LUXURY RESALE - WHAT'S ON THE LEGAL RADAR FOR 2026?

The fashion and resale markets generated considerable news and optimism for growth over the last year, driven by growing comfort with buying secondhand, Gen Z participation, sustainability concerns, and consumer reactions to announced tariffs.

In luxury resale, especially handbags and watches, many observers have predicted that repeated retail price increases would send more buyers to the secondary market. In some cases, that premium has flipped entirely, with certain Hermès Birkin handbags and Rolex watches reportedly reselling for more than their original retail prices on fashion and related resale platforms.

At the same time, 2025 headlines in luxury resale were dominated by authentication concerns, “superfakes,” and a growing list of complaints about platform policies and customer service. As volumes rise, legal scrutiny is rising with it. In 2026, luxury resale platforms are operating in a landscape that is increasingly protective of brand aura and focused on consumer transparency, meaning legal risk is moving from background noise to a core strategic issue.

Based on ongoing review of the luxury resale market, several legal issues stand out as having wide ranging implications for platforms and brand owned resale programs. This post highlights a few of the topics that luxury resale operators need on their radar to stay ahead of the curve. Several other legal related topics will be covered in future posts, including EU regulations. The information in this post is for general informational purposes only and is not intended as, nor does it constitute, legal advice or professional advice.

Resale Platform Models

There are three primary models in luxury resale, and while each has its own operating playbook, they share many of the same legal risks and potential rewards. These three models are: peer‑to‑peer marketplaces, managed consignment marketplaces, and brand owned resale programs.

Peer‑to‑Peer Marketplaces

Peer‑to‑peer platforms provide the technology infrastructure and rules that connect buyers and sellers. They do not take possession of inventory. The seller is responsible for photographing the item, writing the description, posting the listing, and shipping directly to the buyer. Examples include Poshmark and Depop.

Some peer‑to‑peer marketplaces add a step for higher value items in specific categories. When an item sells above a certain price threshold, it must be sent to the company’s authentication center before shipment to the buyer. Platforms such as Vestiaire Collective, eBay, and Poshmark incorporate this kind of authentication process for select listings. (Note there are different policies among these three platforms.)

Managed Consignment Marketplaces

Managed consignment or managed marketplaces act as intermediaries, taking possession of inventory and managing the resale process.. These companies authenticate incoming items, set pricing, take photos, write and post the listings, ship the orders to buyers, and then pay the original owner, whether on a consignment basis or through an outright buy out.

Examples in this category include Fashionphile, MyGemma, and Bag Borrow or Steal. These companies tout authentication, curation, and customer experience as part of their value proposition. This model tends to concentrate legal risk at the platform level because the company is involved in both representation and handling of goods.

Brand Owned Resale Programs

Fashion brands are increasingly launching brand owned resale programs in partnership with technology providers that specialize in resale operations. In these models, the original brand sells its own pre‑loved goods through take back programs (often in exchange for store credit -- in-store or online) and/or peer‑to‑peer platforms operated under the brand’s label.

Examples include Oscar de la Renta Encore (with Archive), Victoria Beckham’s The Re‑Loved Archive (with Faume), and Canada Goose Generations (with Trove). These branded programs are not one‑size‑fits‑all. Each has its own platform architecture and policies around accepted categories, original sale dates (for example, only items from recent seasons), and payout or credit structures, including where and how credits can be used.

While these three models differ in how hands‑on they are, they are all entering a 2026 legal environment that is more protective of brand identity and more demanding on consumer‑facing disclosures. From high‑profile trademark battles to new rules on digital transparency, luxury resale is starting to look and feel more regulated.

Lawsuits Reshaping Luxury Resale

Lawsuit: Chanel v. What Goes Around Comes Around (WGACA)

The legal battle between Chanel and luxury reseller What Goes Around Comes Around (WGACA) began in March 2018 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and has become one of the most closely watched cases in the resale sector.

Chanel’s complaint covered these main issues:

• False Association: Chanel argued that WGACA’s marketing (using Chanel’s logo and hashtags like #WGACAChanel) misled consumers into believing there was an official partnership or endorsement between the two companies.

• The Sale of "Non-Genuine" Items: Chanel argued that WGACA sold items that, while potentially made by Chanel factories, were never authorized for sale. This included Point of Sale (POS) items such as display mirrors, tissue boxes, and VIP gifts-with-purchase that Chanel never intended to enter the commercial market.

• Stolen/Voided Serial Numbers: Chanel argued that 13 handbags bore serial numbers that had been stolen from a Chanel factory in Italy years prior and subsequently voided in Chanel's internal database.

In February 2024, a jury found WGACA liable for willful trademark infringement, false association, unfair competition, and false advertising and awarded Chanel $4 million in statutory damages. The Court later entered judgment imposing a permanent injunction restricting how WGACA can use Chanel’s trademarks and branding, including limits on hashtags and discount codes, and requires clear disclaimers that WGACA is not an authorized reseller Additionally, Chanel obtained more than $560,000 in litigation costs, though its request for $6.7 million in attorney’s fees was denied.

Current Status (January 2026): The case is currently on appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the $4 million award stands for now. Whatever the outcome is on appeal, the message to resale operators is that courts are increasingly willing to scrutinize how platforms invoke brand names and to treat “willful blindness” around sourcing and that serial numbers as a serious issue.

Luxury Resale Compliance Checklist

For industry players, the immediate question is how to convert these developments into practical risk controls. The following 2026 checklist is a starting point for keeping luxury resale platforms off the litigation radar.

1. Marketing and social media

The Court ruled that "nominative fair use" allows the reseller to name the brand to describe the bag, but it cannot co-opt the brand’s identity.

Hashtags: Don't use combined hashtags such as #WGACAChanel. Use independent tags instead.

Discount Codes: Do not use codes such as "HERMES10" or "COCO25" that leverage a brand’s intellectual property or founder’s name to drive sales.:

2. Inventory and “non‑genuine” sourcing filters

The First Sale Doctrine only protects the reseller if the brand originally intended the item for retail sale.

Exclude point‑of‑sale items: Remove display pieces, such as branded tissue boxes, and VIP “gift with purchase” items that were never sold at retail, as these can be treated as non genuine in the trademark context.

