Worn Trainers

masterthief

if they are running/football trainers, 5 miles daily is about average for what they're designed for (think about it - if you were an amateur or semi-pro middle or long distance runner you'd be clocking 5 miles daily, and footballers, rubgy players, etc also clock up a similar distance over the course of a week). do you think competitive (even if only at amateur level) runners woud be able to finance replacing their trainers every month?

and at JJB if they're only 20 quid but they are adidias, nike, puma, etc, that just means they're last season's style, so the price tag doesn't reflect what they were designed to do (if you'd bought them a couple of months earlier, they'd be in the same condition but you would have paid 40-70 quid for them).


get a refund or exchange.

Jake'sGran

luxor4t wrote: »

I think by law something has to be 'fit for purpose' , which these don't seem to be as it is not reasonable for shoes to wear out so fast.

JJB is a sports shop, so they can't claim that these were 'fashion' items (DD had shoes which fell apart that apparently were just meant for standing in!)

I was going to say exactly the same. It's part of the Sale of Goods Act which you can check on. I always take back everything that is wearing out too soon or food that is a bit iffy. Also, there is a rule about an automatic twelve months guarantee which I thought applied to everything but I could be wrong. I remember taking back three toasters within twelve months and getting replacements until in the end I bought a Kenwood. I hate being wripped off.