Should dd's shoes have lasted longer?

(28 Posts)
sapphirestar Sat 15-Feb-14 20:35:49

I bought dd a pair of £45 startrite shoes when she started school in September. Last week she came home with a hole in the leather on the top of one of the her shoes, the bit that gets scuffed IYSWIM? The rest of the shoes are hardly showing any wear at all.

I thought oh well, looks like we need to go shoe shopping but several people have commented that they should have lasted longer and that replacing them should be due to dd outgrowing them (they still fit fine, her feet don't grow much now).

What would you do? Should I try to take them back to the shop (I still have the receipt) or admit they've had a good life and replace?

Journeytolight Wed 19-Feb-14 10:11:45

It happens I guess with all the running around they do and jumping in puddles. DDs try and take care of their shoes, not exactly working till now.

sapphirestar Thu 20-Feb-14 21:26:18

Jinsei That was a nice gesture from Clarks, it's the fact that dd needed the exact same size that got to me. Did get new startrites a bit cheaper than normal though. Wish I could post a pic of the hole in her old shoes, they've gone in the bin now her new ones have arrived!

nova1111 Fri 21-Feb-14 23:39:27

Ours seem to only last a term. Feet often haven't grown. Girls shoes worn out. We've had Clarks in the past. I'm trying Start Rite this term. All our friends said don't as they give blisters. True enough the Start Rite ones have given her blisters. We put plasters on feet every day to avoid them. But they do have a thicker sole and seem to have lasted a bit longer so far.

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