school shoes aibu (prepared to be told I am)

[frangipan]

My son started secondary school this year, in line with the uniform policy which states ' black, preferably leather, shoes with non slip soles' I bought him these
www.amazon.co.uk/Pod-Felix-Older-Casual-School/dp/B00E4NIFBU/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1384879250&sr=8-3&keywords=pod+boys+shoes so far so good, uniform was checked and passed off in the first week.

They fell apart after the first half term, walking, bus ride, heavy rain etc. The soles peeled away and the facing came away. We did glue them together so they would make it to half term.

so in half term we bought some more expensive better quality shoes

www.amazon.co.uk/Vans-Black-Leather-Trainers-UK/dp/B006EIU2YG/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1384879462&sr=8-2&keywords=black+leather+vans

we used permanent marker and blacked out the logo flash. They are black leather shoes with non slip soles. They have told us the new pair are not acceptable and that we have a week to buy new ones and that the original one were not suitable. We argued that our DS (if I do say so myself) is always clean and smart looking and that the shoes are in accordance with uniform policy. The school still say they are not appropriate. I honestly didn't buy them for the brand and bought them on the premise that they were similar to the original pair that no one had commented on for eight weeks.DS has canvas versions for casual wear and I knew they would fit and be comfortable. Can they really force us to buy more shoes by punishing DS??? new to all this so all help much appreciated.

The school sent him into isolation this morning for uniform breach. No one contacted me.

5madthings

Mine too! (Ricosta) They are really light and comfortable

yep - that is why i think school uniform policies should have a level of flexibility to them. Maybe a family can only afford one pair of shoes for school and out of school - to me, so long as the child is smartly dressed and the trainers are black, then what is the actual problem?

well yes they both look like trainers they both look the same,

I sent dd in hiking boots last winter she walks to school it was icey her other boots were too slippy, so school phoned I did apologise but if somebody was willing to give her a lift home she could change her shoes that she had forgotten , school said oh it is fine for today thought so

actually her boots fell to bits the day before I have just remembered

yes the ricosta are really light, suprisingly so as they look quite chunky. they ARE expensive but very good quality and they last so worth the money.

Vans aren't trainers- they are shoes or 'skate shoes' (they're only called trainers on that Amazon link). I don't see the problem with them personally but the school don't agree- and it appears such a big deal to them that they're lending you money to buy others. Not sure there's much you can do about it- I think it's unfair to punish your son for it but I guess the school think it'll force you to act.

Confused though- plimsoll type shoes are brilliant. I wear them all the time in winter- no slipping over on ice with those rubber soled beauties. I'm sure when I was a little 'un we actually had to wear them inside the school instead of outdoor shoes.

They look like plimsolls, bot trainers, IMO. Or a bit like skateboard shoes.

not trainers

That's flippin' ridiculous. Those are plain black shoes.

Neither of those pairs of shoes look like school shoes to me. They are trainer type shoes, not school shoes.

If you know you ds wears exactly the same shoes for casual wear, what made you think they would be smart enough for school?

I find it interesting to see people's different opinions here.

Just out of curiousity, those who think they're ok for school, would you think it ok to wear them outside of school to an event that required smart dress (funeral, wedding etc..)

DD1 used to wear Vans or Dc to school all the time, they are banned now

I would let a young boy wear them probably, I dont have boys so I don't know what shoe fashion for boys are but they would go with smart trousers fine imo

DamnBamboo I don't think I have mentioned how much they cost me. You come across as quite self righteous. I am off to westfield as they are open until 9 to see what I can get. Thanks for the replies and help.

DamnBamboo

Good point. But these ugly Kickers are deemed apprpraite and I'm nt sure they'd pass muster at a wedding. IMO

UGLY

You did break the uniform policy. It states shoes, which your first pair were but the second pair are trainers "vans leather black trainers". If you read the description on Amazon, it states to wear with jeans, cargo shorts etc. not school wear at all.

Look fine to me - and presumably you'd only see the front half anyway due to where trousers would hang over them.

I'd also disagree with the label 'trainers'. They may be marketed as such, but look very similar in style to lots of shoes sold for men in Germany/Austria/Switzerland. To me, trainers are more like New Balance running shoes or some such - not black shoe-like items.

Anyway, personally I'd say they school were in the wrong but it looks like they're not going to back down OP.

Wibbly

Yes

I did see how much they cost Frang! Interesting I find it bizarre that mentioned the cost, i.e. they ain't cheap, they must be ok school of thought.

Not sure why you think my comment makes me self-righteous! ? What has suggesting a low-cost pair of shoes got to do with being self-righteous?

It's just you're moaning about having to buy a new pair so I'm suggesting a quick cheap option...

that you mentioned

Hmm, I've never thought it appropriate to dress for a wedding or funeral in the way I did at school. Considering the prevalence of ugly Kickers, polo shirts and jumpers in school uniforms I'd argue that school uniform often couldn't be considered 'smart dress'...

Both, esp the last ones, look like trainers - and infact the Vans even say they are trainers.
Therefore, I would say they were not shoes - and may well contrevene school uniform on that score.

They look absolutely fine to me. Like school shoes. Seems a fuss about nothing but I suppose the school has to put it's foot down or the next person will take it a step further and get the next casual level down, and so on.

It's the soles on the second pair - they are plimsole soles.

Black school shoes to me are black, with proper soles, which are also black.

You got away with the first pair because the soles were black, but they were still not properly formed 'shoe' soles.