Is Trade Assurance enough, or do I still need my own due diligence?

Platform protection programmes are genuinely useful and buyers should use them. The error is treating a dispute-resolution mechanism as though it were a verification service. They operate at different points: one prevents you dealing with the wrong company, the other gives you a process after a deal with some company has gone wrong.

Scenario	Typically covered?
Goods never shipped, order placed and paid on the platform	Yes
Goods materially differ from the agreed order terms	Usually, within the process and the window
You paid by bank transfer off-platform	No
You paid a different account after an email asked you to	No
The “manufacturer” turned out to be a trader	No — not a covered dispute
Quality fine on arrival, failing in the field months later	Generally no — outside the window
Supplier is subject to enforcement proceedings and cannot perform	Recovery is limited whatever the platform says
Goods infringe a third party’s IP and are seized at your border	No — that is your problem as importer

The off-platform drift

Most losses in this category follow the same shape. The relationship starts on the platform, protection applies, and everything is fine. Then the supplier suggests moving to direct bank transfer for a better price, or the next order is arranged over email because you already know each other. Protection quietly ended at that point, and nobody noticed until it mattered.