Financial Dispute Surrounding Wildberries PVZ in Irkutsk Region
A debt dispute has surfaced between a former owner of several pickup points in Irkutsk and the Russian e‑commerce giant Wildberries. The claimed amount stands at 750 thousand rubles, a sum that Wildberries allegedly seeks to recover after a business setback that began before the new year. The matter was highlighted by a Telegram channel, which quoted a local entrepreneur as saying the bill is unfounded.
The business owner, identified as Anton, previously operated three PVZs, or pickup points, scattered across different districts of the Irkutsk region. Official records indicate that one of these points served as the sole access point for a town with about 20,000 residents—a detail that underscores the strategic importance of the location for local customers and for Wildberries’ delivery network in the area.
During the holiday rush, a high volume of orders arrived, and the staff faced a bottleneck in unpacking and sorting. Some deliveries could not be prepared quickly enough, causing customers to queue outside the facilities. The surge in orders also led to a spike in returns after the holidays. In the end, the marketplace reported a shortage of roughly 1 million rubles and subsequently closed all three pickup points as a precautionary measure.
Following the shutdown, Anton proceeded to settle a portion of the bill, paying a fine of 190 thousand rubles. However, shortly thereafter a new demand arrived—an invoice for 750 thousand rubles. According to the claims circulating online, the charges were framed as compensation for allegedly missing items. The uploaded documentation, as cited, shows that the items remained in vendor possession for an extended period, casting doubt on the necessity of the added charge.
Communication from Anton with Wildberries reportedly proved difficult. He described ongoing deliveries arriving at closed pickup points, with no access to the application, making it impossible to return or redirect shipments currently in transit. This created a cascade of logistical and financial concerns for the operator, who faced mounting costs without the ability to reconcile inventory and refunds.
In the public arena, the issue drew comments from Varley Gartung, a former head of the State Duma Committee for the Protection of Competition. He noted that Wildberries has received and acknowledged a stream of complaints from PVZ owners and that the company intends to respond to these concerns. Gartung added that Wildberries announced it is prepared to review the situation, potentially rescind some automated decisions, and revert certain actions to a manual, human-led process. This shift could facilitate more nuanced handling of specific cases and allow for direct dialogue with point owners who feel aggrieved.
Observers point out that the incident highlights tensions between major delivery platforms and local business operators who rely on a network of pickup points to service rural and semi-urban communities. The immediate questions focus on the fairness of automated penalties, the transparency of the processes behind those penalties, and the practical steps necessary to restore confidence for small business owners who depend on marketplaces for steady revenue. As the dispute unfolds, stakeholders on both sides appear to be seeking a path that balances the platform’s need for inventory control with the operators’ need for clarity, due process, and reasonable recourse when issues arise with orders and returns.
Until there is a formal resolution, the Irkutsk PVZ network remains in a state of operational limbo. Market participants are watching closely how Wildberries will handle incoming complaints and whether a broader update to its rules might be announced. The case underscores the broader risk landscape for independent pickup points anchored to larger marketplaces, where automated policies can trigger immediate penalties that ripple through small businesses and their customers alike.
As this matter develops, more details are expected to emerge about the validity of the 750 thousand ruble claim, the basis for the alleged missing items, and the potential for reinstating certain automated decisions to manual oversight. The outcome could influence how similar disputes are resolved in the future and may prompt other PVZ operators to seek clearer guidelines and confirmatory documentation before engaging with large marketplaces in regions outside major metropolitan centers.