To expect a refund/credit note despite having no receipt.

(64 Posts)
LEMmingaround Mon 20-Jan-14 20:13:15

So we bought DD a pair of ankle boots for school, at the end of nov begining of december.Not sure when. Anyway, they have pretty much fallen apart. I wasn't going to bother trying for a refund as we don't have the receipt but folk have told me that i should.

As they are, imo, faulty, i shouldn't need a receipt should i?

Of course without the receipt they could be years old and i could just be trying it on. But they are a new design, i know this because when we bought them i asked the woman if they were suitable for school and would last - she reassured me yes they would be fine and that she hadn't had any complaints, although they are a new style and they haven't had them long. So she should know that they aren't old.

Called the shop today, the staff member told me to take them over, he agreed with me that they were falling to bits. One was much worse than the other. This was a shop ten miles from home so a car/bus journey away. He said he would recommend a refund/credit note but had to phone his boss. She is insisting that i take the boots over there on wednesday so she can look at them herself hmm Surely if she is leaving staff in change of the shop she should give them the autonomy to make a judgement call on if the shoes need replacing.

I have bought at least four pairs of shoes from this shop before and they are not cheap. We paid £55 for the boots and they are not 3 months old yet but they are unwearable.

What are my rights? Can i insist on a credit note despite not having the receipt? Have never had this issue in bigger shops - this is a small independent shop which i try to support, but if this is what their customer service is like i think i shall be hot footing it to john lewis for DD's next pair of shoes.

Ohwhatfuckeryisthis Mon 20-Jan-14 20:24:11

Did you pay by card? If so you can show that as proof of payment. Theoretically I believe, and I'm sure someone knows this better than me, if it is not fit for purpose then you are entitled to a refund-bollox to credit note. I had similar problem last week with dd new coat that split down back. I went armed with consumer rights act, but got the smug faced twat manager quoting it's not company policy. It's going back again this weekend.

katese11 Mon 20-Jan-14 20:25:00

Yes, the person in charge should have the authority to do the refund. Yes, you should have a refund if they've agreed they're faulty. The only complicating factor is if the style went into the sale over Christmas cause without a receipt they only have to refund at current selling price (though bank statement acts as proof of purchase too)

Debs75 Mon 20-Jan-14 20:25:13

They are clearly not fit for purpose so I do think you can demand a refund. Do you pay by card? If so print out a statement, or ask at the bank and they will print it for you. That counts as a proof of purchase

LEMmingaround Mon 20-Jan-14 20:31:18

No, we paid by cash unfortunately, otherwise we would have had bank statement. The annoying thing was that i remember throwing the receipt away after about a week hmm They are not in the sale, nor were they as far as i know. Haven't seen them on sale anywhere else. A friend of mine has recently had a similar problem with the same shop but managed to get a credit note - or a similar pair of shoes but they tried everything to weedle out of it (saying that the 8 yo girl shouldnt be using them on her scooter!) err, they were school shoes.

It is really poor customer service in my opinion. Small businesses want customer support but they wont get it if their customer service is dire. It is clearly not the shops fault that the goods are faulty but surely they would then take that up with the manufacturer.

17leftfeet Mon 20-Jan-14 20:31:48

Not fit for purpose means you are entitled to a refund regardless of proof of purchase

They could argue miss use if they are a fashion boot but if they told you they are suitable for school then that forms part of your contract with them

LEMmingaround Mon 20-Jan-14 20:36:17

this is what i thought 17leftfeet - they are bastard lellikelly boots which was why i specifically asked if they would be suitable for school. I didn't realise they were lellikelly when i picked them up but they were soft and comfortable. The fault is in the sole - worn right through and sole falling off, water pissing in, the upper is fine with a few scuffs, heels completely worn but wouldn have have returned based on that, its the sole falling off that made me think, actually i want my money back.

I am happy with a credit not because i did see a nice pair of school shoes for DD. She can't wear clarks as they cut into her foot (high instep) and i hate the mary jane style for school. I had the shoes in my hand tonight with DD to try them on but i am buggered if i am going to buy them without a refund. I'll search them out elsewhere.

WestieMamma Mon 20-Jan-14 20:37:50

You don't need a receipt, you need 'proof of purchase'. This can be a receipt, bank statement or even the label if they've got the name shop on them. They only have to refund the lowest price unless you can prove you paid a higher price.

