Faulty Boots

georgewickstaff

Hi all,

Be grateful for any advice RE the following

On 14th October my wife bought a pair of boots from a shop in Drogheda - €65.00 - standard brown leather boots. Appeared to be good quality. She wore them for going out somewhere smart etc so there was very little wear

This morning she walked across a patch of grass and they fell apart. No exageration. They almost disolved.

We went to take the boots back to the shop but rather alarmingly, a sign states that "Boots sold are fashion boots, not waterproof boots and no returns are allowed'. EDIT - This sign appeared in the last week and we certainly did not see it or were advised this was the case on the day we bought them.

I have a receipt etc but the shop appear to be putting up a fierce fight. It is obvious a lot of other people must have had problems.

Any advice?
Many thanks

runawaybishop

georgewickstaff wrote: »

Hi all,

Be grateful for any advice RE the following

On 14th October my wife bought a pair of boots from a shop in Drogheda - €65.00 - standard brown leather boots. Appeared to be good quality. She wore them for going out somewhere smart etc so there was very little wear

This morning she walked across a patch of grass and they fell apart. No exageration. They almost disolved.

We went to take the boots back to the shop but rather alarmingly, a sign states that "Boots sold are fashion boots, not waterproof boots and no returns are allowed'. EDIT - This sign appeared in the last week and we certainly did not see it or were advised this was the case on the day we bought them.

I have a receipt etc but the shop appear to be putting up a fierce fight. It is obvious a lot of other people must have had problems.

Any advice?
Many thanks

That sign means next to nothing, they cannot remove your statutory rights. Insist on a refund and if they refuse inform them you will take them to small clams court.

Ravelleman

The sign is surely illegal.

emeldc

Ravelleman wrote: »

The sign is surely illegal.

Most if not all disclaimer signs are not worth the paper they're written on. They do not affect your statutory rights.

Edit; I found a piece from an 'Irish Times' article a while back:

"When you buy something – and it doesn’t matter if you pay full price or get 98 per cent off – you have a right to expect it to be of an acceptable standard, fit for its intended purpose and as advertised. If your hard-won sale item does not comply with any of these three rules, you are entitled to get the product repaired or replaced, or to get a refund. No matter what the sign says. If the sign adds the post-script “this does not affect your statutory rights”, then the retailer is in the clear. Once the product is of “merchantable quality”, fit for purpose and as described, you have no right to go looking for a refund or an exchange."

Galadriel

runawaybishop wrote: »

That sign means next to nothing, they cannot remove your statutory rights. Insist on a refund and if they refuse inform them you will take them to small clams court.

They don't have to refund you, they can offer refund, repair, replace.

PinkFly

runawaybishop wrote: »

That sign means next to nothing, they cannot remove your statutory rights. Insist on a refund and if they refuse inform them you will take them to small clams court.

They are entitled to give you a repair (but its sounds like they are unrepairable) a replacement and then a refund.
Sounds like they are trying to curve the amount of returns back and I could make a good guess at what shop it is

georgewickstaff

Thanks to you all. Yes it is a certain shop in a retail park near Mothercare..

Very disappointing really as my wife was really pleased with them. No exageration but walking across grass this morning caused them to fall to bits. Its like a practical joke!

runawaybishop

Galadriel wrote: »

They don't have to refund you, they can offer refund, repair, replace.

Going by the OP a refund or a repair is not appropriate and you can insist on a refund.

PinkFly wrote: »

They are entitled to give you a repair (but its sounds like they are unrepairable) a replacement and then a refund.
Sounds like they are trying to curve the amount of returns back and I could make a good guess at what shop it is

They aren't entitled to anything. Consumer law is lovely and vague in this area - the response must be appropriate. From what the op describes only a refund is appropriate.

Galadriel

runawaybishop wrote: »

Going by the OP a refund or a repair is not appropriate and you can insist on a refund.

Why do they have to offer a refund? surely they can offer a replacement or a repair (if feasible of course).

runawaybishop

Galadriel wrote: »

Why do they have to offer a refund? surely they can offer a replacement or a repair (if feasible of course).

The boots are not fit for purpose - a repair or replacement wont change that. The OP can rightly insist on a refund.

