My rights with school shoes?

daytona0

How do you know they were very well cared for when they are on the feet of a child who is at school for most of the day?

What has the retailer done wrong here? They've accepted the shoes back, sent them off to the manufacturer (incurring a cost) and been told that they are NOT FAULTY. They have then returned the item back to you (incurring another cost) and are so out of pocket already! So I kinda get the "spent a lot of time and effort trying to help me already" comment they made, ESPECIALLY if they gave advice which you may have ignored (ie where to go to get the issue fixed).

Whilst I can't accuse you of anything (because there is no proof), be advised that it is very convenient that the shoes have disappeared on the return! It is not impossible that you've received the parcel and binned/kept them in the hopes that the retailer refunds or replaces the 'lost' package. Classic scam. So in that respect, be prepared for a possible investigation with their chosen courier (which may take a while). Good news is that you'll eventually get it resolved, unless you're doing something naughty

If you don't end up getting the shoes then just do a letter before action and then take them to small claims court. Also, if you dispute the non faulty diagnosis then go and get an independent fault report for the shoes and present it to the company. Then go for LBA and then court. Easy peasy. [NOTE: I'm not familiar with the new regulations, only SOGA, so the information may be inaccurate. I would suggest getting clarification first]

It is a shame that you don't have the shoes now as you could have given ThumbRemote's advice more thought before taking such action.

Sammykins

How do I know they were well cared for? Well quite apart from the fact that I myself made sure the shoes were cleaned pretty much daily (they were patent leather and I made a point of them remaining clean and shiny). My daughter is also extremely careful with her belongings - her school shoes last year lasted her the whole school year with barely a mark on them!

Secondly - I have incurred costs to return the shoes to the retailer too, but unlike them, I spent extra to get the parcel sent tracked to make sure it did not get lost. I had nothing to gain by them getting lost, and seeing as the manufacturer themselves told me on the phone the shoes sounded faulty, I had no reason to believe otherwise.

Thirdly - I find it rather offensive that you would even hint at me being dishonest. I am not in the business of buying things and complaining - for what reason? Had I got the shoes back, which are my property, I would have taken them to have the Velcro replaced. The shoes have not materialised and I am more than happy for anyone to investigate anything in this matter as I have better things to do than to try and scam the retailer.

agrinnall

Sammykins wrote: »

I called last week to ask where the shoes were and I was told they are probably lost, they didn't send them back tracked or anything as they had "spent a lot of time and effort trying to help me already".

Ignoring all the issues of whether they were faulty or it's just wear and tear, this is the thing that will get you your money back. You still own the shoes, so the retailer has a duty of care to return them to you. Having failed to do so they need to compensate you for the loss, and without the shoes as evidence that they were not in pristine condition I don't think they can do anything other than provide a full refund.

I would send a Letter Before Action, and if they don't pay up in a reasonable time (two weeks would be my suggestion) then issue a small claim for the full cost, and I'd add in the postage costs you paid too.

https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome

ThumbRemote

Sammykins wrote: »

Thirdly - I find it rather offensive that you would even hint at me being dishonest. I am not in the business of buying things and complaining - for what reason? Had I got the shoes back, which are my property, I would have taken them to have the Velcro replaced. The shoes have not materialised and I am more than happy for anyone to investigate anything in this matter as I have better things to do than to try and scam the retailer.

Don't worry about it, they have a habit of making such suggestions to people, then get defensive and argumentative when challenged.

On the other hand agrinnalls advice is excellent, although personally I'd send them a standard letter first to explain the situation, point out their legal responsibilities and ask if they would consider supplying another pair of shoes as a gesture of goodwill. If nothing comes of that, then I'd escalate it to an LBA.

pogofish

I'f I'd worn shoes using velcro closures to school any time, they would have been promptly removed from my feet and I'd have probably earned myself a stint in the punishment room to think it over - A room lined with locked metal cupboards and filing cabinets to bounce-off.

This would not have been an acceptable standard of dress!

peachyprice

pogofish wrote: »

I'f I'd worn shoes using velcro closures to school any time, they would have been promptly removed from my feet and I'd have probably earned myself a stint in the punishment room to think it over - A room lined with locked metal cupboards and filing cabinets to bounce-off.

This would not have been an acceptable standard of dress!