LEMmingaround Mon 20-Jan-14 20:43:28

Thsts the thing though westie I dont have proof of purchase sad

Floggingmolly Mon 20-Jan-14 20:46:56

Without proof of purchase I don't think they're obliged to do anything, not fit for purpose notwithstanding. You could have stolen them (not saying you did); then they lose twice.

katese11 Mon 20-Jan-14 20:50:04

Legally you don't need proof of purchase if they're faulty, shops just prefer you to have it. LKS are fashion shoes but the black ones are normally suitable for school

Piscivorus Mon 20-Jan-14 20:56:51

I think small independent shops are the worst for this kind of thing, large chains tend to give refunds much easier.

I bought DS a tie to wear for an interview when he left uni, he wore it once and it "plucked" badly with no obvious reason. Went back and the store owner claimed he had to return it to makers to see if they agreed it was faulty, then he just stalled and stalled so he had taken the tie back but still had my money. Eventually I had to threaten Trading Standards and Small Claims Court.

I have since met 2 other people locally who have had similar problems. It is only a matter of time till this bites them on the bum (I hope!)

Floggingmolly Mon 20-Jan-14 21:00:17

No, legally you must be able to demonstrate that the goods have been paid for to force the shop to refund.

insideleg Mon 20-Jan-14 21:03:35

Their cash office will have an electronic record of all sales. If you give them the date, time and till that was used they can check their records. I used to run a cash office for a clothes retailer and had to do this many times.

LEMmingaround Mon 20-Jan-14 21:09:13

Will wait and see what happens on Wednesday I dippose.

SkateLife Mon 20-Jan-14 21:10:43

While it's annoying school shoes have fallen apart, I don't think you'll get a refund. The shop will have to send them back to the manufacturer to get their money back. If they give you a refund, and the manufacturer says it's 'wear & tear', they'll loose out.

If you'd taken them back after a month, then I think things would be different. But after 3 months of being scraped along the ground, I don't think that's fair to the shop.

If they made shoes to withstand scooter foot drag, they'd need to be made of iron. I think your friend was wrong to ask for a refund.

I do sympathise though. My dd went right through the leather of her last Clark's by stopping her scooter with her toe. They were 3 weeks old. Ds goes through shoes regularly on his skateboard and scooter.

I think you should ask the shop to send them back to the manufacturer to be assessed as faulty.

LEMmingaround Mon 20-Jan-14 21:13:28

Id be happy with that outcome to be fair. Although 3 months is the very outside less than two is more likely but just can't remember.

LEMmingaround Mon 20-Jan-14 21:14:31

My did didn't wear them on her scooter though just to school.

katese11 Mon 20-Jan-14 21:19:30

Legally you don't need proof of purchase if they're faulty, shops just prefer you to have it. LKS are fashion shoes but the black ones are normally suitable for school

katese11 Mon 20-Jan-14 21:19:31

Legally you don't need proof of purchase if they're faulty, shops just prefer you to have it. LKS are fashion shoes but the black ones are normally suitable for school

SkateLife Mon 20-Jan-14 21:21:59

It is absolutely fair to ask them to send them back to the manufacturer to be checked for fault.

If you could remember what week you bought them, you could ask the shop to check their records to find the exact date.

I realise you didn't say your dd was scooting on them. But if one sole is worn, could she be dragging her foot?

Good luck, it's allot of money for a short wear time.

LEMmingaround Mon 20-Jan-14 21:27:31

Blimey! Its going to look like she was scooting on them isnt it?? Didn't think of that. She may have gone on her scooter once or twice but shes hardly used it this winter

17leftfeet Mon 20-Jan-14 21:47:48

Do they keep both boots in the same size on the shop floor? If not then you must have paid for them to have them surely?

kali110 Mon 20-Jan-14 21:57:32

Shops can ask you for proof of purchase even if a product is faulty. It doesnt have to be a receipt, can be credit or debit statement, to prove has been from them and not from i.e third party or stolen etc ( def not suggesting you have!)

sharonosaurus Mon 20-Jan-14 22:28:11

I took some slippers back to Moshulu as they were really worn within 8 weeks,

The manager said -" I'm not sure what to do, they have been 'well worn' could you take them to a store 10 miles away using your petrol & pay £4 to park & show them?" hmm

I asked her what she deemed 'fair usage' for a pair of slippers grin she wasn't impressed, so I walked out.

I rang head office, & they sent me a free returns label & refunded me.

SuzanneUK Mon 20-Jan-14 22:43:14

A number of people on this thread seem to be missing the point that no shop is obliged to refund your money in the event that you buy faulty goods - unless you can prove you bought the goods from the shop you're claiming the refund from.