​3. Authentication and serial‑number provenance

Platforms are being held to a "willful blindness" standard regarding stolen goods.

Serial number checks: For brands that publish or share stolen number ranges, cross‑reference inventory against those ranges; Chanel’s stolen 17 million series numbers are a prominent example in this recent litigation.​

Disclaimers and independence: Prominently state that the platform is not an authorized reseller or affiliated with the brands it sells and that authentication is conducted independently, without endorsement from brand owners.​s.

4. “Material difference” and restoration

The "First Sale Doctrine" can be voided if a product is "materially different" from the original.

Restoration refurbishment disclosures: If a handbag has been re‑dyed, had hardware changed, or undergone a “spa” process involving non‑original parts, clearly label item “restored,” “altered,” or similar language so buyers understand what they are buying.

No “Frankenstein” inventory: Do not sell items assembled from parts of multiple authentic piece, leading to what is known as “Frankenstein” bags. These hybrids raise both authenticity and trademark questions, even where components began as being genuine.

Junk Fees, Returns, and Drip Pricing

Lawsuit: Fadrigo v. The RealReal, Inc.

In July 2025, a putative class action suit was filed against The RealReal in California, challenging a $14.95 “Return Shipping and Processing Fee” (RSPF) charged on returned items. The complaint alleges that the fee is a classic “junk fee,” a mandatory charge that is not clearly disclosed during checkout and that allegedly exceeds the actual cost of returns processing, effectively turning the fee into a hidden profit center.

The case, now in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, focuses on two core issues:

1. Whether the fee was adequately disclosed at the time of purchase.

2. Whether its amount of the fee bears a reasonable relationship to the underlying logistics costs.

Current Status (January 2026): The case is currently in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (after being removed from state court). A pivotal hearing is scheduled for February 13, 2026 that concerns a "Motion to Compel Arbitration."

The RealReal is attempting to use the fine print in their Terms of Service to move the case into private arbitration. If The RealReal wins this motion, the class action is effectively over, and individual customers would have to sue one by one, which is a win for the platforms.

If the judge denies the motion, it signals to platforms that their Terms of Service might not be enough to save them from "junk fee" litigation in court. This could force an industry shift where platforms must show return fees as prominently as the item price to avoid "junk fee" liability.

While the Fadrigo case specifically targets a return fee, it sits at the heart of a much larger controversy, Drip Pricing. Drip pricing is a deceptive pricing technique where a company advertises only a portion of a product's price and then reveals additional fees as the consumer proceeds through the buying process. The goal is to hook the consumer with a low headline price before they realize the final cost is significantly higher.

Return Fees Compliance Checklist Audit

For luxury resale platforms that charge any return shipping, restocking, or processing fee, 2026 is the year to treat return policies as a regulatory risk, not just a customer service issue. The following 2026 checklist is just a starting point.

Checkout transparency: Under California’s “Honest Pricing Law” (SB 478) and similar state statutes, mandatory fees must be disclosed upfront; the first price the consumer sees should reflect the “all in" cost, excluding only allowable items such as taxes and certain shipping charges.

Order Summary Detail: Ensure that any return related fee appears as a clearly labeled line item (for example, "Return Shipping & Processing Fee”) in the order summary before the customer clicks “place order,” rather than being buried under vague labels such as “handling.”

Cost Linkage: Review whether each return fee is in line to actual costs, such as carrier rates and processing labor, rather than functioning as a margin enhancer. Note that tiered fees based on weight or category could help demonstrate a cost recovery intent.

Terms of Service Mechanism: Ensure users actively assent to updated terms through clickwrap agreements, as passive browsewrap implementations (footer links only) are under increasing scrutiny in consumer cases.

Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) Regulations

For many shoppers who want to buy luxury goods, the decision to do so is financially out of their reach. Also there are those who could easily handle paying the one lump sum might decide not to do so.

To attract buyers, many platforms have been offering a third party payment plan option. The plans are called Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL). Typically the purchase can be paid for over four interest free payments and the buyer does not have to wait to receive the bag until all payments are made. The option to use BNPL is available at checkout. Each BNPL company has its own features, fees and policies. Leading providers include Klarna, Affirm, and PayPal. The Buy Now Pay Later industry has been the focus of federal legislation and also individual states.

BNPL is a Double Edged Sword

Before looking at the legal risks, it’s important to recognize that BNPL introduces significant operational headaches for luxury resellers. While it attracts buyers by lowering "sticker shock," it also facilitates costly consumer behaviors, including those noted below.

Wardrobing:Though BNPL lowers the initial cost of the purchase, it could lead to an increase in "wardrobing." In this scenario a customer buys an item, wears it for a specific event, and then returns it. Since the buyer has laid out just a small fraction of the total price, the psychological and financial barrier to renting luxury goods for free is significantly reduced. However, resellers then must expend extra employee time and resources to inspect and relist items that have been returned. Plus, there could be quite a bit of time consuming back-and-forth between the customer and the reseller if the return is initially denied.

Bracketing Combined with Buyer’s Remorse: BNPL makes it easy for consumers to bracket their purchases. For instance, the purchaser could buy several versions of a similar high ticket item using different BNPL partners. Once those individual payment schedules start to pile up, buyer’s remorse could sink in. The resale platforms would then need to deal with returns as outlined above. Not only are sales lost because of the returns, they take on added manual labor time.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

In May 2024, the CFPB (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) issued a landmark Interpretive Rule officially classifying BNPL providers as "credit card issuers" under Regulation Z (the Truth in Lending Act). Even though BNPL is often interest free and has only four installments, the CFPB determined that the digital accounts used to access these loans function as credit cards.

Throughout 2024 and 2025, the CFPB attempted to bring the BNPL industry under federal control by classifying digital accounts as credit cards, granting those who used BNPL the same protections as traditional Visa or Mastercard users, covering dispute rights and refund guarantees.

This rule was called landmark because, for the first time, the CFPB officially treated BNPL credit products as subject to credit card protections under federal law, which was a significant shift from the longstanding view that these payments were outside Regulation Z. It effectively changed how many BNPL lenders would need to operate if the rule remained in force long term.

After leadership changes at the CFPB on May 6, 2025, the CFPB retreated, announcing it would not prioritize enforcement of its rule that classified BNPL providers as credit card issuers.

