a particularly positive experience. Frustration begins around 11 days, while a delay of nearly 16 days can discourage them from purchasing from the brand again.

The customer must be kept informed at every stage: request received, package dropped off, return in transit, product received, inspection in progress, and refund approved.

7. Encourage exchanges without forcing them

A return does not necessarily have to result in a total loss of revenue.

The brand can offer a size exchange, an immediate replacement, store credit, a bonus gift card, or an in-store return.

But incentives work better than mandates.

23% of consumers would be discouraged from returning an item if they could only get an exchange or store credit, while 16% might accept a gift card with a value slightly higher than the original refund.

Systematically imposing store credit risks damaging trust. Offering an advantageous alternative is a better way to preserve revenue without frustrating the customer.

8. Maintain a firm policy on used products

The return policy must clearly state that worn or used items are not eligible for a full refund.

Clear wording can be used:

Items must be returned unworn, unused, and with their original tags and accessories. If a product shows signs of use or a loss of value, the refund may be refused or adjusted after inspection.

The tone should remain factual, but the message should not downplay wardrobing.

Intentionally returning a product after using it is an abuse of the return policy. When repeated, this behavior may justify stricter monitoring, delayed refunds, return fees, or account suspension.

Any unfavorable decision must, however, be documented and capable of being explained to the customer.

9. Track the right metrics

The overall return rate is not enough to understand the problem.

A brand must distinguish between product-related returns, operational issues, and abusive behavior.

The key metrics to track are:

• return rate by product, size, and category;
• stated reasons for return;
• share of products showing signs of use;
• time elapsed between delivery and return request;
• rate of partial or denied refunds;
• average time to restock;
• dispute rate after inspection;
• value recovered through exchanges and store credit;
• repurchase rate after a return;
• average processing cost per return.

For international brands, this analysis must also incorporate lead times, shipping costs, and local regulations. Our comparison of international return management software outlines the main criteria to consider.

Limiting wardrobing without hindering legitimate returns

Wardrobing is an abuse that must be treated as such. It damages products, ties up inventory, increases costs, and reduces margins for e-commerce retailers.

However, it remains a minority issue. Most customers return a product because it doesn't fit, is defective, or does not meet their expectations.

A balanced strategy must therefore protect two objectives simultaneously: making wardrobing more difficult while maintaining a seamless experience for legitimate consumers.

This involves:

• reducing avoidable returns through better product information;
• identifying abuse based on multiple signals;
• segmenting return policies;
• strengthening inspections in a targeted manner;
• adjusting refunds based on risk levels;
• analyzing data to distinguish between fraud and product issues.

An e-commerce returns portal allows you to centralize these rules, automate the process, offer exchanges, and leverage data to better distinguish between standard returns and abusive behavior.

The goal is not to reduce returns at any cost. It is to prevent a minority from misusing a service that is essential for trust, conversion, and customer loyalty.

‍

‍