What is Lipomax's refund/exchange policy timeline and any restocking or shipping fees?
Executive summary
Lipomax’s vendor-return language publicly available on a Lipomarts returns page sets a 30‑day window for refunds or exchanges for unused, original‑packaging items and places return shipping costs on the buyer — shipping is non‑refundable and will be deducted from any refund [1]. Independent consumer reports and complaint aggregators, however, document widespread problems getting refunds honored, requests for RMA forms, double charges, delayed or missing responses, and recurring‑billing complaints that contradict the advertised “money‑back” promise [2] [3] [4] [5] [6].
1. What the vendor policy actually says: 30 days, unused, buyer pays return shipping
The explicit return policy hosted on Lipomarts states the company’s policy lasts 30 days from purchase; items must be unused, returned in original packaging, and certain sale or customized items are final sale — exchanges are limited to defective or damaged products — and customers are responsible for their own return shipping with shipping costs non‑refundable and deducted from any refund [1].
2. Restocking or additional fees: no explicit restocking fee, but shipping cost deduction functions like one
The published page does not list a separate restocking fee, but it makes clear that customers “will be responsible for paying for your own shipping costs for returning your item” and that “the cost of return shipping will be deducted from your refund,” which in practice reduces the refunded amount and can act like a de facto fee for returns [1]. The policy also warns that delivery times for exchanges may vary by location [1].
3. How practice diverges from policy: complaints, RMA requirements, and delays
Consumer complaints compiled on BBB and other consumer help threads describe payment and operational problems that undercut the written policy: buyers report being asked to fill refund forms and obtain an RMA number, mailing proof of purchase and tracking, experiencing double charges, being told refunds are refused after 30 days even when the vendor previously advertised full refunds, and encountering unresponsive customer service — indicating the policy’s terms are not reliably honored in these accounts [2] [3] [7] [4] [8]. JustAnswer and BBB reports recommend documenting communications and pursuing payment disputes when refunds are delayed or denied [8] [6].
4. Recurring charge and cancellation red flags that affect refunds
Independent write‑ups and malware/scam trackers identify a pattern of recurring charges and failed cancellation attempts for similar weight‑loss drops products, noting that customers “often report being charged monthly, with no option to cancel or request a refund successfully,” which, if accurate for a given Lipomax seller, would materially change how the refund timeline functions in practice because disputes then require card‑issuer or platform intervention [5].
5. Practical steps and limitations of available reporting
Available sources consistently urge collecting and keeping evidence — screenshots of the advertised guarantee, emails, tracking receipts, and RMA communications — and, if the vendor fails to honor the stated 30‑day, no‑questions‑asked‑style advertising, to file disputes with banks, payment platforms, or state consumer protection agencies; those recommendations stem from complaint threads and consumer‑law Q&A rather than an independent audit of Lipomax’s operations [7] [8] [6]. Reporting here is limited to the documents cited: the vendor return page that sets the formal 30‑day policy [1] and multiple consumer complaint/assistance threads that allege non‑compliance, RMA requirements, or billing irregularities [2] [4] [3] [5]. There is no verified corporate response in these sources detailing whether alternative Lipomax vendors use different return terms, nor is there a definitive government adjudication cited here that confirms systemic fraud.