States Enact "Mini-CFPB" Laws

As federal oversight of the "Buy Now, Pay Later" (BNPL) industry has pulled back, a new wave of state evel "Mini-CFPB" laws has taken center stage. Leading the charge are New York (The BNPL Act) and California (SB 825), both of which rhave been fullly implemented on January 1, 2026.

These state agencies now hold significant power, including:

• The power to void BNPL loans.

• Levy heavy fines for "drip pricing," the hidden fees.

• Freeze a reseller's ability to process payments if their third party partners, such as Klarna, Affirm, Klarna, Afterpay aren't locally licensed.

1. The New York BNPL Act

Enacted as part of the New York FY2026 budget, this is now considered the most comprehensive BNPL law in the nation. It transforms BNPL from a "fintech loophole" into a regulated financial product. The law forces BNPL lenders to offer the same dispute and refund rights as credit cards, essentially codifying the rule the CFPB walked away from.

A Licensing Mandate: Every BNPL provider must be licensed by the NY Department of Financial Services (DFS).

The "Unlicensed Lending" Concern: If the financing partner isn't licensed in New York, the resale platform could be held liable for "facilitating unlicensed lending." In New York,

loans made by unlicensed entities can be declared void and uncollectible.

Key Note: The law applies to any BNPL loan made to a "consumer," which the Act defines as an individual who is a New York resident. So, even if a luxury reseller is based in Florida and sells a luxury watch to a customer in New York using a BNPL service, the transaction must comply with New York’s licensing, disclosure, and "ability to repay" standards.

"Ability to Repay" Standards: New York now mandates "risk-based underwriting." Lenders must verify a consumer's ability to pay before the loan is issued. This is an attempt to prevent "phantom debt" where consumers over leverage themselves.

Phantom debt is consumer debt that is actually a real debt and is is enforceable. However, it is not fully visible, or or tracked by lenders, nor consumers and even regulators when credit decisions are made. Because many BNPL transactions are not consistently reported to the major credit bureaus, this debt exists "off the books" of a typical credit report. As of 2026, reporting practices still vary significantly by BNPL provider and product. for example, while a longer-term monthly installment loan is tracked a four payment installment plan might not be reported.

2. California’s SB 825: Ending the "UDAAP" Shield

Effective January 1, 2026, California's SB 825 closed a major regulatory loophole. Previously, many licensed lenders were exempt from certain oversight by the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) under the original California Consumer Financial Protection Law. However, this is no longer.

Note: California is now specifically targeting "loan stacking," the risky practice where a customer takes out multiple BNPL loans across different platforms simultaneously, leading to an invisible debt spiral.

Immunity ended: The new law clarifies that even licensed banks and fintechs are fully subject to DFPI enforcement regarding Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices (UDAAP).

Third-party liability: The DFPI has clarified that its authority extends to "third-party service providers." If the BNPL partner utilizes a deceptive user interface (UI), California can hold the resale platform responsible for that consumer's experience.

Drip pricing enforcement: This gives California the the right to sue companies specifically for drip pricing. In the context of the Fadrigo v. The RealReal case, this includes practices like hiding a "Return Shipping and Processing Fee" (RSPF) or failing to disclose the total cost of a BNPL loan until the final click.

Direct enforcement: Even if a platform is already licensed by the DFPI, this financial watchdog can now sue the BNPL provider directly for UDAAP violations, bypassing previous administrative hurdles.

For luxury resale platforms, being "compliant on a national level" is no longer enough. To protect your business in 2026, you must be compliant on a state-by-state basis, starting with the rigorous standards set by New York and California.

BNPL Partner Checklist Audit

The following 2026 checklist is a vital starting point for any platform utilizing Affirm, Klarna, Afterpay or similar financing services. To avoid "facilitator liability" under new state laws, your legal team should verify these three areas of compliance:

1. Licensing Status

Question: Are you currently licensed or authorized under the New York BNPL Act (Article 14-B) and the California Financing Law?

The Risk: In New York, if a provider is unlicensed, the loans they issue to NY residents can be declared void and uncollectible. As a reseller, you do not want to be the at risk for an illegal lending operation.

2. The "Refund Loop" Protocol

Question: When a returned is triggered by the resale platform, do you immediately pause the customer’s next installment, or do you continue charging them until the refund is fully cleared?

The Risk: Continuing to collect payments on a returned item is considered an Abusive Practice under the 2026 expansion of UDAAP laws. California’s DFPI and the NY Attorney General are specifically targeting "phantom payments" that occur while a consumer is waiting for a return to be processed.

3. Data and Surveillance Disclosure

Question: Do you clearly disclose if you use customer data for "Surveillance Pricing" or algorithmic credit limits, and are you compliant with the NY Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act?

The Risk: Since late 2025, New York law requires a prominent notice"THIS PRICE WAS SET BY AN ALGORITHM USING YOUR PERSONAL DATA" if a price or credit limit is adjusted based on browsing history or zip code. If your BNPL partner’s "instant approval" logic uses this data without disclosure, your platform could be cited for lack of transparency.

Future Legal Topics to be Covered : This post highlighted only a few of the critical legal shifts currently impacting luxury resellers. There are more topics t be covered and also as the landscape continues to evolve in 2026, I will be reviewing other timely topics in future posts, including new EU regulations.

Full Disclosure: The content in this post is for general informational purposes only and is not intended as, nor does it constitute, professional, financial or legal advice. Research for this post ended on January 8, 2026. I participate in reselling on the Poshmark, Vinted, Mercari and The RealReal platforms. I have not had any disputes with them, nor have they provided me with any benefits except for payments of items sold via their platforms. All opinions are my own, and I have not received any compensation for writing this post. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel licensed in their specific jurisdiction. Images in this post were generated by Gemini AI Pro and Perplexity AI Pro.

update - vinted,the peer-to-peer marketplace -december 8, 2025

Vinted, the peer-to-peer resale marketplace, announced in mid-November 2025 it would step up its business efforts in the United States. Since Vinted has been less known than competitors in the United States such as Poshmark and Mercari, it seems a timely opportunity to review the company’s key strategies, strategic advantages, and potential vulnerabilities as well as well as sharing my experience so far with selling to a buyer across the pond.