D3PO

runawaybishop wrote: »

The boots are not fit for purpose - a repair or replacement wont change that. The OP can rightly insist on a refund.

and you can tell that this is a design flaw in the boot and not just a faulty product by an online post.

wow your good .....

the OP cant rightly insist on a refund as none of us know that a repair or replacement are unfeasible.

runawaybishop

D3PO wrote: »

and you can tell that this is a design flaw in the boot and not just a faulty product by an online post.

wow your good .....

the OP cant rightly insist on a refund as none of us know that a repair or replacement are unfeasible.

I think its a fair assumption going by the OP.

D3PO

runawaybishop wrote: »

I think its a fair assumption going by the OP.

yes but you replied that they could definitively have a refund. This isn't the case its based on your assumption so the posters that have said any of the 3 R's can be offered are correct unless something new in regards the situation comes to light.

runawaybishop

D3PO wrote: »

yes but you replied that they could definitively have a refund. This isn't the case its based on your assumption so the posters that have said any of the 3 R's can be offered are correct unless something new in regards the situation comes to light.

The offer must be appropriate. If the boots are not fit for purpose, which seems to be the case, then a refund is most appropriate solution and the OP can insist on it. The law is vague though, you could make a case that you can always insist on a refund.

edit:

Reject item - Full refund

If you agreed to buy something and it simply does not work from the outset, then you are entitled to reject the goods and get a refund from the seller.
- See more at: http://www.consumerhelp.ie/faulty-goods#sthash.dW75XjeS.dpuf

Galadriel

runawaybishop wrote: »

The offer must be appropriate. If the boots are not fit for purpose, which seems to be the case, then a refund is most appropriate solution and the OP can insist on it. The law is vague though, you could make a case that you can always insist on a refund.

edit:

Reject item - Full refund

If you agreed to buy something and it simply does not work from the outset, then you are entitled to reject the goods and get a refund from the seller.
- See more at: http://www.consumerhelp.ie/faulty-goods#sthash.dW75XjeS.dpuf

But how do you know another pair of boots won't be fit for purpose? Just because they have a sign up saying not water proof doesn't mean every pair of boots will fall apart the second it touches wet grass - but if they did then they are obviously not fit for purpose and it doesn't matter what they put on the sign they would have to refund people.

But we still don't know enough either way so I still don't see how the op can demand a refund, he obviously is entitled to one of the three R's as the boots are faulty.

sandin

No shoe is waterproof unless it is stated as such.

The op does not say if the shoes were worn every day or once a week. Nor where the shoes were worn, yet some posters seem to be 100% sure of their advice.

Bring them into a shoe repair place and ask their opinion - at least you'll have a semi professional opinion to go on rather than an online forum

Sulla Felix

sandin wrote: »

No shoe is waterproof unless it is stated as such.

The op does not say if the shoes were worn every day or once a week. Nor where the shoes were worn, yet some posters seem to be 100% sure of their advice.

Bring them into a shoe repair place and ask their opinion - at least you'll have a semi professional opinion to go on rather than an online forum

I don't think most people expect every pair of shoes to be waterproof, but they should at least be water resistant enough to maintain their integrity over time. We do live in Ireland, they are going to be worn on a wet day undoubtedly.

runawaybishop

Galadriel wrote: »

But how do you know another pair of boots won't be fit for purpose?

Because I read the post?

sandin

Sulla Felix wrote: »

I don't think most people expect every pair of shoes to be waterproof, but they should at least be water resistant enough to maintain their integrity over time. We do live in Ireland, they are going to be worn on a wet day undoubtedly.

quite incorrect - classic example would be a pair of converse. Do you expect a pair of canvas shoes to be water resistant in any way whatsoever?

You check the weather and you use your judgement. Sometime you'll get it wronga nd you learn for the next time. That's life.

dudara

OP - I'm going to assume here that there was no abuse or harsh treatment of the boots in the period since you purchased them.

In my opinion, a pair of boots should not disintegrate while wearing. They may get damp, absorb water etc, but not fall apart. So I would definitely be of the opinion that they are not fit for purpose, and therefore you should get a refund, replacement or repair.

If this is not forthcoming, I would be going to the small claims court.

runawaybishop

sandin wrote: »

quite incorrect - classic example would be a pair of converse. Do you expect a pair of canvas shoes to be water resistant in any way whatsoever?

