Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
A case against a running store?
![[Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/0023a2df371befcbe67cef49705b9822_100.png)
Hi everyone,
I wonder if I could get some advice/thoughts on this. Having begun pavement-pounding for a few weeks, I went to a reputable, well-known running store for my very first running shoes. Basically, I was sold a pair of unsuitable, painfully blister-causing shoes, but as they were reduced in price, I'm not entitled to refund/exchange.
Full story? Well, the lady at the shop was very pleasant; she started me out in a pair of neutral shoes to analyse my gait running outside on the pavement, and pronounced me an over-pronator. I mentioned that I was just started out, I wasm't looking for anything too expensive/fancy, so she scanned the sale racks for me. I tried a few shoes on, although none were quite right; she tried me in an expensive one too, and that didn't work either. I asked her about the shoes in the 'bargain bin' - she said none of them would be right, as they were about size 3 (I'm a size 4). While she went into the backroom to look for more options, I rummaged in the bargain bin and found some size 4 shoes, to ask her opinions about whether they would suit.
When she came back, she was surprised to see the shoes; she had even bought out the other shoe from one pair as a possible candidate! These were Adidas Supernova shoes. I put them on and she said I looked "fine" in them, but that she "wanted to see how I run in a few other options". I then tried on Saucony Hurricane 7s: she'd previously discarded them for being "too supportive", but she recommended them over the Adidas, saying that I "looked better" running in them, as I "have low arches, and need a lot of support." They felt fine... to be honest, having never worn a support shoe, I didn't really know what to look for, but both felt quite bouncy to run in. She did warn me that I wouldn't be able to exchange them, but given that they fit and she assured me that they were right for me, I went for it (obviously! Wouldn't you?)
I was warned not to run for more than 15-20mins at first to get used to the cushioning, which is fine, as my runs only last 20min at the moment anyway! But 10mins into my first run with the shoes, it began to hurt along the inner arches, and gave me big blisters there. 
I've tried lacing them differently, wearing different socks, using blister plasters... to no avail.
I went back to the shop today, and the same lady tutted and said she "warned me" about sale shoes, and that they were a "false economy". She implied that I pushed for sale shoes, even if they weren't right. However I feel this isn't fair, as she never actually recommended a better pair, and never once did she say that the Sauconys might not be right; in fact she said I was very "lucky" to have found something in my size. Also, I went to 2 other running shops afterwards, just for 2nd/3rd opinions, where they used treadmills and cameras for gait analysis - and both said the Sauconys are MUCH too firm for me, and that I should go for something less cushioned ...like the Adidas! So if the support of the Adidas was OK to begin with, why would she have gone for something infinitely more supportive?! What shall I do? What can I do, or am I doomed to be lumbered with these trainers while having to buy new ones? 
Sorry for the essay, but I just wanted to provide the full story. Any and all advice is welcome. TIA!
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
tough one, they recomedned them so......... but they argue that you wanted a sale shoe....but they still said they looked ok.....mmmm
my first thought is without seeing you run slowed down on vieo it is impossible to say what "looks right" and what "looks right" might not actually be right
the only way to tell is to have a full analysis with a profiling of the shoes concerned, somthig you may have to pay for to get the full detail you need.
it may be one to put down to experience and never shop there again or you could try and argue the point the fact that 2 other places have recomended the same shoe [not the one you have] could strengthen your case but.......... it all comes down to customer service and what they consider that to be
good luck with whatever you do
What a load of bollocks!!!
The shoes have not been bad for you because they are in the sale for goodness sake-if they were twice the price, would you still have the problems? of course you would-the problem is in the shoe not the price. As for running for 20 mins until you are used to the shoes-sorry-bollocks again.If the shoes were sold to you on the basis that they would solve or prevent a particular problem, and they haven't, and you can show that, then you have a "case". If there is no obvious fault on the shoe that is causing your problem then you will have to rely on the company's policy and hope that they will do the right thing in your situation.
It will be hard to prove that the advice you got from the salesperson was "faulty", even though she sounds like she is full of bull.
If you want to get a refund, first write to the Head Office of the shop, and tell your story. If you get no joy, contact trading standards and ask their advice. they may be sympathetic, but realistically you may have to leave it there.
