My battle against the evil shoe company aka who was in the right?

[table1349]

I know a place you can buy used underwear. Only worn once to church on Sunday.

Sorry, we are talking about shoes here, shoes that were worn an entire day by a person. I am not saying your friend is some sort of typhoid Mary, but there are over 100 types of foot fungi, not to mention that due to their natural environment, no matter the amount of washing they are one of the germiest parts of the body.

You have a point but what about all the people that try those same pairs of shoes on day after day? By the time you buy a pair of shoes there might have been 100+ feet in them from people trying them on for fit or style. Are those feet magically germ free?

If the shoe store does not have a policy that all shoes must be tried on with socks or foot sox then it is not a place that I will shop for shoes. Most health codes require that all footwear must be tried on in store with some sort of socks or even better foot sox. There is also a difference between a couple of minutes and 8 to 10 hours.

I doubt the show stores have sock police watching to make sure customers are wearing socks before they try on shoes. Most stores don't even have a clerk to help if needed. It's not the customers job to check to make sure the correct size shoe is in the box as shown.

I don't know about show stores, but the shoe stores we shop at do. They also have staff that waits on you since we go to real shoe stores, not the discount throw it all out on the isles places like Payless or Walmart. Where we buy our shoes they have one sample pair on display of each kind of shoe they sell, the stock is in the back. The sample is usually is some size small enough no one would want to steal it anyway. You tell the clerk you size and they go in back and bring out the pair in the size you requested. They also make sure you have some kind of sock on even if it is one of their little disposable booties before you try it on.

Maybe us hicks in the sticks just take hygiene a little more seriously or maybe we just get better service. Even at the Academy Sports the clerk checked the size of the shoes in the box when my wife bought some new athletic shoes. Perhaps you need to change where you shop for shoes.

 

[Designer]

.. the clerk checked the size of the shoes in the box ..

Yup, they always check. They check them when they take them out and they check them again when they put them back in.

Shoe clerk 101.

Before lunch.

 

[vintagesnaps]

In department stores where there are actual people who wait on customers, seems like they usually double check to make sure the shoes are in the correct box (matching the size on the shoes and on the box...). Probably to try to prevent returns because of a mix up.

Then again there are places like the clearance section upstairs at DSW where you fend for yourself and I usually try to make sure I've got the right box. But sometimes if you're in a hurry or just don't think to double check before you go I'm not sure if there's much that can be done with that store policy. I suppose there may have been people who brought in shoes that looked like they'd been worn quite a bit and have had them awhile and still wanted their money back so the store came up with this kind of policy.

 

[Frankinfuji]

Looks like a clear case of false description to me. The shoe size was part of the description of the product, and it was not accurate, retailer guilty and needs to repl e the product or be prosecuted.

“Any person who shall use in connection with any goods any false description or representation, including words or symbols tending falsely to describe or represent the same, and shall cause such goods to enter into commerce, shall be liable to a civil action by any person who believes that he is or is likely to be damaged by the use of any such false description or representation”. [15 USCS § 1125]

 

[table1349]

Looks like a clear case of false description to me. The shoe size was part of the description of the product, and it was not accurate, retailer guilty and needs to repl e the product or be prosecuted.

“Any person who shall use in connection with any goods any false description or representation, including words or symbols tending falsely to describe or represent the same, and shall cause such goods to enter into commerce, shall be liable to a civil action by any person who believes that he is or is likely to be damaged by the use of any such false description or representation”. [15 USCS § 1125]

And your proof of intent on the part of the shoe company is????????? Intent is a large part of such decisions.

 

[Designer]

Looks like a clear case of false description to me. The shoe size was part of the description of the product,

How do you know it was the same pair of shoes?

 

[vintagesnaps]

I guess you'd have to go to one of those 'self serve' type shoe stores to see what it's like, but basically the customers fend for themselves! There aren't any clerks or salespeople to assist customers so I don't think there'd be an expectation of getting waited on or shoes actually being in the correct boxes; so I don't think it would be a case of misrepresentation. I mean if a place is called Payless or Shoe Carnival doesn't the name give you some idea what to expect? lol (you'll find bargains and have as much fun as at a carnival?!)

 

[Designer]

I guess you'd have to go to one of those 'self serve' type shoe stores to see what it's like, ..

Been there, done that. I've bought lots of shoes at Payless, and I have nothing against them except for the quality of their shoes. I hope you haven't missed my point.

 

[Peeb]

If the shoe store does not have a policy that all shoes must be tried on with socks or foot sox then it is not a place that I will shop for shoes. Most health codes require that all footwear must be tried on in store with some sort of socks or even better foot sox. There is also a difference between a couple of minutes and 8 to 10 hours.

But the business is definitely evil if they follow health codes...

No proof that the business is evil, but the business COULD eat the loss for putting the wrong sized shoes in the 9.5 box. Customer could have caught the error, but it wasn't the customer's error, it was the vendors.

Not sure the vendor put the wrong shoes in the box? Well, it is STILL the vendor's fault as it was negligent of the clerk not to check the shoe sizing when ringing it up.