You check the weather and you use your judgement. Sometime you'll get it wronga nd you learn for the next time. That's life.

No, you don't expect them to be waterproof but they shouldn't disintegrate, as per OP below

georgewickstaff wrote: »

This morning she walked across a patch of grass and they fell apart. No exageration. They almost disolved.

ted1

runawaybishop wrote: »

The boots are not fit for purpose - a repair or replacement wont change that. The OP can rightly insist on a refund.

No the OP can't insist on a refund, you are providing false information.

A remedy can be put in place, its up to the shop as to weather a repair, replacement or refund is issued

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/consumer_affairs/consumer_protection/consumer_complaints/how_to_make_a_consumer_complaint.html
*****************
Before you make a complaint be aware of your consumer rights under the law. If you have a written contract or description of the goods or services read what it states. Your complaint will almost certainly be much more effective if you are aware of your rights. Remember: A repair, a replacement or a refund are all possible options where goods are faulty.
****************************************

runawaybishop

ted1 wrote: »

No the OP can't insist on a refund, you are providing false information.

A remedy can be put in place, its up to the shop as to weather a repair, replacement or refund is issued

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/consumer_affairs/consumer_protection/consumer_complaints/how_to_make_a_consumer_complaint.html
*****************
Before you make a complaint be aware of your consumer rights under the law. If you have a written contract or description of the goods or services read what it states. Your complaint will almost certainly be much more effective if you are aware of your rights. Remember: A repair, a replacement or a refund are all possible options where goods are faulty.
****************************************

This is a major fault and a refund can be insisted on.

D3PO

runawaybishop wrote: »

This is a major fault In your opinion and a refund can be insisted on.

Luckily your opinion isn't consumer law. Lets stick to the facts shall we. The shop can do any of the 3 R's and if you think its a major fault and they disagree its up to you to go and prove it otherwise or go to small claims.

lets try give correct impartial advise here and not opinion based advise. Makes things a lot easier for people who don't know their rights.

runawaybishop

D3PO wrote: »

Luckily your opinion isn't consumer law. Lets stick to the facts shall we. The shop can do any of the 3 R's and if you think its a major fault and they disagree its up to you to go and prove it otherwise or go to small claims.

lets try give correct impartial advise here and not opinion based advise. Makes things a lot easier for people who don't know their rights.

The boots seem to be clearly not fit for purpose. It is reasonable therefore to insist on a refund. Why would the OP accept anything less? Obviously if the shop refuse a refund the OP is within their rights to go to the small claims court. By standing firm, on their rights the OP has a better chance of avoiding that hassle.

Why is there such an issue with this?

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

mrsbyrne

runawaybishop wrote: »

The boots seem to be clearly not fit for purpose. It is reasonable therefore to insist on a refund. Why would the OP accept anything less? Obviously if the shop refuse a refund the OP is within their rights to go to the small claims court. By standing firm, on their rights the OP has a better chance of avoiding that hassle.

Why is there such an issue with this?

There is an issue with it because you are ignoring consumer law which quite clearly states that the retailer has the right to offer a replacement, a repair, or a refund. The customer does not have a right to dictate which remedy is applied.
Your options

If you bought an item that has a fault, either major or minor, you have different options depending on different things. In all cases you should act quickly. We have given a few examples below of the most common problems callers to the National Consumer Agency have.
Reject item - Full refund

If you agreed to buy something and it simply does not work from the outset, then you are entitled to reject the goods and get a refund from the seller. Examples include a new washing machine which fills with water but does not spin or drain, or a new TV set which the audio doesn’t work on. In both of these examples, the consumer has discovered a major problem/fault with the item as soon as they go to use it for the first time. In the shop they agreed to buy it, but clearly there is something wrong with the one they were given. The consumer has not “accepted” the item – they brought the item home but it does not do what it said it would and the consumer had the right to reject it. They can return it to the shop and demand a full refund. This will terminate the contract they had for the item with the seller.
Repair