€8 billion valuation

Vinted, a Vilnius, Lithuania-based company founded in 2008 and now active in about 26 markets, captured significant attention when a November 16, 2025 Financial Times article reported it had reached a valuation of €8 billion, up from €5 billion about a year earlier. The article also noted that a potential share sale, understood to be driven by existing shareholders, was under review that drove this valuation.

Combined with Vinted being profitable for the first time in 2023, again in 2024, and expected to remain so in 2025, the company appears in a strong position. However, resale remains a fiercely competitive market. Success depends on several factors including maintaining efficient, cost-conscious operations and drawing the sellers who provide the inventory that attracts buyers. A closer look at Vinted’s recent strategic moves suggests it understands these challenges well.

Introduced UK-US Connection in November 2025

In mid-November 2025, Vinted CEO Thomas Plantenga announced on LinkedIn, “Next up: testing a UK-US connection to understand our American audience and expand our global reach.” He reiterated this plan during an interview with Bloomberg TV, and the initiative has since drawn widespread coverage.

Although Vinted has operated in the U.S. since 2013, publicly available data suggest its user base has remained small with limited visibility. Recognizing the untapped potential of the U.S. market, the UK-US Connection strategy represents a logical, measured step forward.

The pilot began in late November 2025. According to the Vinted U.S. site, the new feature is currently available only to users in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, as well as those in the UK. The test includes several restrictions:

• Only items and bundles valued under £120 (excluding buyer protection, shipping, and customs tax) can be sold from the U.S. to the U.K.

• Items must weigh 4.4 lbs or less.

• To make the experience appealing, Vinted emphasizes convenience and affordability:

• No additional steps are required for international sales; Vinted manages customs processing.

• International shipping typically takes 5–8 business days.

• Vinted will temporarily cover customs tax for international transactions.

While it remains unclear how long the company will absorb these costs, the limited geographic scope should keep expenses manageable while yielding valuable insights. Once Vinted evaluates results from this pilot, it may choose to expand to additional U.S. regions.

Summary Financial Information

Vinted Limited ^(A)

Year	Gross Merchandise Value	Revenue	Net Profit
2022	Around € 6.2 billion	€ 370.2 billion	(€ 20.4 million) loss
2023	Around € 9 billion	€ 596.3 billion	€ 17.8 million (B)
2024	Around € 10 billion	€ 813.4 billion	€ 76.7 million
2025 Projection (C)	Over € 10 billion	Over €10billion

^(A)      Consolidated Statement including all subsidiaries. 

As Vinted does not report specific financial results by country, I’ve relied on widely circulated third-party data in sections below. It is worth noting that while the figures noted in sections below are unofficial, Vinted’s management has not publicly disputed these estimates, suggesting they generally align with the company’s market reality.

^(B)    First profit ever, in 2023.

^(C)     Projection from Thomas Platenga, CEO in a mid-November 2025 LinkedIn post.

Summary

Vinted’s Apparent Strategic Advantage	Vinted’s Potential Vulnerabilities
Zero selling fees could encourage more listings. Buyer protection fees are the leading revenue source. Transparent with fees so buyers see the breakdown of what is included in the total price. Sellers using fee based promotion tools are shown the back-up prior to paying for them.	The secondhand marketplace is highly competitive and it is intensifying.
Diversified product lines.	Authenticity issues are a persistent problem.
Ongoing focus on cost with investments in infrastructure including Vinted Go and Vinted Pay.	Delivery problems continue, including complaints about taking a long time for delivery.
	Ongoing disputes regarding purchased items, such as not matching with photos and descriptions. (Per social media and articles)
Changes to the app / website, which would probably be secret until launched. Some changes could receive favorable reviews.	Changes to the app / website, such as the November 2025 update related to how sizes are listed that was met with complaints.
Expanding into new geographic markets leading to new buyers and sellers.	Expanding into new geographic markets with different regulations, different behaviors and adds costs. (See section below about US-UK market expansion).

Vinted’s Apparent Strategic Advantages Having plentiful inventory is a key success factor for a resale marketplace.

• Vinted's ability to attract inventory is believed to be closely tied to its policy of zero selling fees. In fact, zero selling fees seems to be the basis of its business model.

• Zero selling fees means Vinted’s sellers receive the full sale price. They do not incur commission costs or payment processing fees, which is the case with many other platforms, such as Mercari, Poshmark and consignment platforms. The zero seller fees is a competitive advantage.

• Vinted has a buyer protection fee that supports the zero selling fees.

• Every purchase includes this buyer protection fee and is automatically charged. Below is the calculation:

  • A fixed amount of $0.70; plus

  • 5% of the item price agreed to between the Buyer and the Seller, not including the shipping costs, any additional costs and applicable taxes

• Per website, buyer protection fee covers:

  • Refund for these reasons, item: (1) doesn't arrive (2) arrives damaged (3) is significantly not as described. 

  • Extra measures against fraud.

  • Support from customer service team. Note that all rules must be followed to receive a refund and these are detailed on the Vinted website.

•  Transparent with fees so buyers see a breakdown of what is included in the total price.

  • Sellers using fee based promotion tools are shown the back-up prior to paying for them.

• Diversified product lines. When Vinted started, it focused only on second-hand fashion. Has expanded to include other categories such as electronics, home, hobbies and collectibles, toys, games and books.

• Ongoing focus on cost control. In an April 25, 2025 website post, when discussing the financial results for 2024, the CEO stated: “This performance is the result of our hard work to deliver products that bring high value for members at the lowest possible cost. We do this by having a relentless focus on cost control, building complex infrastructure ourselves, and innovating to bring new services and solutions at scale. It's this mix of scale, innovation, cost control that helps us succeed. 

• The infrastructure initiatives include establishing Vinted Go for logistics and Vinted Pay for payments. These are not yet fully integrated and notable is that Vinted Pay is in a pilot phase. (These businesses are discussed in sections below.) “…by having a relentless focus on cost control, building complex infrastructure ourselves, and innovating to bring new services and solutions at scale. It's this mix of scale, innovation, cost control that helps us succeed.” Source: Vinted 2024 Annual Report.

