Mel Gibson suffers fashion mishap as he steps out in bizarre combination made up of clumpy trainers, beach shorts and socks

A Canterbury shopper claims she has been refused a refund because she bought "fashion shoes".

Heidi Kitty Morrell returned her shoes to Peppermint Canterbury in early November, displaying what she says were two large holes in the back of the shoes.

Advertisement

Wholesale Shoe Hub Cheap Air Max Shoes Air Jordans Shoes Online

"I explained to the assistant that I hadn’t worn them very much but that unfortunately both shoes had come apart at the back, leaving large holes between the sole and the canvas of the shoes," Miss Morrell stated in her blog, which depicted what she claimed to be poor customer service.

She continued: "She then commented that as I’d bought the shoes in June, too much time had passed for her to give me a refund. I explained that I’d bought the shoes specifically for my waitressing job, for which I work only one or two shifts per week."

Miss Morrell said the assistant seemed to have accepted this point and went to consult with her colleague.

"She returned a few minutes later and coolly informed me that a refund would not be possible because my shoes were actually “fashion shoes” and that they’re not supposed to be treated like 'normal shoes'," she said. "I must admit I stared blankly at her for a few seconds." 

She added: "I pointed out that the Sale of Goods Act specifies that goods must be fit for purpose and last a reasonable length of time. She repeated that my shoes were actually 'fashion shoes'. 

"I asked her how long she personally thought was reasonable for a pair of shoes to last and she replied that my shoes were actually 'fashion shoes'.

Miss Morrell has posted her story and e-mail she has sent to the shop for the past few weeks, which you could read here. She claims she hasn't heard back from the store in several weeks.

A Peppermint spokeswoman commented on Miss Morrell's complaint. She said: "We understand that the shoes were purchased at the beginning of June. Miss Morrell returned the shoes to our store at the beginning of November. 

"Our Staff inspected these shoes and believe that the shoes were worn out and that the customer had received fair wear and tear. In our opinion, these shoes were worn out and showed no sign of manufacturing fault."

The shop refused to make a comment on the "fashion shoes" remark.