If you start using the item for some time then it is deemed that you have accepted the item. But if you discover a fault then you are entitled to have the item repaired or replaced free of charge – provided you did not cause the damage. If the fault occurs within the first 6 months of owning the item, it is accepted that the fault was there when you bought it.
In general, the seller can offer to repair the item first. This should be a permanent repair and the problem should not reoccur. If the same fault occurs again, then you should be entitled to a replacement or refund. If you are not happy with the retailer’s offer to repair the item, you can say no - but if you do this, you may have to use the Small Claims process if you want to take the matter further.
Remember, the retailer may charge you for the repair if you have been responsible for the damage to the product.
Replacement

If it is impossible to repair the item, or if it is more convenient than repairing it, then the seller may replace it for you. For example, if you bought a laptop and it overheated, causing significant damage to itself, it may be very difficult or even impossible for the seller to have the laptop fixed for you, so they may offer to replace it instead.
If you opt for a replacement, it should be the same as the item you bought, or of similar quality and price. You should not have to pay extra for a replacement and should be given the difference in price if the replacement costs less than the item you originally bought.
Price reduction

If the item has been repaired or replaced and it is still not doing what it is supposed to do correctly, you could look to have a reduction in the price you paid for it, if you are happy to put up with it. For example, if you bought a bicycle with 21 gears which develops a fault and needs to be repaired. After the repair you are told that the bike now only has 18 working gears. You may still be happy to keep it with 18 working gears but you could look for a reduction in the price you paid for it.


What to do

Your contract is with the retailer or supplier who sold you the product so if there is a fault, it is up to them to fix it. You may also have extra protection if you have a guarantee or warranty from the manufacturer. It is the retailer’s responsibility to provide a remedy under the warranty, unless they have opted out of this and told you this. So you should check the terms and conditions of the warranty.
You should return the faulty item to the seller as soon as possible and explain what the problem is. If you think it might be useful, print out this page and bring it with you.
Other options

You have the option to use the Small Claims process as long as the claim does not exceed €2,000. There is a small application fee and the service is provided in your local District Court.
If you paid for the goods by credit or debit card, your card provider may agree to reverse the transaction. This is called a chargeback. Contact your card provider (the bank who issued you the credit or debit card) immediately and give them details of your transaction. Rules on chargeback schemes vary between providers.
If you have any queries about your options, you can contact us.
Remember:

• You have no rights under consumer protection law if you change your mind about the goods you have purchased. However, some shops may offer you an exchange as a gesture of goodwill
• The shop is entitled to request proof of purchase, but this doesn't necessarily have to be the shop receipt. You could show your credit or debit card statement if you used one or any other documentation that proves it was purchased in that particular shop or retail chain

If you received the item as a gift, you will need to have a proof of purchase if you need to return it ot the seller for any reason. This can take the form of a gift receipt, which you may need to request from the person who bought the item.
-

runawaybishop

mrsbyrne wrote: »

There is an issue with it because you are ignoring consumer law which quite clearly states that the retailer has the right to offer a replacement, a repair, or a refund. The customer does not have a right to dictate which remedy is applied.
Your options

If you bought an item that has a fault, either major or minor, you have different options depending on different things. In all cases you should act quickly. We have given a few examples below of the most common problems callers to the National Consumer Agency have.
Reject item - Full refund

If you agreed to buy something and it simply does not work from the outset, then you are entitled to reject the goods and get a refund from the seller.

Did you read what you posted? You just quoted what I have been saying. The goods have a major fault. No point posted a wall of text when you haven't read it.

D3PO

explain to me what consists of a major fault and what consists of a minor fault .....

its a matter of opinion. Its laughable that you can claim there is a major fault here when you have never seen the product.

Gimme a break.

runawaybishop

D3PO wrote: »

explain to me what consists of a major fault and what consists of a minor fault .....

its a matter of opinion. Its laughable that you can claim there is a major fault here when you have never seen the product.

Gimme a break.

Sure thing, i'll unfollow the thread now. Have fun.

D3PO

runawaybishop wrote: »

Sure thing, i'll unfollow the thread now. Have fun.

yep always a good option to do that when you cant back up your point....

dudara

Posters - enough squabbling. It's derailing the thread.

dudara

username123

D3PO wrote: »

explain to me what consists of a major fault and what consists of a minor fault .....

Id consider a pair of boots that actually dissolved when they were worn to walk across a patch of wet grass to have a major fault.

the_syco

runawaybishop wrote: »

It is reasonable therefore to insist on a refund.