• Secondhand shopping is now considered mainstream, which supports continued market expansion Vinted’s alignment with sellers and buyers focus on the environment and sustainability. “A core element of Vinted's strategy is its commitment to encouraging consumption practices that have a lower climate impact.” In 2024, the Group remained dedicated to assessing and disclosing its environmental impact. Source: Vinted 2024 Annual Report.

Vinted’s Potential Vulnerabilities

• The secondhand marketplace is highly competitive, and it is intensifying which could impact margins and profits.

• For instance, more brands are getting involved with their own resale programs. (Examples: Lululemon Like New, ba&sh Secondhand, Sandro Secondhand)

• Expanding into new geographic markets means it must comply with additional regulations and address various delivery and logistical challenges. For instance, in November 2025, it introduced a test UK–US connection. At least for a while Vinted will be responsible for customs related activities and fees, for both markets a new responsibility.

• Authenticity issues are a persistent problem. Although the company does not provide formal statistics, there is ongoing negative discussion on social media about counterfeit goods being sold on the platform.

  • Note: Vinted 2024 Annual Report states: “Additionally, when buying an item of selected categories and brands a user may opt for additional service to verify the authenticity of such item, for a separate fee, in which case the item before being delivered to the buyer undergoes a physical inspection and authenticity.

• Per the website:“Item verification is currently available in France, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Spain, The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Denmark, Sweden, Lithuania and Finland.” Also:

  • A listing must meet the criteria (e.g. price, brands, category) to become eligible for verification. Members will see a diamond badge on items that are eligible.

  • The service fee is paid for by buyers and is visible on the item page and the checkout.

  • After checkout, the order is first shipped to the verification hub. After successful verification, the order then goes to the buyer. However, if the item fails verification, it is returned to the seller.

• Based on my review of publicly available information, it seems Vinted is focused on “verification” rather than “authentication”.  The verification service is a physical inspection by “experts, reviewing the hardware, stitching, serial numbers and logos. If an item passes verification, it receives a “Verified” badge and is sent to the buyer. Authentication usually  ends with a written document (or a certificate of authentication) stating an item is genuine. Vinted does not provide such a document or statement.

  • It cautions sellers: “If the item you listed is sold, you should keep a copy of all their proofs of authenticity before sending the parcel. We may request that you provide documentation (such as invoices or authenticity certificates) showing the authenticity of your items.”

• Delivery problems including complaints about taking a long time for deliveries despite the roll-out of Vinted Go as well as reporting problems with other carriers.

  • Trustpilot has about 39,000 reviews of Vinted Go. It is rated 2.9 stars out of 5.0 stars., with 40% being 1 star. (Note: Even Trustpilot has complaints that it is not truly impartial. Nevertheless, it is included to see at least the types of complaints.  https://www.trustpilot.com/review/vintedgo.com

• Disputes of purchased items not matching photos and descriptions. As with other resale platforms this is a risk. Once people have had one or a few bad experiences with items they received, or a seller has to deal with a number of false buyer claims, these people could stop dealing with Vinted. Note: Per social media posts, the following events are happening across other resale platforms. I do not have proof from Vinted that these have occurred on the Vinted platform.

• Related to this are fraud situations such as:

  • Empty box scam - Seller sends an empty box and possibly takes photos of the item being packaged. But, then ends up shipping an empty box. The buyer could have a difficult time getting a refund. The buyer could also claim she was sent en empty box, and also would have a problem receiving a refund.

  • Wardrobing - If a buyer buys an item that has the tags attached, it is possible the buyers wears the item with the tags attached. However, after wearing it one or more times, she decides to return the item. She might say it was not as described and asks for a refund.

  • Using AI for creating fake damages - A more recent scam is that buyers have been using AI to create fake damages to get a refund and also end up keeping the item that is really in fine condition. Instead of actually damaging the item, she would use AI to change the condition of the item, such as placing a stain on it, or showing a broken zipper. The buyer will show the AI image with the damage and request a refund from the resale platform. Meanwhile the buyer keeps the item that was never damaged, and also receives a refund. The seller could not receive any funds and the item she sold would not be returned to her.

• Changes to the app / website that end up frustrating sellers and buyers. For example, what has been considered by many as a poorly communicated update in November 2025 is related to Vinted’s change to its clothing size system. This was in connection with the introduction of the UK-US connection announcement.

  • The new system grouped sizes (such as Sizes: 4–6;S 12–14;M) rather than having users select single sizes. This made it difficult to search and filter for specific sizes.

  • The items were automatically recategorized. However, at times items went into the incorrect size range and for those with many listings to correct it was cumbersome as there wasn’t a bulk tool to correct the sizes.

  • Users concluded Vinted did not give adequate advance warning or clear instructions, leading to a poor experience.

The Vinted Group includes:

Vinted Marketplace

Vinted Go

Vinted Pay

Vinted Ventures

Vinted Marketplace 

A peer-to peer resale platform. In addition to clothing, Vinted has broadened the offerings to include electronics, home décor, entertainment and sports. Vinted’s website includes a detailed list of allowed and prohibited items: https://www.vinted.com/catalog-rules.

• The most recent country launches include: Estonia, Latvia, Slovenia, Croatia, Ireland and Greece.

A Few Figures

The largest markets include France, UK and Germany. Third parties report France is its largest market.Vinted does not provide detailed country results.

A few statistics provided by trade publications:  

France “The French Fashion Institute (IFM) recently did a consumer survey and has now reported its findings. The survey included retailers that sell online as well as offline. In the first quarter of this year, Vinted is the biggest seller of clothing in France in terms of sales volume. Ecommerce giant Amazon and local seller Kiabi ranked second and third.” Source: ecommercenews.com May 8, 2025.

Germany “According to CEO Plantenga, Vinted is on track for an annual revenue of over 1 billion euros… This is partly due to the strong performance in Germany, which has transformed “from a challenge into a top market” for the recommerce leader.” Source: ecommercenews.com November 17, 2025.

UK “The app entered the UK market in 2013 and has since amassed over 16 million users – nearly a quarter of the country’s population.” Source supplychainoutlook.com October 7, 2025

UK-US Connection

In the middle of November 2025, in a LinkedIn post, Thomas Plantenga Vinted’s CEO wrote: “Next up: testing a UK-US connection to understand our American audience and expand our global reach.” He reiterated this is during an interview with Bloomberg TV and this UK-US strategy has been widely written about.

