Newspaper Cover Page
Our Paper

Front and Back Pages, E-Edition and Back Issues...

Weather
 9°C
London
Saturday 5th July 2008 Make us your HOME PAGE  What is RSS?
The Crusader

NEW BOOTS WEREN'T A HOLE LOT OF GOOD

Story Image


Ugg boots are a favourite of celebs

Monday March 3,2008

By Maisha Frost

DESIGNER footwear costs a mint so don’t get tripped up by legal loopholes if those objects of desire turn out to be less than you hoped for.

Mum Deborah Burge is counting the cost after treating her daughter Aimee to a pair of Ugg boots, winter’s hottest must-haves. Deborah, from Cleethorpes, Lincolnshire, paid £172 in December 2006 but after just three months wear Aimee says a small hole developed in one of the toes.

“I didn’t think that was good value for money,” said the 20-year-old Leeds University student, who took them back to the shop.

She says they were then sent away for analysis but she was unhappy with the response when she picked them up. “I was told it was wear and tear, not a fault with the boot. I was even informed a long toenail could be the cause. How ridiculous – someone would have to have a hawk’s talons. It was clear no other offer was coming so I took them home.”

But the perceived injustice nagged away at both mother and daughter. “Every time I saw that obvious hole I felt very annoyed,” says Deborah. In October she contacted AMG Group, Australian brand Ugg’s UK distributor, as well as Crusader. “But am I just expecting too much from a fashion item?” she wondered.

AMG agreed to look at the boots but has said that usage is the cause. “We don’t get complaints about Ugg.

SEARCH THE CRUSADER for:


Customers are very happy. We’ll send Aimee a pair of designer earmuffs worth £75 as a goodwill gesture,” said an AMG Group spokesman.

But this isn’t AMG’s responsibility anyway, declares senior lawyer Peter McCarthy, of Which? Legal Service.

Shoes cover tricky consumer ground as questions of what is reasonable wear and tear arise. But basic consumer rights do operate under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and how a consumer pursues their complaint also has a crucial bearing.

“New goods should be of satisfactory quality when sold,” says McCarthy. “Under the Act, when goods are less than six months old the onus is on the retailer to prove there was no fault to begin with. Durability and correct use is clearly part of the assessment but if a product can be shown to have flaws after three months this must raise questions.”

Consumers need to get written confirmation of when goods will be returned if they are taken back by a retailer for analysis.

“But at this point customers also have to make clear what remedy they are seeking – either repair or replacement,” warns McCarthy. “They then have to give the shop the opportunity to do this. If the retailer won’t budge then the consumer has a good case to go to the small-claims court. But it is essential that they inform the shop what they intend to do.”

Aimee didn’t follow this procedure because she didn’t know her rights. But McCarthy points out: “Unfortunately, although it may seem eminently reasonable that someone didn’t exercise their rights because they didn’t know them, that is no defence. But a small claims court may take that into account.”

Consumers have six years to bring a claim and McCarthy thinks Deborah and Aimee could restart the process by going back to the shop and giving it the chance to repair the hole or replace the boot.

“We’ll battle on,” pledged Aimee, adding: “We hope this helps others learn about their rights.”

** Which? Legal Service: 0800 252 100/www.whichlegalservice.co.uk


User Image

WHAT ......

13.06.08, 8:17pm

Paying up to £200 for a pair of BOOTS ! ! ! you have to be joking...... that why these firms are taking you to the cleaners...

Apart from that a £200 (wow) pair of boots should last for life...... get yourselves together form a group, get legal advice, share the cost, and then take Ugg to the cleaners....

• Posted by: EltorroReport Comment

User Image

MY UGG BOOTS ALSO HAVE A HOLE IN THEM

20.05.08, 7:52pm

I also bought a pair for my daughter from a supposedly reputable High St retailer and paid £170 at the end of Februarey 08. These too developed a hole in the front, having only had them for less that 10 weeks I took them back to the store (BANK FASHION) and they said this was due to wear and tear. I don't believe this for one minute it's an easy get out for them, as I pointed out to the store manager that in my opinion the sheepskin was not up to standard. Having read other same complaints it seems that these retailers cna rib you blind and get away with it. Can any one help?

• Posted by: NAZAReport Comment

User Image

DISAPPOINTED CUSTOMER

06.03.08, 8:43pm

I bought a pair of these boots at the end of November last year costing me £199. I can't wear them to work because they are too casual, so save them for the weekend. I loved my boots, and looked after them never getting them wet. I was horrified after only 2 and a half months when I noticed a small hole on the top of my right boot by my big toe, on closer inspection the left boot had also softened by the big toe and was about to go. I have two other pairs of Uggs, one pair being over three years old and have never had the same problems. I took the boots back and they sent them to their head office, after 2 weeks they were not sure so sent on to Uggs. They said no fault with the boots, and that was over a week ago, it has now been almost a month and I still do not have the boots back and have been told that they will not replace them, which is what I have asked for. So I am nearly two hundred pounds down and no boots. I dont have long toe nails, in fact I am constantly told by my daughters that they are too short, so I know I have not 'punctured' the boots. I am at a loss as to what to do.

• Posted by: Jools08Report Comment

User Image

UGGS

04.03.08, 7:15am

You'd be better off sticking fake fur onto a good old pair of British Wellies!

• Posted by: KaosTheoryReport Comment

User Image

I BOUGHT A PAIR OF UGGS

03.03.08, 5:02pm



From the car boot sale for £3.50 for this self same reason.
There wasn't a hole where the big toe met the boot but it was on the way.
Fact is,the leather is far too thin and not suitable for footwear.
Glad mine were £3.50 I would cry if I had paid £170 plus.
Don't suppose the celebs take them back,just buy another pair.

• Posted by: thewarlordReport Comment

View All Comments

To view all 'Have Your Say' comments, click this button...

Don't call the cashback phonies

BE VERY wary of mobile cashback deals if you value your peace of mind and your p...

Read More Comment Speech Bubble Have Your Say(1)

Missing data put pensions at risk

CAROL Doran was left in limbo after her personal data went missing from a govern...

Read More Comment Speech Bubble Have Your Say(0)

Heating firm's cold comfort for mum

THERE was cold comfort for the Broad family when their new heating system stutte...

Read More Comment Speech Bubble Have Your Say(1)

Todays best TV right here for you at the Express. • See Guide

The Political Cartoonist of the Year