Store doesn't want to go to that bother for each transaction? Fine- just eat the cost of the shoes when this happens.

 

[Vtec44]

Not sure the vendor put the wrong shoes in the box? Well, it is STILL the vendor's fault as it was negligent of the clerk not to check the shoe sizing when ringing it up.

Store doesn't want to go to that bother for each transaction? Fine- just eat the cost of the shoes when this happens.

... and if the customers dont' want to have to go through the hassle, its 10 seconds to check the shoes size.... or several days arguing back and forth regardless of who's at fault. I guess it depends on how much time people have on their hands, and how they want to spend it. LOL

 

[Peeb]

Not sure the vendor put the wrong shoes in the box? Well, it is STILL the vendor's fault as it was negligent of the clerk not to check the shoe sizing when ringing it up.

Store doesn't want to go to that bother for each transaction? Fine- just eat the cost of the shoes when this happens.

... and if the customers dont' want to have to go through the hassle, its 10 seconds to check the shoes size.... or several days arguing back and forth regardless of who's at fault. I guess it depends on how much time people have on their hands, and how they want to spend it. LOL

Where I come from, retail is a customer-oriented business and the customer is always right in a circumstance where both sides could have done better. If you want to blame the customer and invite them to shop elsewhere, I'm pretty sure there will be other retailers who are happy to take their money! Your call....

OTOH, if you view customers as a vast unlimited resources and you want to weed out 'bad apples' who stupidly read your packaging without cross-checking the product, then the approach of smacking them in the face with a cold inflexible 'policy' has 'win' written all over it. You've successfully trimmed your retail tree of a stupid loser AND all his friends/family who will hear how harshly your business treats customers. LOL

 

[Designer]

I wonder what the store's side of the story is.

 

[pixmedic]

Not sure the vendor put the wrong shoes in the box? Well, it is STILL the vendor's fault as it was negligent of the clerk not to check the shoe sizing when ringing it up.

Store doesn't want to go to that bother for each transaction? Fine- just eat the cost of the shoes when this happens.

... and if the customers dont' want to have to go through the hassle, its 10 seconds to check the shoes size.... or several days arguing back and forth regardless of who's at fault. I guess it depends on how much time people have on their hands, and how they want to spend it. LOL

I dont think the actual return was the issue.
I believe the issue was that the shoes had been worn all day and returned "dirty", therefore unable to be resold. The store policy was not to accept returns that were not in
resaleable condition. Had the shoes been returned in the same condition they left the store in, im pretty sure the refund would have been given./

shoes were used, admittedly brought back dirty, full refund was expected, store refused to accept return based on their policy, store labeled "Evil".
its weird to me that people are so intently focused on the shoe size issue, when it clearly was not the actual problem with the return.
I mean, the guy wore them all day...wore them a full day before they were brought back.

and yes...I get it. customer service industry, customer is always right, etc etc...
business = evil, so sticking it to them isn't considered bad. they can take the hit, so its fine.
do some stores bend their own policy rules to make customers happy? of course. plenty of places go above and beyond. but why is the store "evil" for not breaking a rule that the customer should know when buying their product? the store is evil for not taking the hit when that return policy was clearly violated?
maybe its bad for business, maybe its just good form to bend a little to make a customer happy...but since when did refusing to break policy when someone doesn't follow the rules become "evil"?
why is the store the only entity here expected to be held accountable for their actions?

 

[table1349]

If the shoe store does not have a policy that all shoes must be tried on with socks or foot sox then it is not a place that I will shop for shoes. Most health codes require that all footwear must be tried on in store with some sort of socks or even better foot sox. There is also a difference between a couple of minutes and 8 to 10 hours.

But the business is definitely evil if they follow health codes...

No proof that the business is evil, but the business COULD eat the loss for putting the wrong sized shoes in the 9.5 box. Customer could have caught the error, but it wasn't the customer's error, it was the vendors.

Not sure the vendor put the wrong shoes in the box? Well, it is STILL the vendor's fault as it was negligent of the clerk not to check the shoe sizing when ringing it up.

Store doesn't want to go to that bother for each transaction? Fine- just eat the cost of the shoes when this happens.

Who says the store put the wrong size shoes in the box. It could have been another customer, it could have been the customer that bought the shoes. It wouldn't be the first time someone did such a thing. You make far too many assumptions, and you know what they say about assumptions.

Caveat emptor. The buyer has just as much responsibility to perform due diligence as does the seller when conducting any transaction.

 

[weepete]

I'm with the Evil Shoe Company I'm afraid. The issue was not that there is a problem with the shoe that would make the company responsible (like a manufacturing defect that made a shoe not fit for purpose), nor is it an issue with labeling, as shoes (and clothes) can vary in dimensions even for the ssme size depending on which company makes them. Most companies will take returns as long as the footwear has not been worn outside, which is more than they legally have to do. The real issue is that you and your friend did not check if they fit before use, and that, I'm afraid is on you and your friend.