help with returning shoes to shop

sharpy2010

Unintentional wrote: »

If staff in a shoe shop are not trained to fit shoes, it sounds like a pretty rubbish shoe shop to me.

I work in a restaurant, bringing out food to people. That doesn't make me an expert on food, I simply bring the stuff out.

No different to someone who works in a shoeshop in my view. They bring out the shoes and sell them.

They won't necessarily be an expert on shoes! Just someone trying to earn a living!

Pollycat

Flyboy152 wrote: »

It doesn't matter if you need one or not, if one has told you that it fits, they have taken the responsibility to accept any liability if that advice is incorrect.

Pollycat wrote: »

Can you post the link to that piece of legislation, please.

2nd time of asking, Flyboy.......

Pollycat

Flyboy152 wrote: »

That is the business's problem, not the consumer's.


Any business that sells any goods is considered to the "expert." The consumer is not expected to establish the qualifications of the seller before buying.

So you think if you went into Shoe Zone or Jonathon James for a pair of shoes, you'll get expert advice on fitting? :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

The consumer may not 'be expected to establish the qualifications of the seller before buying' but the type of shop should tell you whether you're likely to get good advice on fit for a child.

The OP has still not said which shop she bought the shoes from.

Pollycat

sharpy2010 wrote: »

Madam!! lol.

Who says "madam" these days!

I was thinking about the old sketch 'Oooooh, suits you, sir' but I couldn't really say that as I was talking about a dress....or on second thoughts, maybe I could have said that. :rotfl:

A lady in a very old fashioned lingerie shop once called me 'madam' - but she pronounced it 'modom'.

arcon5

Pollycat wrote: »

2nd time of asking, Flyboy.......

In all fairness legislation is not that specific.

I think its quite a grey area... in that if you go have a wedding dress made to your specific size/shape and it was made to the wrong size you would have an argument under SOGA not as described (maybe even fit for purpose in this example), in this instance op asked the assistant if they fit which could be argued they are not as described.

BUT... saying that, I agree with you here... its widely known many shoe shops workers are not staffed by experts and are not trained to measure for correct shoe sizes. They are there to assist you, not inform you.

Even more, op did have the opportunity to inspect the shoes and how well they fit the child BEFORE purchasing to should have checked the fitting before leaving rather than being swayed by the child. Plus, what may be a comfortable fitting to one person may not necessarily be that for another, so what may infact be the correct size for somebody may not necessarily be the most comfortable fit.

Flyboy152

sharpy2010 wrote: »

I work in a restaurant, bringing out food to people. That doesn't make me an expert on food, I simply bring the stuff out.

No different to someone who works in a shoeshop in my view. They bring out the shoes and sell them.

They won't necessarily be an expert on shoes! Just someone trying to earn a living!

It doesn't matter whether you consider yourself to be an expert or not. You are doing a job where you would be advising peopel on what they are eating. If a diner asks you what is in the food and you tell them something that isn't true, your are responsible for that.

Flyboy152

Pollycat wrote: »

2nd time of asking, Flyboy.......

This is about common sense as much as it is about contract and consumer law. The customer is not expected to be an expert in shoes, those who sell the shoes are. The shop assistant represents those who are selling the shoes and therefore is expected to know more than the consumer. The consumer is not expected to know what level of training the staff have, therfore the onus is on the seller to take responsibility for their staff's actions.

Why don't you show me where I am wrong?

arcon5

sharpy2010 wrote: »

I work in a restaurant, bringing out food to people. That doesn't make me an expert on food, I simply bring the stuff out.

No different to someone who works in a shoeshop in my view. They bring out the shoes and sell them.

They won't necessarily be an expert on shoes! Just someone trying to earn a living!

But if somebody asked you if something was suitable for somebody that is lactose (?) intolerant and you incorrectly said 'Yes, it is fine for them to consume'. You can't then say I only take the food out.

The difference with ops case is they did have the opportunity to check themself if the shoe was okay on the childs foot. I mean really, how hard is it to check the childs toes aren't banging the front of the shoe.

Ops case could be compared to buying a piece of art, then trying to return it on the basis on the salesmen said 'it would like nice on my purple wall'.

Pollycat

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Why don't you show me where I am wrong?

Here:

Flyboy152 wrote: »

This is about common sense as much as it is about contract and consumer law. The customer is not expected to be an expert in shoes, those who sell the shoes are. The shop assistant represents those who are selling the shoes and therefore is expected to know more than the consumer. The consumer is not expected to know what level of training the staff have, therfore the onus is on the seller to take responsibility for their staff's actions.

A load of tosh!

Are you saying someone who works in Primark is expected to an expert in mens underpants?
Or in ladies tights?
Or be able to advise parents if shoes are suitable or if they fit?

See how silly that expectation is?
It's certainly not 'common sense'.

In most shoe shops, the customer wanders around, tries on different pairs and then takes the pair they've chosen to the sales assistant waiting behind the till to pay for them.

We don't know if the OP bought the shoes in a proper shop that specialises in measuring and fitting childrens shoes, so your comments about 'level of training' and 'expertise' are not necessarily relevant.

Flyboy152

Pollycat wrote: »

Here:



A load of tosh!

Are you saying someone who works in Primark is expected to an expert in mens underpants?
Or in ladies tights?
Or be able to advise parents if shoes are suitable or if they fit?

See how silly that expectation is?
It's certainly not 'common sense'.

You're right, that would make sense at all, seeing as Primark are not a shoe shop. For example, I wouldn't expect a bar man in a pub to be able give me financial advice.

In most shoe shops, the customer wanders around, tries on different pairs and then takes the pair they've chosen to the sales assistant waiting behind the till to pay for them.

We don't know if the OP bought the shoes in a proper shop that specialises in measuring and fitting childrens shoes, so your comments about 'level of training' and 'expertise' are not necessarily relevant.

By it's very virtue as a shoe shop, it would be one that specialises in selling, measuring and fitting shoes.