Footman sums it up really-it's a customer service issue.
Above all-if the shoes don't feel perfect-don't use them-even if you have no others and can't run-you will crock yourself for a long time if you continue in unsuitable shoes.
Do post up the results-it will help a lot of other runners...
When you are old and on your deathbead you will rue time you wasted doing useless things like worrying about being sold the wrong shoes. Use them for gardening and buy a nice pair somewhere else.
Yes, admittedly, I was fully aware of this.
That's where the issue arises, I guess, as I was not fully aware that the saleslady was, allegedly, only looking amongst the limited choice of sale shoes. Nor was I aware that the shoes were obviously too firm for my feet (seeing as the less supportive Adidas already corrected my over-pronation). So obviously she made an error... but then again, I knew there was no refund/exchange.
Thanks for your post! Hm, I wonder where I can get this done? But seems like it might be a lot of money and time wasted on what should have been the relatively simple act of buying a pair of shoes...
Thanks for your advice! Although talking about faults on shoes, my blisters do correlate with some tough stitching on the arch of the shoe. Funnily enough, when I took it back, the lady instead recommended me a pair of New Balances, and showed me the smoother lining, telling me to notice how much "better" it's manufactured - which surprised me, as I thought Saucony was a good brand?
I suppose their sale shoes are sold "as is", though, so perhaps I was supposed to take that into consideration before buying... grrr.
Haha! While I see your point,
a) I'm a student. I have no income. Running shoes was a treat for me after taking up a (finally!) worthwhile hobby... it's more than a little annoying to then have your feet torn to shreds by them, and then be told "I told you so" by the person who sold them to you.
b) Old and on my deathbed? That's assuming I don't go mad from the foot pain and run, raving, into the next oncoming car
Fizzipop...no refund on sale shoes...just how gullible are you? A retailer cannot subvert the sale of goods act with a sign or a statement.
The shoes are faulty or they are not.
The salesperson lied to you or she did not.
When you have established which of the above statements is/are true you can decide what to do.
It might well be gardening...
Mr Puffy, I have no idea if they are faulty, i.e. whether all Saucony Grid Hurricane 7 shoes have that scratchy stitching, or whether it's just mine. All I know is, when I pointed it out to the saleslady today, she said it wasn't as well-manufactured as, say, New Balance, which doesn't have scratchy stitching. She did not acknowledge it as a "fault" in so many words.
Secondly, she never at any point at the sale say the exact words, "these are the perfect shoes for you", but then she never suggested anything better at any point, either. I don't know about you, but that kind of insinuates that that was the best choice in the store, right? She did tell me I needed that level of support, though... which I clearly don't... which is confusing, as she said that the Adidas was "fine", despite it being such a light stability shoe. Argh. Do you see why I keep running myself in circles here?
P.S. Urgh, I hate gardening.
Something that is causing your foot to blister is not good. Why would she sell you a shoe if she thinks it isn't well made? And why would she admit to you that New Balance were better, without getting you to try on those as well, so you could make an informed decision?
She sounds like a numpty to me. I have recently had gait analysis done and the man serving me must have got ten pairs of shoes out in goodness knows how many different width fittings. I didn't care and neither did he. He was doing his job and part of that job is to ensure I don't hobble back through his door waving a running shoe in his face.
I have recently successfully won a case against a major retailer who refused initially to refund me on an unworn sports crop top that the manufacturers described on the packet as "for use in extreme sports" and "ultimate support". The changing rooms were out of use and when I tried it at home it was immediately clear that it did not live up to its billing. When I took it back I was refused a refund, point blank as they considered the top "underwear" and said it came outside their (not clearly stated) refund policy. As I wouldn't let it go, I rang their head office to complain and they gave me the same monosyllabic crap. They simply asked for the item back so they could return it to suppliers for "testing".
I rang Trading Standards, who informed me that my contract was with the shop, not the suppliers and if they want to take up the point with the suppliers, then they can do so AFTER they've refunded me. If the goods are NOT FIT FOR THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN SOLD then you can invoke the sale of goods act and ARE entitled to a refund, no matter what the company policy is. It's that little line at the bottom of your receipt "your statutory rights are not affected".