Without proof of purchase, a shop might accept that you bought the goods there and refund your money, or they might give you a credit note, or they might tell you to bugger off. It's the shop's choice because, legally, without proof (or, at the very least, evidence) of purchase you don't have a leg to stand on.

jacks365 Mon 20-Jan-14 23:03:41

You do need proof of purchase, notinecessary for it to be a receipt so bank statement or credit card receipt but something that proves the purchase was made at that store. Not as critical for a shops own brand but something like lellikelly which is sold all over you really need something.

SuburbanRhonda Mon 20-Jan-14 23:17:30

Don't wish to derail, but you bought your DD ankle boots for school? Why didn't you buy shoes? hmm

katese11 Tue 21-Jan-14 08:10:25

Ah yes, good point re the brands. But if op knows the date they were bought, the shop should check their transaction record and see if she's telling the truth...It's v recent in the grand scale of things. The onus is on the shop to treat the customer fairly and I say that as an ex Clarks mgr

LEMmingaround Tue 21-Jan-14 08:20:21

hahahaha surburbanrhonda - really? Ok, well i bought her boots because despite looking everythere i couldnt find her a pair of school shoes that weren't mary janes, and i didn't want her getting cold feet - thanks for your concern though hmm

newmum001 Tue 21-Jan-14 08:34:13

I work in retail, our policy is that faulty items returned without the receipt get an exchange or a credit note of the most recent sale value. If an item has gone into the sale the credit note will be for that amount. Or you can exchange for the same pair of shoes if they are still in stock. I returned a pair of dd's boots to asda before Christmas as they had fallen apart after 5 weeks. She's only 3 and dainty so not heavy footed at all. The boots were out of stock and I was told I couldn't return them. So I told her that I work in retail and of our policy etc and she didn't argue further and I got a credit note. Perhaps try that.

LEMmingaround Tue 21-Jan-14 09:26:54

Ok, so it turns out that we didn't pay cash ( i would have bet my house that we did!) but DP found the transaction on his bank statement and we bought them on the 25th November. So have proof of purchase - its not unreasonable to expect a pair of expensive school shoes to last longer than 8 weeks, less than that if you account for the two weeks in the holidays when she would have only worn them a few times.

prh47bridge Tue 21-Jan-14 09:54:46

It constantly amazes me how many people work in or, worse, run shops without knowing the what rights their customers have under the Sale of Goods Act 1979. Far too many shops have policies that are in conflict with the law. Some even seem to think their policy takes precedence over the law.

There is no legal requirement to produce a receipt or any other proof of purchase to exercise your Sale of Goods Act rights. Of course, in the absence of proof the retailer may argue that you obtained the goods elsewhere. If you end up taking the retailer to court the matter would be decided on the balance of probabilities. You may win without proof of purchase but having a receipt or similar improves the odds. The fact it appears on your bank statement should be adequate proof. The retailer could still argue that you obtained the goods elsewhere and this transaction relates to a different purchase but there is a good chance the courts would accept your version of events (although I hope it won't get that far).

The law is that you can reject faulty goods and get a full refund of the purchase price regardless of whether or not you have a receipt. The retailer cannot fob you off with an exchange or a credit note. The refund must be the purchase price, not the current price. However, you have a limited time after purchase to reject goods. The time varies but it is best to assume you only have a few weeks. Eight weeks may or may not be too long in this case - the only way of finding out for certain is to go to court.

If you have had the goods too long to reject them you are still entitled to a repair or replacement. Normally the retailer can choose which. If the retailer fails to act in a reasonable time you can get the goods repaired elsewhere and make the retailer pay the cost of repair. Alternatively you can get a partial refund to reflect the reduced value of the goods, or a full refund less an amount for the use you have had of the goods.

LEMmingaround Tue 21-Jan-14 10:09:58

Thanks prh - its a funny thing i guess with shoes isn't it, in all honesty i probably should have returned them sooner but DD loved them and i thought i'd get this seasons wear from them. Hopefully they will have a decent customer service ethos and not try to wriggle out of it. Its not the shops fault i guess but its not mine either and i am £55 down. I would imagine the manufacturer would have to reimburse the shop?

Im not sure about the credit note thing, i have seen another pair of shoes that i would like to get from them so would be happy with that exchange - it really depends on their attitude.

whatever5 Tue 21-Jan-14 10:32:21

It constantly amazes me how many people work in or, worse, run shops without knowing the what rights their customers have under the Sale of Goods Act 1979. Far too many shops have policies that are in conflict with the law. Some even seem to think their policy takes precedence over the law.

