📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Shoe Zone denied warranty 2months old.

Options
24

Comments

  • Flyboy152
    Flyboy152 Posts: 17,118 Forumite
    ikati5 - I'd be intrigued to see the *special* law just for footwear. if you can find a copy online it'd be interesting reading.

    al4 - your problem, and I appreciate your desire to keep your son's feet dry, is the fact you tried to repair the shoes yourself. If you'd returned them when the hole appeared then you'd have stood a chance of getting the remedy you were after. I say 'stood a chance' because it depends a lot on what your son was doing in the shoes. If he was kicking a football round at break times for example (and I'm not suggesting he was!) then that's not what they're designed to do.

    Bear in mind this statement from the Office of Fair Trading's website:
    Circumstances when customers do not have a legal right to a refund, repair or replacement.

    Customers do not have a legal right to a refund, repair or replacement from you if they:
    accidentally damaged the item
    misused it and caused a fault
    tried to repair it themselves or had someone else try to repair it, which damaged the item

    If the repair did not damage the item, I would presume thois clause would not be relevant.

    I would also take exception to your assumption that a child's school shoe shouldn't be used to play in. We had similar excuses from Shoe Zone when we bought US Brass School Shoes and the sole wore out after five weeks. We were told, "of course they wore out, they have been worn. There is nothing we can do."

    After I pointed out they have a poster with a child playing football in the shoes, on the wall of the store, they couldn't open the till fast enough.
    The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark
  • Flyboy152 wrote: »
    If the repair did not damage the item, I would presume thois clause would not be relevant.

    No, agreed - but without seeing a picture of the shoes we'll never know!
    Flyboy152 wrote: »
    I would also take exception to your assumption that a child's school shoe shouldn't be used to play in. We had similar excuses from Shoe Zone when we bought US Brass School Shoes and the sole wore out after five weeks. We were told, "of course they wore out, they have been worn. There is nothing we can do."

    After I pointed out they have a poster with a child playing football in the shoes, on the wall of the store, they couldn't open the till fast enough.

    If they advertise the shoes in that way, and I'd say that's what the picture you saw does, then I agree. It's fair to assume they can take that level of use and if they can't then a remedy should be put in place.

    However, if no mention was made of the item being suitable for anything other than walking in then you can't really complain if it doesn't stand up to the challenge.
  • deanos
    deanos Posts: 11,241 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Uniform Washer
    s_b wrote: »
    £12.99 for a pair of school shoes is ridiculous
    go buy your child some proper shoes OP

    maybe that's all they could afford, and what proper shoes do you suggest they buy ?
  • s_b
    s_b Posts: 4,464 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    deanos wrote: »
    maybe that's all they could afford, and what proper shoes do you suggest they buy ?

    proper quality fitted shoes from a proper retailer my friend

    when i was selling shoes 30 years ago jumping jacks were £12.99 so i would not expect school shoes for £12.99 to be any good
    if OP can only afford £12.99 for the most important point of a childs developing foot then i feel very very sorry for the child as they grow into an adult because bad shoes on kids will be bad feet in later years
  • Flyboy152
    Flyboy152 Posts: 17,118 Forumite
    No, agreed - but without seeing a picture of the shoes we'll never know!

    If they advertise the shoes in that way, and I'd say that's what the picture you saw does, then I agree. It's fair to assume they can take that level of use and if they can't then a remedy should be put in place.

    However, if no mention was made of the item being suitable for anything other than walking in then you can't really complain if it doesn't stand up to the challenge.

    But, any reasonable person would assume, shoes sold as suitable for children to wear at school, should be expected to withstand some harsh wear.
    The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark
  • Flyboy152
    Flyboy152 Posts: 17,118 Forumite
    s_b wrote: »
    proper quality fitted shoes from a proper retailer my friend

    when i was selling shoes 30 years ago jumping jacks were £12.99 so i would not expect school shoes for £12.99 to be any good
    if OP can only afford £12.99 for the most important point of a childs developing foot then i feel very very sorry for the child as they grow into an adult because bad shoes on kids will be bad feet in later years

    What arrogant twaddle.
    The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark
  • To be fair, like Flyboy said, I think it's a bit arrogant to denounce ALL shoes under £15 ad useless.

    No parent is going to pay £40 or £50 for school shoes that the kid will grow out of within a few months. Equally, the problem the OP had was with a 'probable' fault on the shoe, not with the fit of it.
  • Mupette
    Mupette Posts: 4,599 Forumite
    s_b wrote: »
    proper quality fitted shoes from a proper retailer my friend

    when i was selling shoes 30 years ago jumping jacks were £12.99 so i would not expect school shoes for £12.99 to be any good
    if OP can only afford £12.99 for the most important point of a childs developing foot then i feel very very sorry for the child as they grow into an adult because bad shoes on kids will be bad feet in later years



    Who is this..........

    Get a grip its 2012 not 1980. things are not made to last anymore.

    admittedly if you buy cheap shoes you know they are going to break sooner, BUT remarks from this poster is just pathetic, we all can't afford to buy long lasting expensive shoes on top of the school uniform.

    Suggests this poster goes back into hibernation.
    GNU
    Terry Pratchett
    ((((Ripples))))
  • s_b
    s_b Posts: 4,464 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    if you people are buying £12.99 shoes for your children then there is nothing to be said is there

    i reckon that all of you that disagree with me are under 30 too
  • TheSaint_2
    TheSaint_2 Posts: 1,011 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 500 Posts Combo Breaker
    To be fair to s b child benefit is quite a bit more than £12.99 a month and shoes are indeed a very important part of a childs' development.
    If you shop at shoe zone you have to be prepared to get what you paid for (tat).

    They should indeed have lasted more than 3 months but boys will be boys eh!
    I have found that if you spend around £20 - £30 you tend to get reasonable quality shoes for children. We buy hush puppies from the local outlet store, very good quality for the price.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.6K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.