The minute I returned to the shop and claimed my statutory rights, they buckled and gave me back my money without question. Trading Standards investigated them anyway and put a flea in their ear!
You can try to have a go yourself if you want, but it depends on whether you can be bothered to take the time to do it and how much of your life you want to waste on principle. You could always sell them on Ebay! Good Luck what ever you decide.
Hail Hail
Complain. Go either to the store manager or owner. If the woman that originally sold you the shoes is that person, then politely mention Trading Standards and the Sale of Goods Act. If they still refuse to budge, then go to the store's Head Office, or (if independently owned) Trading Standards and take it from there. Push firmly to resolve the issue. Worst case scenario the store will offer you credit towards a different pair of shoes, best case, you get your money back and you go elsewhere.
Talking of which, tell us where you are (although at this time in the morning, being a student you'll be in bed!), and somebody can reccommend a good store with video analysis. Also, tell us which store has caused you all this grief and we can have a good laugh at them and then never go there.
When I was a young lad I took a lightbulb back to B&Q because it has cost me £2 and had only lasted 4 days.
You could always try writing to Saucony and explain the situation and that the shoes are causing you pain although the shop advised these would suit you. I did this many years ago with a pair of Asics and they sent me a new pair more suitable for my feet FOC when I returned the others.
The Asics also blistered me on the inner arch of my right foot and the only way I could alleviate it while running was to put on a blister pad. This was a fleecy pad which was sticky on one side, was an orangy colour if I remember correcly. It did work but got expensive having to use it on every run so in the end I stopped buying the make of shoe that caused this. Every shoe of that make did it to me.
Am very happy with Brooks Adrenaline's now though. No arch blister problems.
I would advise you not to wear them as I have a permanent lump on the arch of my right foot where for years I blistered before finding correct shoes.
You're exactly right - there's something about the way in which she showed me the "better made" NB shoes that rankles me. She never even suggested NB as a possible brand in the first place! But then I guess she might argue that she was only looking at Sale stuff for me?
I never even thought of the Trading Standards! I just went on the website to look up their advice - you're right, you have the same rights when you buy sale goods as any other time. But I'm thinking the stitching might not the manufacturers fault, but rather simply where the seam happens to fall on my foot?
I do have the time to have a go with this, just limited funds to keep travelling in and out of the city to get to the store. And I'm slightly paranoid that if I call, they'll just put the phone down on me, haha...
Sound advice, Running Bouy, thank you! I think I'll do this, although I imagine a big fight on my hands. You're right, I'm writing this in bed
I'm a lazy sod at the best of times.
As for the shop name, guys, I think I'll go and try reasoning with them first, and then report back afterwards on how they dealt with it. They might end up being ultra-helpful, they might not... I just don't want to ruin a reputation when this might (I hope!) be smoothly resolved. But I will definitely namedrop when the time comes.
Even if they work, though, Compeeds are so expensive... a few runs down the line, I may as well have bought an expensive pair of well-fitting shoes!...wow, I never thought of that. Thanks! Although I wonder if Saucony would do that in this case, seeing as they are an old model (and therefore discounted in the sale)...
Ouch, the Asics sound like pain! I'm glad you've found your holy grail shoe
Thing is, it does take 10 mins for the Sauconys to start hurting though, which makes it very difficult to assess their suitability from the <1min running in front of the shop.
Hm, yes, I wasn't sure if the scratchy seam was a fault. I'm guessing not then
I guess my main beef is with the shop assistant, and the way in which she didn't help me find the "right" shoes in terms of support (something written in their website blurb). 2 other stores told me the blisters were caused by the firmness of the unneeded support rubbing up against my arch, and that a softer support should help eliminate the problem?
WHile i can understand that you don't have money to throw away on shoes and it does sound like you got 'dubious advice' - the lady in the shop is not the 'god' of shoes. She was obviously trying to help you and donig so to the best of her ability - what level her ability is, well that is another question and not one that you can legislate for.
I sincerely doubt the there are any legal options for you to hang your hat on. However writing to the head office of the store might help or writing to saucony.
If you get no joy - or come to the conclusion that life is too short for all that (which admittedly would be my reaction):
Try swapping out the insoles with older comfier shoes - oftern it's the insole that is causing the blisters rather than the supportiveness/non-supportiveness of the midsole.