Vinted has been available in the U.S. since 2013 and publicly available information has characterized Vinted’s US operations as having a small user base along with limited visibility. Realizing the US market is full of potential, this UK-US strategy is a logical step. This initiative started in late November 2025. According to the U.S. website, this new arrangement is available to a limited number of those in the US (only those living in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut) and those in the UK.

For the UK-US Connection the U.S. website lists these key features:

• Only items and bundles with less than £120 value can be sold from the US to the UK, excluding the buyer protection fee, shipping costs, and custom tax.

• Only items weighing 4.4lbs or less can be bought or sold between the US and UK.

• Buyers are covered by the buyer protection and refund policy.

• The integrated shipping options with tracking is available.

• Sellers will get a pre-generated label that they need to attach to their package.

• There are no extra steps when selling internationally; the customs process is handled by Vinted.

• Vinted will cover the custom tax for international transactions for now.

• International shipping usually takes 5-8 business days.

This initiative looks to be a large expense for Vinted as it will be taking care of customs matters. On the other hand, this test is limited to a group of three states and should provide useful learnings.

Vinted Marketplace Generates Revenue in Several Ways

(1) Buyer Protection Fees - Refer to this topic in above section: Vinted’s Apparent Strategic Advantages

(2) Item Bump -  A paid feature by the seller added to any listing to increase the chance of selling the item. When bumped, it appears higher in members' newsfeeds and search results for either 3 or 7 consecutive days (depending on the Bump duration), or until the item sells. 

• The Fee for Bumping listed items is displayed before completion of the Bump order. Any applicable sales tax may also be added at checkout.

• The item Bump are for local use, to increase the visibility of items in your registered country.

  • The cost of the item Bump depends on the market, item type and demand. Typically ranges from $0.75 to $3.00. Source: Vendoo.com June 3, 2025 web post.

(3) Closet Spotlight -  A paid feature by seller that can boost all of sellers’ listings' visibility. Valid for 7 consecutive days, it will highlight up to 5 items that a member is most likely to buy from the seller. Buyers may see the Closet Spotlight in their newsfeed and search results. The cost of the Closet Spotlight is $6.95/£6.95 to showcase five items in premium spots for a week. Source:startupbooted.com July 2, 2025 web post.

(4) Vinted Pro - For those seeking to sell high volumes of second-hand items as part of their professional activity. Eligibility criteria must be met and sell items from specified categories.

• Currently  available to sellers who meet the criteria and are registered in France, Italy, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium, Portugal, Spain, the UK, Ireland, Germany, and Austria, with other countries in a test phase and are not listed on the website.

(5) Advertising - Generates revenue from advertising and brand partnerships on its platform. This is prominent in Vinted’s European markets. As of today, I do not see any advertising on the Vinted US site. This makes sense as Vinted is not a big player here.

Vinted Go 

Launched in 2022, it is a logistics business, with the goal of lowering shipping and delivery  costs across Europe.

• “Since its launch in summer 2022 in France, the Vinted Go network has grown to almost 7,000 pick-up points and lockers spanning over 2,000 municipalities in the country. In the Benelux region, Vinted Go joined forces with the Dutch delivery scale-up Homerr, creating one of the largest PUDO (Pick Up Dropp Off) networks in the region. As we expand, applications to become a Vinted Go location in Spain or Portugal are now open.” Source: Vinted press release April 9, 2025.

• “Vinted Go continued successfully scaling its logistics operations to offer low-cost, convenient shipping to Vinted members via locker and pick-up-drop-off networks. Building on extensive networks in France and the Benelux region, this year Vinted Go is expanding into Spain and Portugal.” Source: Vinted press release April 28, 2025. “By the end of 2025, Vinted's ambition is to develop the network with lockers and parcel shops in the biggest cities in Spain and Portugal.” Source: Vinted press release April 9, 2025.

Vinted Pay

The goal is to replace the third party payout service companies. Vinted Pay is in a pilot phase and does not yet operate across all of Vinted’s markets. “The company is building an in-house wallet and payout service for its members, in what it says is a bid to “create a more seamless, secure and user-friendly way to make payments through the app’ As of November 2025, “Vinted Pay is currently testing an in-house wallet service with a small group of members in Lithuania, Finland, Greece, Slovakia, and Croatia.” Source: Vogue.com (Vogue Business) November 21, 2025. With Vinted handling the money themselves, they reduce their processing fees, which in turn should benefit the buyers and sellers.

Vinted Pay is not yet available in major markets such as France, Germany, the UK, or Spain, and most users in those regions are still required to use external payment providers like Checkout.com, Adyen, and Clearpay for transactions.

Vinted Ventures

An investment fund, which will invest in re-commerce startups.

• Vinted publicly announced in  2025. a new venture fund that will act as an investor with an operator mindset to fuel future growth opportunities in European re-commerce.

  • Vinted Ventures will target Series A to Series C stage companies, with ticket sizes ranging from €0.5M to €10M.”  Source: Vinted press release April 28, 2025.

  • “Get access to insights from experienced executives at Vinted. They can offer personalised guidance and practical expertise to help you navigate challenges and opportunities.” Source: Vinted website.

• Have been unable to find if any investments have yet been undertaken.

 My Vinted UK-US Experience; So Far

The new Vinted UK-US connection sounded intriguing. Since the other resale platforms I use are limited to domestic US buyers, I decided it was time for an adventure!

The Strategy Last week, I listed a test item: a Florida mug from the Starbucks "You Are Here" collection. I intentionally listed it at a low price due to Vinted's policy: "For international shipments, compensation for lost or damaged packages is up to $27." By choosing a low-value item, I ensured my costs would be covered if the item was lost or damaged during this test run.

The Sale Within minutes of listing, three users, all located in the United Kingdom "favorited" the mug. One buyer sent an offer, which I accepted. The process was identical to a domestic sale, with the buyer covering the shipping costs.

The Logistics About 15 minutes after the sale confirmation, I received the shipping label. I noticed it was addressed to a third-party processing center in Springfield Gardens, NY, located near JFK airport. While initially confusing, this makes sense: this domestic hub likely acts as the freight forwarder. I packed the mug heavily in bubble wrap (see photo) and included a note for the buyer regarding the carrier.

Vinted is vague about the specific logistics, simply stating: "There are no extra steps when you trade internationally – even the customs process is handled for you." My assumption is that the Springfield Gardens facility receives the package, handles the customs data, and applies the final international label.

The Tracking Data I dropped off the package and received a receipt from the USPS on November 28, 2025. Between then and the afternoon of November 30, 2025, there were 17 updates that provided the comment: "Departed Facility." When clicked, the words "Departed Post Office" appears. (Please refer to image.)

This isn't really a glitch, but it is an annoyance that lacks really useful data. It is unlikely that the package went to 17 different post offices on the way to the third-party carrier located about 20 miles from my local post office. Yet, the notification of estimated delivery date, Dec. 9 - Dec. 11 (which would be 7 to 9 business days), is somewhat in line with the statement on the Vinted website: "Shipping typically takes 5-8 business days." I shall be monitoring the steps.

Conclusion

Vinted has been profitable since fiscal 2023, has attracted sellers and buyers by adding product lines, entering new markets and is focused on cost control strategies by developing new business lines such as Vinted Go and Vinted Pay. The November 2025 start of the test UK-US connection is something to watch, though it is uncertain if findings will be disclosed. Key takeaways include that by controlling costs and diversifying its services, Vinted is actively forging ahead for a higher valuation and securing its competitive edge in the market.

December 8th Update: Mission accomplished! The buyer in the UK received the mug, rated it 5 stars and I requested the payout. To summarize, I mailed the package on Friday November 27th, the buyer received it on Sunday December 7th, and he provided the rating today, December 8th. Since the label I used was addressed to the carrier, I'm still curious about the logistics. The shipping label I used was addressed to to carrier in New York and I'd like to know when the address label that included the buyers' details were included. Nevertheless, I'd use this platform again.

Full Disclosure: The content provided is for informational and entertainment purposes only and does not constitute professional or financial advice. I have no personal or professional relationship with Vinted, its employees, or its investors. I have received no compensation for this review. All research regarding specific Vinted data points was conducted between November 21, 2025 and November 23, 2025. My sale to a Vinted buyer in the UK took place on November 27, 2025 and all shipping updates were reviewed between November 28, 2025 and November 30, 2025. With the exception of the Florida coffee mug image, the bubble wrapped package image and the shipping history image, all images were created by Gemini AI.

Lord & Taylor Relaunches Again and Includes Resale

Lord & Taylor Relaunches Again and Includes Resale

Lord & Taylor, the iconic retailer that was left a shell of its former self before closing its stores a few years ago, is once again back in business, operating as a purely online store under yet another new owner.

However, this relaunch is distinguished by confusing merchandising and pricing strategies that attempt to blend a focus on resale with what appears to be an overall off-price approach for higher-end and luxury fashion and home goods.

Confusing Pricing and Merchandising Strategies

The banner “CURATED LUXURY AT YOUR FINGERTIPS” is posted prominently; yet, the actual pricing strategy is bafflingly unclear.

The website avoids labeling its offerings as officially "off-price," but the merchandise suggests an inferred markdown strategy, with many individual items shown as being marked down. This implied off-price approach, however, is immediately undercut by contradictory listings. For example, the site includes women's skirts and dresses, both appearing to be in new condition, listed for $69 and $98, respectively, and are not marked down from a higher price. Additionally, these prices clearly do not align with a "curated luxury" positioning.

Compounding the confusion is the presence of just one price and no markdowns alongside items with full, non-discounted prices, such as a Gucci horsebit flat mule for $1,241.90 and a Ferragamo Castagneto L chocolate handbag for $4,079.90. On the other hand, examples of deep markdowns include items like Gucci cat eye-frame sunglasses, with a sale price of $179.99 (regularly $590.00), and a Ferragamo Vara bow smooth leather tote, with a sale price of $899.99 (regularly $2,100.00).

A surprising finding during my review is that a significant number of items, assuming they are identical on other websites, are priced higher on lordandtaylor.com. An example of this is shown in the section below called “A Surprising Pricing Premium.”

The sheer range and inconsistency of these listing types make the actual pricing and merchandise strategies difficult to definitively pin down.

Strategies Vague by Design?

The "About Us" section offers zero clarity regarding the website's strategy or current positioning. Instead, the section is nothing more than a nostalgic history lesson. It emphasizes the heritage of Lord & Taylor with scrolling boxes and black-and-white photos pertaining to the company's past from 1826 until the 2000s, leaving customers to guess the current business model.

While the site itself is strategically vague, the push to include resale was openly underscored by Reflaunt's CEO, whose company is powering the effort. In a post last week on LinkedIn, the CEO stated that Lord & Taylor "is returning with a bold vision: putting customers at the center and building resale into the heart of its relaunch." The program is called Resell by Lord & Taylor.

Disclaimer Integrated into Item Descriptions

After clicking on each item, there is a detailed disclosure that states:

“What to know before buying: Lord & Taylor is a platform that hosts sellers of authentic luxury brands. Neither Lord & Taylor nor its sellers are affiliated with or authorized retailers of any brand. You should assume that warranties, packaging, return policies, and other brand services do not apply or are different from those offered directly by brands. Please review the product details carefully before making a purchase.”

Critical Lack of Transparency in Authentication and Returns

The "What to know before buying" section simply asserts that all goods come from sellers of authentic luxury brands. However, this statement provides little practical assurance because it fails to disclose two critical pieces of information:

1. The specific details of the authentication process.

2. The explicit policy for returns and refunds if the item is later confirmed to be inauthentic by a third party.

Obviously, authenticity is a top concern for buyers when purchasing a $4,000+ handbag on this website.

This lack of transparency aligns with a broader industry challenge, evidenced by a comparative analysis I conducted about six months prior across approximately 25 luxury resale platforms. While a number of platforms guaranteed authenticity and promised a refund if the item were deemed inauthentic, this analysis demonstrated a significant systemic problem: very few resellers explicitly detail their procedures for such scenarios, often necessitating follow-up inquiries that frequently yield an incomplete or vague response. In a few instances, persistent follow-up emails were required to finally obtain the company’s process for honoring the authenticity guarantee.

Inventory and Condition Categories Not Stated

A critical deficiency is the absence of a clear condition designation (e.g., new, deadstock, or pre-loved) for items. The platform appears to mix inventory without clear designation, which forces the consumer to infer the state of the goods.