In primary school?

daytona0

Sammykins wrote: »

How do I know they were well cared for? Well quite apart from the fact that I myself made sure the shoes were cleaned pretty much daily (they were patent leather and I made a point of them remaining clean and shiny). My daughter is also extremely careful with her belongings - her school shoes last year lasted her the whole school year with barely a mark on them![/quote[

I thought your beef was over the velcro, not the cleanliness and shininess of the shoes!

Secondly - I have incurred costs to return the shoes to the retailer too, but unlike them, I spent extra to get the parcel sent tracked to make sure it did not get lost. I had nothing to gain by them getting lost, and seeing as the manufacturer themselves told me on the phone the shoes sounded faulty, I had no reason to believe otherwise.

You chose the tracked method as an optional extra. In reality, the tracked method doesn't differ too much from normal delivery; you are still entitled to make a lost item claim either way.

Thirdly - I find it rather offensive that you would even hint at me being dishonest. I am not in the business of buying things and complaining - for what reason? Had I got the shoes back, which are my property, I would have taken them to have the Velcro replaced. The shoes have not materialised and I am more than happy for anyone to investigate anything in this matter as I have better things to do than to try and scam the retailer.

Why do you find it offensive? I can guarantee that you are dishonest to some extent; you are human like the rest of us (aren't you?). Besides, it was speculation and I NEVER accused you of anything. So chill

daytona0

ThumbRemote wrote: »

Don't worry about it, they have a habit of making such suggestions to people, then get defensive and argumentative when challenged.

Indeed, it is such a crime pointing out how a situation may run congruent to a fairly common scam and how this can impact on the viewpoint of a third party. You make me feel like I accused OP of it!

I know you said that agnirall's advice was excellent, and it was. The key point to bear in mind is that my post also introduced the exact same thing, albiet with less information. You didn't even acknowledge that. If you turned round and said "that daytona0 is very frank and maybe he should tone down a bit, but he brought up a good idea in regards to the LBE and court action" then fair play! But noo, all about the negatives. Even the OP, who was "offended", received my post better than you

susancs

agrinnall wrote: »

Ignoring all the issues of whether they were faulty or it's just wear and tear, this is the thing that will get you your money back. You still own the shoes, so the retailer has a duty of care to return them to you. Having failed to do so they need to compensate you for the loss, and without the shoes as evidence that they were not in pristine condition I don't think they can do anything other than provide a full refund.

I would send a Letter Before Action, and if they don't pay up in a reasonable time (two weeks would be my suggestion) then issue a small claim for the full cost, and I'd add in the postage costs you paid too.

https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome

I think this is good advice. I have purchased school shoes from Clarks and Startrite, when my daughters were in Primary school and the velcro bar part of the shoe had no problems and they outgrew the shoes as opposed to issues with the strap. However the issue of faulty shoes is now secondary to the fact they have not returned the shoes.

A letter along the lines of:

Name of
Address

Date

Letter before Court Action

Dear Sir or Madam,

Re: Return of my shoes or £41 for the cost of shoes.

I purchased a pair of children's shoes on ? date and at a cost of £41. After contacting you on ? date about a fault with the velcro on the shoes, I was asked to return the shoes to you for inspection. This was done on ? date by tracked delivery. After inspecting the shoes, it was stated on ? date that the fault could be considered normal wear and tear and that the shoes were being returned back to me.

I have not received the shoes back and upon contacting your office, I have been informed that you do not know where my shoes are.

As you are aware you have a duty of care to safeguard and return my property back to me and as such I request that this is done within 14 days of receipt of this letter. If this cannot be done, I will expect a cheque for £41, to compensate me for the loss. I enclose a copy of the proof of purchase, showing you the goods were purchased for £41.

To avoid taking court action, I am willing to use Alternative Dispute Resolution to resolve this issue.

If I do not receive a satisfactory response from you within 28 days of the date of this letter, I intend to issue proceedings against you in the county court without further notice. This may increase your liability for costs.

I refer you to the Practice Direction on pre-action conduct under the Civil Procedure Rules, and in particular to paragraph 4 which sets out the sanctions the court may impose if you fail to comply with the Practice Direction.
I look forward to your acknowledgement.
Yours faithfully

P.s. Get proof of postage

pogofish

peachyprice wrote: »

In primary school?

Yes - If you couldn't tie your laces, as well as the above "containment" you could expect to be given a pair of shoe boxes with holes cut in the lid to put on your feet to clomp around in until you learned to tie for yourself.

Of course if you damaged the boxes, which was pretty easy you could expect a whole other layer of punishment.