Money Moral Dilemma: Would you replace the shoes?

Seakay · 10 February 2010 at 2:11PM

I don't see any indication from the description that the shoes did not fit. As he was behind her when rushing to get the train he could not have trodden on her toe - he must have shoved her in order to squeeze himself onto the train and trodden on her heel, which would have forced the shoe off, probably quite painfully.
At the very least he has hurt her, caused her to lose property, made her late for work (as she will have to get that shoe or another) and caused embarrassment.
As the underground was mentioned I am assuming that this was London so all that will happen is that someone else will step on her shoeless foot, break her toe and swear at her, she'll have her pay docked and a bad mark on her record for not having a reasonable excuse.
Obviously, if you are at fault you should make amends. The style of footwear should not make a difference to whether it is ok to be careless of who you barge into or tread on.

A.Jones · 10 February 2010 at 2:24PM

No doubt the Daily Mail will soon be reporting on the latest scam to hit the streets (well train stations). Wear an old pair of shoes, make sure one is not secure, purposely block the person behind you as they are getting on to a train so they they knock you from behind, make the shoe fall down the gap, fake some tears, pocket the cash. Repeat at the next train station, or on the next train.

Solomon_Broad · 10 February 2010 at 2:44PM

Why is she wearing shoes so big that someone treading on them can pull them off? What on earth???

She should be more careful of her footwear. Maybe some laces or something would help. Or some shoes that fit...

Hels28 · 10 February 2010 at 2:58PM

I've had several pairs of shoes "pulled" off when on escalators - but they were not bad fitting and I can see if someone was hit hard enough that the shoe might well come off.

However, no money should be exchanged, but the shoe should simply be retrieved from the track, unless of course the heel was broken and therefore they could not be worn any more. I think if someone has caused irreparable damage, costs must be incurred by the person at fault.

Pee · 10 February 2010 at 2:58PM

If her first approach is to be furious, I wouldn't offer to help at all.

If I felt that it was my fault, I would offer to buy another pair from New Look, say, but I would be inclined to think that offering money would be accepting liability and she might then be able to prove they were £500 Jimmy Choo's.

It sounds to me like they weren't the right shoes for the occassion.

laughing_cow · 10 February 2010 at 3:00PM

wildthing01 wrote: »

love how people are assuming this is in london, as if london's the only place in the world! up north we're a lot friendlier (i know - i lived in london for a few years), so i hope peter would be quite contrite and helpful (although i'm not sure he should buy a whole new pair of shoes).

In the MSE weekly email it says the dilemma is based on someone who works at MSE Towers......which is located in London.

I'm not sure about this one being real - I think it sounds like the kind of rubbish excuse I would use when I was younger for being late to work:
"Erm, sorry I'm late. These shopping bags? Ah, well...... I had to go shoe shopping before work because some guy stood on me and I lost my shoe. Honest guv."

wonko · 10 February 2010 at 3:06PM

Depends on the circumstances, I suppose.

I see the possibility of negligence on behalf of the stepper on the shoe and the risk and ownership thereof of the stepee (looser of the shoe) by wearing inappropriate footwear for the circumstances and situation. The risk is that this would happen and by choosing to wear those shoes on this occasion, the risk is accepted..

Domestic insurance normally carries some form of 3rd party liability. This is a good cover for the situation which was presumably, accidental.

What would I do? Probably cough up and then try to claim on the insurance policy.

mishelly · 10 February 2010 at 3:11PM

When they get off at their destination he should give her a piggy back to the shoe shop and they can split the cost of a pair of shoes 50/50. He only damaged one shoe. Just a pair for the day, not a stupidly expensive pair.

Robothell · 10 February 2010 at 3:12PM

Assuming the shoe was either unable to be retrieved or unusable if retrieved I think it is probably appropriate for him to pay something towards a new pair.

Having said that it would be a good scam to get a new pair of shoes, just flicking it off in a crowd and blaming one of the many people around you - are we sure the heel wasn't broken on the "lost" shoe?

camaj · 10 February 2010 at 3:18PM

Seakay wrote: »

I don't see any indication from the description that the shoes did not fit.

The fact that it came off by someone stepping on it indicates it was insufficiently secured.

Money Moral Dilemma: Would you replace the shoes?

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free