This ambiguity is compounded by the absence of condition ratings (if the item is pre-loved) commonly found on most resale sites. Shoppers are given no indication if the item is new or pre-owned, and if pre-owned, the item's condition (e.g., Excellent, Very Good, Shows Wear) is missing.

While the website tells those wishing to sell items through this platform that it will only accept items in "brand-new, excellent, or very good condition," this internal vetting grade is not visibly carried through to the customer-facing product page. (Note: The content in Resell by Lord & Taylor does not specifically mention that items sellers submit through here are sold on lordandtaylor.com. It states: your items will be listed on Reflaunt’s global resale network, reaching over 300 million buyers.")

A Surprising Pricing Premium

Further investigation into the buying side on lordandtaylor.com generated an alarming concern regarding the final prices. Given that the most recent Q3 2025 Lyst Index ranked Coach highly among fashion’s hottest brands, at number five I decided to search for a Coach handbag.

As of the writing, the website lists over 50 Coach handbags, many of which appeared to be current styles, and my assessment is that none of them have been worn, though there isn’t a confirmation. As previously noted, the broad disclaimer was posted next to each item, but there was no clear indication if these bags are new or used.

The most startling discovery is the significant price premium on the lordandtaylor.com listings compared to the prices on the Coach website:

Coach Bag Style Name	Price Coach Website	Price Lord& Taylor Website	How much more expensive on Lord & Taylor website
Juliet Shoulder Bag	$350	$622.90	$272 or 79% more
Bleecker Bucket Bag	$450	$831.90	$381 or 85% more
Quilted Tabby with Chain Shoulder Bag	$595	$1,102.90	$507 or 85% more

The explanation for this startling price structure might lie in the FAQ’s, which outlines an additive pricing model that could be confusing for shoppers. It states:

“To determine the listing price shown across our resale network, we add shipping, a reduced marketplace fee negotiated by Reflaunt, operational costs, and our commission on top of your payout. This full amount is paid by the buyer, not deducted from your earnings.”

This fee structure is designed to maximize the seller's payout. However, it results in final prices that, based on my product reviews, look to be highly non-competitive. The website explanation is lacking in detail, such as what a marketplace fee is and what operational costs cover. This approach, where the price is marked up dramatically to cover all logistics and fees paid by the buyer, creates significant confusion when comparing a Lord & Taylor listing against an official retail price.

On November 10, 2025, I sent an email to Lord & Taylor’s customer service, along with the relevant screenshots, asking why the prices on their website were so much higher compared to the Coach website. I am awaiting a response.

A Consignment Model, With Two Exceptions

A review of how individuals can sell pre-loved items via the Resell by Lord & Taylor website was easy to follow. Though the words “consign” or “consignment” were not used, for the most part, selling here follows the consignment model. The process and logistics are run by Reflaunt, which has extensive experience with this type of business, including working with NET-A-PORTER and Balenciaga.

After clicking a tab on the home page called "Resell" it clearly notes: (1) The items the person wants to sell are shipped to Reflaunt for free. (2) Reflaunt authenticates, takes the photos, and writes the descriptions. (3) The price is set by Reflaunt, and the items are listed.

The FAQ’s further states: "your items will be listed on Reflaunt’s global resale network, reaching over 300 million buyers." Though no specific retailers in the global resale network are noted, I’ve come across Reflaunt being the supplier for other companies pre-owned luxury handbags. For example, the Saks OFF 5TH website has pre-owned luxury handbag listings, and next to some of them, it states: Sourced & Shipped by Reflaunt. Fashionphile is also a supplier for Saks OFF Fifth pre-owned luxury handbags.

Points to Keep in Mind

To reiterate, with two exceptions explained below, this is a consignment model, so payment occurs only after the item has been sold. The payment can be in the form of cash via a bank transfer or a Lord & Taylor credit worth 20% more than the cash option.

Instant Reward Option Instead of Consigning

The exceptions of getting paid prior to the item selling are applicable for select models of handbags and sneakers, for which a Lord & Taylor credit may be received immediately. This is called an Instant Reward. For handbags, the seller clicks a link and uses two drop-down menus to find the brand and category, where they can see eligible models and the dollar amount they "could earn." The website does not specify the sneaker brands or models that qualify. Once the bag or sneakers are received by Reflaunt and evaluated, a pricing agreement will be sent, with the option to receive the Instant Reward, or list the item and await a sale.

Commission, Fees, and the Fine Print

As with working with any consignee, it is essential the consignor (seller) read all the fine print. The FAQ’s confirms the seller's payout is net of all costs, with the final consumer price being marked up to cover all operational and marketplace fees. Note there are no details about the operational and marketplace fees.

It seems that reestablishing the Lord & Taylor brand online presence is difficult enough, so adding the resale business could only make operations even more challenging. However, the resale partner, Reflaunt, has experience with other brands’ resale operations, including Balenciaga and NET-A-PORTER. When comparing the Balenciaga ReSell program with Lord & Taylor’s Resell program, it looks like there are a number of similarities, such as a 20% bonus over the cash amount when opting for payment with a Balenciaga voucher.

Conclusion

As a former employee of Lord & Taylor, it is heartening to see the name continue. However, the current iteration of Lord & Taylor is struggling to capture the essence of its past. The merchandising and pricing strategies appear muddled, and clarity is needed regarding item transparency and authentication policies. These factors present significant hurdles to delivering the "curated luxury" experience the brand promises. On a positive note, the incorporation of resale is a timely and strategic move, and the program benefits from the expertise of its technology partner, Reflaunt. Ultimately, establishing a competitive foothold in the digital luxury market will require the new Lord & Taylor to address these foundational inconsistencies.

Full Disclosure: Although I worked at Lord & Taylor more than 15 years ago, this post is based entirely on my recent experience with the current Lord & Taylor website. My opinions reflect only my current interactions with the company's website and are not influenced by my previous employment. The content in this post is based on my personal opinions and experiences. It is intended for informational and entertainment purposes only and should not be considered professional advice. Specific research for the items mentioned in this post was conducted between November 10, 2025 and November 14, 2025 and it is possible they are no longer on the website. I have not received any compensation for writing this post.