I'm always amazed by that as well. I've had one or two arguments with shop managers in the past who seem unaware of the Sale of Goods act and don't seem to understand that their shop policy is completely irrelevant if it conflicts with the law.

propertyNIGHTmareBEFOREXMAS Tue 21-Jan-14 11:53:16

Agree that you need to be able to prove that you have a contract with the shop. You need some proof of having bought the shoes from them. Perhaps you have the box and there is a barcode or serial number on it that the manufacturer can confirm was distributed to and sold through that particular shop. Unless you have some proof of contract you are relying on thevshop's goodwill.

Maryland2013 Tue 21-Jan-14 13:18:11

The best advice here comes from prh. Go back to the store and quote the Sales of Goods act.
Look on moneysavingexpert for the best bits to quote. Essentially goods have to be for for purpose for a reasonable amount of time. School shoes lasting only 8 weeks is a total piss take.

Don't let them tell you it's not their store policy, the Act is THE LAW!!! It doesn't matter what their customer service ethos is ITS THE LAW. Don't let them fob you off.
I have taken boots back before after 6 mths +. Argued with store staff. Got new boots.

You are entitled to a refund or an exchange if you're happy with that.

Good luck smile

SuburbanRhonda Tue 21-Jan-14 20:02:36

You don't say how old your DD is, OP, but Clark's have four styles for girls on their website that aren't Mary Janes, and they have a sale on smile

You're lucky her school allows children to wear boots instead of shoes - neither of the schools where I work does.

Floggingmolly Tue 21-Jan-14 20:37:48

The Sale of Goods Act is quite clear on the requirement to produce proof of purchase?? confused

Debs75 Tue 21-Jan-14 21:40:18

Suburban the fact they are boots not shoes has nothing to do with the proof of purchase or refund wanted. Clarks shoes aren't the be all and end all of school shoes either. Both my girls have boots for winter as I don't want them wearing silly summer style shoes in the snow and the school are perfectly fine with that as they have indoor sandshoes

LEMmingaround Tue 21-Jan-14 21:52:08

Our school doesn't "allow" boots either and i ordinarily wouldn't choose them as i wouldnt want to wear boots all day, but these were comfortable and soft - the upper is still pristine, just the soles fallen off! I honestly don't rate clarks at all - nothing they have seems to fit DD, she has a high instep which is why the mary janes have been ruled out. Our school has a very strict uniform policy, but they also apply a modicum of common sense.

Flogging - i was worried about this, but have since opening this thread found out we actually purchased them on DP's debit card so have it on the bank statement so they really have no comeback.

Floggingmolly Tue 21-Jan-14 21:56:54

Ah, then you're home dry. And Clarks are still trading on the reputation they built around 50 years ago... These days they are pure shite smile

jlb1234 Tue 21-Jan-14 22:05:01

That it is Floggingmolly. I bought DS new school shoes from clarkes in september, by late nov/december he had put his toe through them.
I didnt take them back because i assumed i would be told it was normal wear and tear. Ultimately they were just shitty shoes.

LEMmingaround Wed 22-Jan-14 10:25:41

Right then: Today's the day

I am going in armed with my SAD FART rules and expect to come out with a refund.

I will accept a credit note if the woman is reasonable, but if she tries to argue the toss then she will have to give me my money back.

Wish me luck smile

LEMmingaround Wed 22-Jan-14 10:29:29

To be fair, i have returned a pair of DD's shoes to clarks as within two weeks they were rubbing her little toe. We took her to be measured in anotehr store and the shoes were too small. They couldn't have been nicer, we didn't have the receipt either i don't think. To be fair i had emailed head office first but they gave us a full refund and a £15 money off voucher. Saying that, clarks shoes are shite nowadays.

ThistleLickerIsGoingToBeAMummy Wed 22-Jan-14 10:35:36

I got shoes from Clark's but made the mistake of throwing away the receipt with the bag, wasn't given a box, after only tow days of wearing them the soles had worn away and the insides had freyed! I took them back to a
Store more local than the one I bought them from, because I had no receipt she would only refund half the price back even though they were advertised at full price still, this to me wasn't acceptable as 50pound shoes shouldn't be in that condition after two days wear! The sales assistant was arsey and rude and the shoes to me weren't fit for purpose and I felt I should have a full refund! I went there on recommendation that they are good quality last a lifetime shoe, in the end miss arsey rang the store I bought them from and quoted the time and my card number and I got a full refund! I won't be back to Clark for shoeshmm

LEMmingaround Wed 22-Jan-14 11:51:20

Full refund smile

Maryland2013 Wed 22-Jan-14 12:53:18

Well done smile

jacks365 Wed 22-Jan-14 12:57:07

Well done. I'm another who will never buy clarks shoes again. Last pair looked tatty and worn within a week, dd is a toddler who crawls around while playing and shoes in that size should be able to cope with it.

