Shoe Zone denied warranty 2months old.

Hintza

s_b wrote: »

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

I tend to agree with you but care you sould be able to find some decent shoes at quite a low price.

You should always buy the best shoes you can afford especially for children.

But even cheap shoes should last longer than 2 months. If the OP is up for the fight they should probably win but you really will ned to have a lot of energy to fight this (especally with an attempted repair). OP are you up for this battle?

If it was me and I had the time I would probably go back and cause a bit of a fuss, ask for manager, then ask for area manager etc knowing it was costing them a lot more than the price of the shoes to deal with me.

Flyboy152

s_b wrote: »

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

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

That passed me some years/decades ago.

Flyboy152

TheSaint wrote: »

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.

So is other clothing, food, housing, transport and fuel.

pulliptears

s_b wrote: »

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

Very much over 30.

Very much disagreeing.

Also have 2 now adult kids with perfectly normal feet from £12.99 or even less shoes.

Norfolk_Jim

I buy all my shoes from shoe zone or tesco and pay £9.99 - £15 a pair. They last maybe 3, if I'm lucky 4 months. For about £10 I accept they will be inferior quality in some respect to the £60 doc martins or £80 hush puppies I'd rather buy.
However when I did buy expensive shoes they were ruined in 2 weeks and I took them back to the proper shoe shop for a full refund.
I'd like to put my kids in clarks shoes but its more important that they get to eat. I'm nearly 50 and I've never been so hard up in my life. People buy what they can afford but sadly cheap footwear dont last long. The best shoes I ever had came from a charity shop - some will think like thats a crime but my feet still work fine. I dont think you can expect too much from shoe zone shoes sadly but they are low price and virtually disposable items - sad isn't it

Mupette

s_b wrote: »

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

I reckon you are wrong.

people tend not to spend a fortune on kids shoes
A.. can't afford to with the way things are
B. kids grow out of them so fast it's unreal.
C. rather my kids scuffed and destroyed a cheap pair of shoes out playing than an expensive pair of shoes.

Seriously your trolling is a bit naff, sorry your not getting the reactions and b1tch fights you were looking to see. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

SingleSue

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

My parents always made sure we had quality well fitting shoes when we were growing up (generally Clarkes).....my feet are a long way from being good now, probably due to reaching my mid teens and rebelling against 'sensible' shoes and buying things that looked glam :rotfl: and probably because I was a dancer up on points.

So you can look after their feet for the first 16 years but once fashion takes over them, it all goes by the wayside and they can still end up with horrendous feet.

I do try to get the boys Clarkes shoes but it does depend on if they have a sale on, no sale means not enough pennies to buy, thankfully I have been pretty lucky in that respect and their shoes tend to need replacing when a sale is on!

s_b

Mupette wrote: »

I reckon you are wrong.

people tend not to spend a fortune on kids shoes
A.. can't afford to with the way things are
B. kids grow out of them so fast it's unreal.
C. rather my kids scuffed and destroyed a cheap pair of shoes out playing than an expensive pair of shoes.

Seriously your trolling is a bit naff, sorry your not getting the reactions and b1tch fights you were looking to see. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

let me give you a little background
i worked for over 10 years for sir charles chlore and the british shoe corporation,i was the youngest shop manager in the company when i was given my first appointment
i underwent a full 6 months training programme to both understand the business, how to fit shoes and how to give service
i would never let any member of staff fit shoes to childrens feet unless they were up to my standard and as a company we always liked to do a bespoke fit using proper measuring devices and knowledge gained
we sold jumping jacks for infants and birthday shoes for older children
we did not sell poor quality shoes for school work because apart from as i explained earlier you damage a childs growing feet any returns were all collated and it affected my salary at the year end review
then came cheap trainers and plastic shoes and the british shoe corporation was no more
i left before the business collapsed so as to work for myself ,it was one of the best groundings anyone could wish to have when starting work and there is nothing to match it these days

if im seen as arrogant for wanting to protect youngsters feet then its becoming a very sad world with parents that dont give tuppence for their children but let me assure you my grandchildrens parents learnt their lesson well and fit proper quality fitted leather shoes and only let them wear rubbish after school and before bed

Mupette

Things have changed, not every household are able to buy an expensive pair of shoes for their children.

£50 for electric to keep them warm and fed or £50 pair of school shoes that might if your lucky still fit at the end of term.

You may well be an expert in shoes, diplomacy ... people are poor, you may not be.. and so we have to choose shop's like these.

fyi yes my son was in clarks shoes for most of his schooling, it was a struggle, he had his shoes, i went without, bills didn't get paid on time.

Lip_Stick

I hate myself for saying this but I agree with s b up to a point, but then I disagree with him too. Shoes should be well fitted, but even cheap shoes can have a good fit surely s b?

I also wouldn't put my son in anything other than leather shoes. Synthetic shoes just don't mould to the shape of feet like leather. I wouldn't wear plastic so certainly wouldn't have my son in such shoes.

Two guys I have known have had disfigured feet because of ill-fitting shoes, but, twice I have bought sandals from Clarks, and twice my son's feet have been rubbed raw by them. Haven't had a problem with shoes from there though.

I've just paid £9 for a pair of trainers from Clarks in the sale so you can get a decent pair and not break the bank.