Shoes Faulty, returned without the original box???

JamesJ35mm

I bought some designer shoes online a few weeks ago to wear at my friends wedding, they were delivered as expected, I tried them on and they fitted fine and were exactly what I wanted so I put them away until the special day.

My parents used the shoe box to send a parcel to their friend.

On the day of the wedding I took them out of my wardrobe put them on and fastened them up, however upon fastening them the pin thing that secures the buckle snapped and rendered the shoes un-wearable!

I wore some other shoes for the day and forgot about it until the following Monday.

I tried to use the companies online return form to get a returns authorisation code, but in order to get that code I had to tick a box to say I had all original packaging (which I didn't as parents had used it to send a parcel!) and I was outside of the companies 7 day returns policy so instead I rang explained the situation and just didn't mention the lack of box. The guy acknowledged I was out side of the returns period but apologised for the shoes not being satisfactory and gave me a returns code.

I returned the shoes in a regular postage box and a letter explaining that the actual shoe box had been used to send a parcel and asking for a refund saying I didn't want the shoes repaired as I wasn't confident a repair would be up to the job.

About a week later, the shoes were returned to me having had the faulty buckle replaced (the original faulty buckle was also in the box) and a letter saying that without the original box a refund cannot be issued? They say that without the original box the shoes cannot be resold having been repaired

Is this true? What am I entitled to?

I've looked online but can't see anything that mentions whether shoes must be returned with their original box?

chunkychocky

This is complex because it comes under two different laws. One is the Distance Selling Regs but you are well out of the timeframe for that I think, however they do stipulate that they can't insist that you return the item in its original packaging. The other is Sale of Goods Act, which is I think the law that they have applied regarding returning the goods for a repair. I'm not very well up on the Sale of Good Act to know whether you are entitled to a refund if the goods are found to be faulty after a few weeks even without the packaging. Maybe contact Trading Standards and just ask. They are quite helpful. You don't need to name and shame, just ask them where you stand.

McKneff

You were out of time.

The company did exactly what they should have done ie carried out a repair.
They are obliged to repair, replace or refund. But it's their choice.

You are not obliged to return anything in the original packaging.
Their policy cannot over ride consumer law.

Flyboy152

McKneff wrote: »

You were out of time.

The company did exactly what they should have done ie carried out a repair.
They are obliged to repair, replace or refund. But it's their choice.

You are not obliged to return anything in the original packaging.
Their policy cannot over ride consumer law.

Only if it is outside of a reasonable time. However, if they agreed to a refund, they cannot reasonably reject the offer later, simply because of the lack of original packaging.

OP, how long after you took delivery of the shoes, did you inform the seller of the poor quality of the goods?

visidigi

the Op states the store gave him a returns code, I dont see any point at which the op says the store agreed to a refund and then changed their mind - I see the bit where the op asks for a refund...thats not a 'you will be refunded'.

halibut2209

Under SOGA, you do NOT need the original packaging.

Flyboy152

visidigi wrote: »

the Op states the store gave him a returns code, I dont see any point at which the op says the store agreed to a refund and then changed their mind - I see the bit where the op asks for a refund...thats not a 'you will be refunded'.

It would be a reasonable assumption, seeing as the OP spoke to the seller, that they agreed to a refund; otherwise why would the OP be expecting one.

McKneff

Flyboy152 wrote: »

It would be a reasonable assumption, seeing as the OP spoke to the seller, that they agreed to a refund; otherwise why would the OP be expecting one.

I think it was more wishful thinking than a reasonable assumption,
just because she asked for a refund, didnt mean she was going to get one.

The company did what was required within the law.

Flyboy152

McKneff wrote: »

I think it was more wishful thinking than a reasonable assumption,
just because she asked for a refund, didnt mean she was going to get one.

I am sure the OP would have pointed that out. Based on what we know to date, it is reasonable to assume that the OP would have asked for a refund, or she would not have been surprised that she didn't get one.

The company did what was required within the law.

With the limited amount of detail available, how can you know that? This is not a DSR issue, it is a SOGA issue.

JamesJ35mm

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Only if it is outside of a reasonable time. However, if they agreed to a refund, they cannot reasonably reject the offer later, simply because of the lack of original packaging.

OP, how long after you took delivery of the shoes, did you inform the seller of the poor quality of the goods?

It was about 9 or 10 days after delivery? When I spoke to the guy on the phone he just said to 'send them back and they'd see what they could do' he did actually offer a refund.

Flyboy152

JamesJ35mm wrote: »

It was about 9 or 10 days after delivery? When I spoke to the guy on the phone he just said to 'send them back and they'd see what they could do' he did actually offer a refund.

This is actually very important, was it nine, or was it ten days and what was the actual date of delivery and what was the date you called them to report the fault?