If that doesn't work - you could try punting them on ebay. I have sold off a few shoe mistakes on ebay to happy runners who then got the benefit of a bargain on shoes they hopefully know suits them.
You have not said what socks you were wearing, the blisters are caused by friction and COULD be caused by wet or unsuitable socks NOT the trainers.. I normally get blisters the first couple of times i wear new trainers. They then are fine
JP's got a point. I've found that too.....
I wear Hilly mono skins. They're comfy, wicking and wash well.
(Crikey, I sound like my mother)
I bought a pair of Brooks on the advice of the salesman in the shop, he spent an hour with me trying on all different shoes before recommending those as the ones he felt were right. I did one 8 mile run in them and they were totally wrong for me, I even got a stress fracture for my troubles during that run and had to pull out of London, and four months on I've only just begun treadmill jogging again.
What did I do? Wrote a letter to the store manager praising the salesman and saying how happy I was with the service I received, because I was. I didn't mention about the injury because a few days earlier I went back and although I'd run 8 miles outside, they still let me exchange them (I didn't mention my injury) and were again very helpful. My take on it is that I ran in the shoes on their treadill, they were comfortable and I went away happy with what I'd bought. Unfortunately neither I nor the salesman knew what would happen on a long run outside, so I just put it down to one of those things. It wasn't his fault, he recommended a shoe based on what he saw in the hour he had with me. Thankfully the Asics I exchanged them for were fine, and now I know never to move from those or the Nike Triax which I'd been running in fine before!
Mm, I've tried a couple of options, starting with bog-standard Primark cotton socks, and eventually getting to Wright double-layer Coolmax socks. I even put Compeeds on (aren't they fantastic?). But no joy, and my feet always hurt like nutso around the 10 minute mark.
MoscowFlyer - Ouch, how terrible that you got injured with those shoes
I'm glad that worked out for you in the end! Mm, see I'm slightly iffy with the service, although of course, it's my word against hers. If a lower level of support was already OK, why recommend full level support? And she very specifically denied me any exchange, under any circumstances...
I think whether you are entitled to a refund depends entirely on how the store advertises itself.
If its just a retailer of running shoes, they are perfectly within their right to refuse you a refund. You made the purchase, they are no longer in a sellable condition as new and it is through no fault in the product.
However, if they claim, anywhere, to provide expert advice on finding you the right shoe, you are entitled to a refund. You are paying for that advisory service in the cost as much as the actual shoe (the place I go to charges for gait analysis if you don't buy shoes during the visit, for instance). Therefore, the recommendation is part of the service. If they told you the shoes you bought would be ok for you, they are in the wrong and you deserve a refund. If they merely advised you with some others, but said they were ok for you, they were wrong to say that. Its only if they warned you that the sale shoes weren't right for your running style they have a right to deny you a refund as you've ignored their advice.
I get told from the store I go to that I should wear my new shoes around the house for a week before running in them to help break them in without affecting their condition. I usually do my first run or two in them on a treadmill - it gives me an idea of how they feel without getting any dirt on the things.
That's very true! I didn't think about wearing it around the house, and I'm not a member of the gym, so no joy with treadmills. But I'll definitely be wearing my next pair indoors first!
Yes! That's my beef with them - their 'expert advice'. They very definitely claim on their website blurb that their staff are 'trained' to fit running shoes according to the individual's needs. Although it does also say 'to the best of their ability', which is a bit of a disclaimer in itself, non?
I've written and sent a rather long letter to their head office, explaining the situation in detail. Ball's definitely in their court now! I'll keep you all posted on what happens next - thank you so much for your comments
I hope it works out for you, I know how frustrating it can be, not to mention expensive!
I am not entirely sure about wearing them around the house, whether that would make any real difference. Walking around on carpets does not in any way replicate the action of running, so I don't see how this would give you any idea of how they would perform outside? The idea of the treadmill is a brilliant one, but like you say, you need to be a gym member really. Its really hard isnt it? Some shoes feel lovely at first, but you soon know after mile number 1 whether they actually ARE comfortable! I bet there are loads of people on here who have also made expensive mistakes, me included!
Yes, let us know how it goes.
Good luck.