Barratts shoes dragging their heels!!!

hollydays

Read through the posts again.Your assumption was incorrect.Assuming is dangerous.As allready stated this occurance is not commonplace in retail.A for "data",I could have asked you what data you have to prove that its much easier to get caught by mail order.
Accept your assumption is incorrect-and move on.

Astaroth

LMFAO

And I would have answered that with mail order we have the name and address for every single order and in many cases with mail order also an account. It is therefore very easy to spot someone ordering 5 plasma TVs or pairs of identical shoes.

As a customer in, say a shoe shop, I can go into the 5 Barratts shops in my area and buy using cash the same shoes from each one. They do not take my name or address and have no record of who I am therefore cannot tie up what would be considered suspicious behaviour.

Therefore it is easier to catch someone via mail order.

I fear that you have an issue with having holes in your unconsidered responses pointed out so I look forward to your response.

PS. assuming isnt dangerous it is what every single person does every single day either actively or subconsiously as none of us even know that we will be alive in 5 seconds time... but we assume that we will and plan on that basis.

hollydays

Watch my lips
Your scenario is not common practice.

Astaroth

Ok, I take the refusal to give any arguement to back up your comments as an admission that you cant

hollydays

My Dads bigger than your Dad!

tquarter

Thanks for all the comments - and sorry for starting a row. :eek:

Update: Head Office have agreed to refund the total cost I paid for the shoes - £20 I just need to send them (they're gonna refund the postage too)

hjb123

Bet you are pleased with that - and bet you wont be going back to Barratts for a while either!

hollydays

Good news! Thanks for letting us know what happened.

Quackers

tquarter wrote:

Anyway on my return I took the shoes back to the shop to be told I could exchange them for the current selling price - £12. Knowing that I could prove how much I paid for them on a statement I asked if that would be surfice. Shop assistant said yes - I told her we bought two items at the same time (hubbie bargain £5 flip-flops) - she said it wouldn't be a problem. So trip number two to the store (on both occassions it was the only reason the visit) produced statement and shoes to be told that because she could see a final cost of £25 she would only be able to refund me the current selling price £12!!!

I'm glad you got your refund.

I work in retail (and shoes - but not barratts!) and we do this too. A bank statement is perfectly acceptable as proof of purchase as long as you can show us exactly what you purchased on the date and the total tallies with your statement. So, if you'd have returned to our store you would have needed the £20 shoes, the £5 flip flops and as long as the prices were correct on the dates you purchased them you'd have got your refund from me without having to go to head office. I think most retailers do this & its a perfectly acceptable method of proof of purchase.

Our customer service dept would have paid for the petrol for the wasted journeys to the store as well if you'd have complained about it!

Astaroth

hollydays wrote:

My Dads bigger than your Dad!

I am sure that he is seeing as mine was reduced to ash over 10 years ago :cool: