CLARKS SHOES |
CLARKS SHOES CLARKS OF ENGLAND DEFECTIVE SHOES, Internet |
11th of Mar, 2011 by User660432 |
Bought a pair of expensive walking shoes from them early 2010. Used, not abused, 20-30 times then put away in box for the Summer. Did not get them out until the end of the year, and both soles completely fell apart the first time I wore them again. Took them back to store and was told 'nothing they could do about it' even though the uppers and laces looked new. Called Clarks and a polite service lady said she would send me a return authorization to have them evaluated; she did, I returned them. Yesterday the shoes came back with a form letter saying the shoes were not defective and the box checked was "Prolonged Storage (66)." $126 + tax down the drain. |
|
|
I had two pairs of Clarks shoes that the sole literally “fell off” from the rest of one of the shoes.
I sent an email of complaint to Clarks (and while this sort of defect should never happen in *any* pair or brand of shoe!), I was contacted by a customer service representative, and she replaced both pairs with my choice of brand new shoes — no questions asked!
One of the pairs had a stock/style number that she couldn’t pull up in her computer, I guess because they were so old (but still in “otherwise” excellent condition).
Again, while this type of defect seems to be all-too-common with Clarks (per online searches), being offered brand new shoes without having to even return the defective pairs is unheard of in this day and age.
Spending $150 or more on a pair of shoes that are constructed so poorly that this is a common problem seems ridiculous. I don’t know if I will ever purchase another pair of Clarks.. I’ll have to see how these new shoes do.
But backing their product like this is a good start at building back my being a return customer.
(Altough, like I said, it would be nice if this problem were dealt with at the manufacturing level, so as to not have to deal with returns/exchanges in the first place!) |
|
|
Post your Comment
|
|
|