JRmumma Wed 22-Jan-14 13:00:53

You don't actually need a receipt, you need proof of purchase. If you used a credit/debit card and it says that you spent £55 then i believe that they will have to honour this as a refund. Quote sale of goods act (i think that's the right one!)

LEMmingaround Wed 22-Jan-14 13:56:26

The owner was ok about it, made a few sarky comments about school shoes (shut up when I told her she was the one who sold them to us AS school shes). Also tried to say dd heavy footed. She is but shes not actually a horse! But anyway, all amicable. I couldn't find anything suitable for dd so need to find a pair on non mary jane non lace ip shoes now.

sazzlesb Thu 23-Jan-14 14:54:41

I agree you'll probably need some proof of purchase unless they take your word for it (which it sounds like they have). Legally, under the Sale of Goods Act you have a contract with them and under the terms, they must provide you with goods that are of a satisfactory quality and match the description of them. You can "reject"(return) the goods if they breach this and get your money back or get a replacement. Hope that helps

Debs75 Thu 23-Jan-14 22:44:55

So I think most of us are starting to realise that Clarks are not the best shoes for kids so where is the place to get kids shoes from? I go to Brantanos which does offer ore of a range but I'm not convinced they are consistently better than Clarks.

OP Great news on the refund and for putting a sarky sales assistant in her place

Grumpasaurus Thu 23-Jan-14 23:02:10

Another Clark's shoes hater! Bought some expensive brown brogues from them last spring. They were tatty and the souls had worn completely through by beginning of summer. They refused a refund!

JRmumma Fri 24-Jan-14 08:14:40

Yes good point, where do we buy kids shoes from then??

LEMmingaround Fri 24-Jan-14 08:26:06

I feel your pain jrumma. I eventually got dd a psir of hush puppies. Had discounted before but they have a really good depth to them which is adjustable by varying the sole inserts. Dd needed two different depths so this worked well for her. They were still £££ though but I have definitely bought my last pair of clarks shoes.

AwfulMaureen Fri 24-Jan-14 08:33:09

Jack do you mind telling me where you get school shoes from that aren't Clark's please? I'm so tired of that shop.

jacks365 Fri 24-Jan-14 09:16:39

I've been buying start rite recently with no issues at all but can't vouch for their school shoes as I don't currently have a child in school shoes but I would expect her current ones in black to be suitable and after several months of hard wear they still look immaculate.

AwfulMaureen Fri 24-Jan-14 09:22:44
LEMmingaround Fri 24-Jan-14 09:26:12

Start-rite are good but really expensive, they do do a more formal range of proper school shoes although have been sucked in by fashion somewhat too. What ever happened to the proper shoes with the t-bar and the buckle, thats what i want to know - i mean, i had to wear them so i should be able to inflict the same on my children!

prh47bridge Fri 24-Jan-14 14:45:57

Returning to this late but...

The Sale of Goods Act is quite clear on the requirement to produce proof of purchase

No it isn't. It doesn't even mention proof of purchase.

If the seller denies having sold the goods to you proof of purchase helps. But if it goes to court you will not automatically lose just because you cannot produce proof of purchase. The court will decide whether or not you purchased the goods from the seller on the balance of probabilities.

JRmumma Fri 24-Jan-14 15:24:52

TBH DS is only 5mo so we haven't had to buy shoes yet but i was just going to go to Clarks (as you do, it seems) and get his first pair of shoes. But good to know that once he gets a bit older then it might be worth branching out!

LEMmingaround Fri 24-Jan-14 16:03:09

Don't get drawn into buying shoes too young. They really don't need them until they are walking outside x

JRmumma Fri 24-Jan-14 16:57:38

No i won't buy any yet, don't see the point until he can walk (and he doesn't even roll or sit up yet!) but its just interesting that no-one on this thread rates Clarks and i genuinely didn't know anywhere else to buy little babies shoes. Everyone seems to just get Clarks at first as a rite of passage!

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now