Sports Direct leaking boots

SheilaH27

I bought pair of Karrimoor walking boots for £85 in Sports Direct, after a few wears they have
let in water, to the extent they are soaked. Took them back - no receipt as bought a few months ago and paid cash. Manager agreed boots faulty and would exchange, however the green boots I purchased are now reduced to £50 and not available, the black ones are £80 and he wants me to pay the difference as I have no receipt. Surely this is not right. Help please!

lincroft1710

You have no proof of purchase, and the equivalent boots are now £35 less than the price you are claiming you paid (he has no confirmation of this) so asking for a £30 contribution does not seem to be unfair.

stuartJo1989

lincroft1710 wrote: »

You have no proof of purchase, and the equivalent boots are now £35 less than the price you are claiming you paid (he has no confirmation of this) so asking for a £30 contribution does not seem to be unfair.

Well.....

I think you are right, but ONLY BECAUSE there is no proof of purchase.

If it could be established that OP bought from SD then SD would be liable under the statutory consumer rights; potentially more favorable than what is being offered.

lincroft1710

stuartJo1989 wrote: »

Well.....

I think you are right, but ONLY BECAUSE there is no proof of purchase.

If it could be established that OP bought from SD then SD would be liable under the statutory consumer rights; potentially more favorable than what is being offered.

Even if that could be established, what is very important in consumer rights is the date of purchase. Under 6 months from date of purchase and the rights are more generous.

stuartJo1989

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Even if that could be established, what is very important in consumer rights is the date of purchase. Under 6 months from date of purchase and the rights are more generous.

Hey listen, if SD are entertaining the claim in the first place then its a miracle in itself :rotfl:

George_Michael

stuartJo1989 wrote: »

Well.....

I think you are right, but ONLY BECAUSE there is no proof of purchase.

Maybe that's why the first 6 words in Lincroft's reply were:

lincroft1710 wrote: »

You have no proof of purchase,

stuartJo1989

George_Michael wrote: »

Maybe that's why the first 6 words in Lincroft's reply were:

And Maybe that's why the first 6 words in my reply were:

me wrote:

Well.... I think you are right

Maybe I was just a bit concerned that lindcroft didn't refer to the fact that OP has statuary rights if they can prove the purchase (POP). Such an action could lead to OP getting the false impression that they have no rights with POP.

lincroft1710

stuartJo1989 wrote: »

Maybe I was just a bit concerned that lindcroft didn't refer to the fact that OP has statuary rights if they can prove the purchase (POP). Such an action could lead to OP getting the false impression that they have no rights with POP.

I usually only reply to facts as stated, so as OP said she had no proof of purchase, I answered her question on that basis. I didn't see any need to explain her statutory rights if she did have POP as this didn't apply in her case.

stuartJo1989

lincroft1710 wrote: »

I usually only reply to facts as stated, so as OP said she had no proof of purchase, I answered her question on that basis. I didn't see any need to explain her statutory rights if she did have POP as this didn't apply in her case.

That's absolutely fine.

I, however, felt that it was also helpful to elaborate so that OP could be motivated towards actually looking for the POP, as they would then have legal rights (more so if SD have accepted that there is a fault).

Not sure why we are being made to explain ourselves to each other though.... I simply elaborated on a perfectly valid point that you made (something which George Michael couldn't comprehend)

SheilaH27

Thanks for all your replies, SD came up trumps, Thanks to the manager, I gave him the dates I thought boots were purchased and he checked through records, found the day and took that as POP, therefore I got the boots refunded at the higher price and could replace with the same pair, just hoping that these don’t leak, but have kept receipt!!

lincroft1710

Given all the facts of the case, that is a major result. Well done!