So? Consumer law protects both buyer and seller. The shop chooses which of the 3 R's (Repair, Replace, Refund) it goes with.

=-=

OP, Google the make and model, and check if there has been any notification from the manufacturer? Sometimes there may have been a flaw with a certain batch, etc.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

D3PO

username123 wrote: »

Id consider a pair of boots that actually dissolved when they were worn to walk across a patch of wet grass to have a major fault.

yes because the statement that a pair of boots were dissolved by water isn't even a tiny bit exaggerated ....

must have been some very localised strong acid rain that fell near the OP :rolleyes:

keithclancy

Go back and get a refund, don't leave the shop until they give you your money.

Put it simply as, the boots disintegrated when she walked through grass, do not become aggressive but just simply say that you will stand there until your issue is resolved.

Waterproof would mean they do not prevent your feet from getting wet.

Not that they fall apart when exposed to water, if this was the case then they are not fit for purpose in Ireland ... maybe Saudi Arabia or something.

If they put up the sign after wards I suspect the whole batch is faulty and they bought them off a company going out of business and now have nowhere to RMA them to.

emeldc

A lot of 'if's', 'but's' and 'assumptions' here.
OP, is there any chance you could throw up a picture of these cardboard boots as it might clear up a few things.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

D3PO

Melendez wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Im not making up any story. Im the one saying that NONE of us know the situation with the boots and therefore the OPINION that a refund is 100% warranted as opposed to the alternative R's repair or replacement is nothing more than opinion and doesn't reflect the facts of consumer law.

if others on here perhaps stopped imagining what the state of the boots are and dealt with the facts perhaps the OP could get some useable advise rather than being stoked up with a potential false view of their entitlement to a refund ...

Oh and I never said the OP wasn't telling the thruth but telling the truth and exaggerating things slightly are very different things. When words like the boods dissolved or disintegrated are used its reasonable to any rational person to think that the emotional involvement in the situation means things are portrayed in a slightly exaggerated fashion tbh.

username123

D3PO wrote: »

yes because the statement that a pair of boots were dissolved by water isn't even a tiny bit exaggerated ....

must have been some very localised strong acid rain that fell near the OP :rolleyes:

We can only go on what's been posted and my understanding of boards.ie is that we do not assume the OP is lying when we respond?

D3PO

username123 wrote: »

We can only go on what's been posted and my understanding of boards.ie is that we do not assume the OP is lying when we respond?

Boards members should also understand the difference between lying and through frustration exaggerating the point unintentionally. I never once said or remotely implied the OP was lying.

To say a pair of boots were coming apart due to stitching failing is something that's actually possible, to say boots have disintegrated/dissolved due to walking on wet grass is actually impossible unless said boots were made of tissue paper or a similar material.

I again refer to the point Ive made a half dozen time sin this thread that some people conveniently are ignoring. I openly accept I don't know the condition of the boots nor does anybody else on this thread.

Im not the one saying the customer is 100% absolutely entitled to a refund though Ive actually based my comment on what the OP is entitled to under consumer law based on the fact that I don't know the situation.

The fact is you also have no idea of the condition of the boot, nor are you I suspect qualified in footwear design to comment on whether the problem in the boot can be repaired, or replaced (which would be a reasonable option should an investigation show the issue is not in fact an inherent design flaw in the type of boot rather than a component failure in one individual pair of these boots.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

D3PO

Melendez wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

certainly it indicates they are unusable. But the sole coming away which would be what id call "falling apart" could be down to bad stitching that could infact be easily repaired we really don't know what falling apart actually refers to.

Can you or anybody with a straight face actually hand on heart say you believe that "they almost dissolved" isn't an exaggeration given that the molecular structure of the material used in the manufacturing of footwear (rubber, leather, suede etc)it makes that an impossibility.

Now if the OP comes back on and tells me the boots were actually made of tissue paper then I will retract that statement but I very much doubt that is what the boots in question were made of.

Sulla Felix

sandin wrote: »

quite incorrect - classic example would be a pair of converse. Do you expect a pair of canvas shoes to be water resistant in any way whatsoever?

You check the weather and you use your judgement. Sometime you'll get it wronga nd you learn for the next time. That's life.

I didn't say you wouldn't expect to get wet toes wearing a pair of converse in the wet. I would expect that the converse wouldn't "fall apart".