My husband took a pair of my shoes to a local shoe repair and alterations shop (in Tampa, FL) to have the rubber on the bottom of the heels replaced as it had worn away. The shoes were in otherwise good condition and I wear them routinely to work. I've owned them for about 6 months.
When we returned to pick up the shoes, the side of the upper support of one shoe was completely caved in. The actual solid form of the shoe was indented as if it had been crushed by a heavy object. It was impossible to pull it back to its original condition and the shoe is not physically wearable in that condition as the indentation blocks the opening where you would insert your foot. The owner insisted it was that way when we brought it in. We pointed out that the shoe is not wearable in that condition, so why would someone pay to repair a small item on a shoe and not ask to repair the greater damage that actually makes the shoe unwearable? We also pointed out that she hadn't noted the damage on the claim tag that she gave my husband. She said she tried to run after my husband as he was leaving the store to point it out to him but she couldn't catch him. We asked why she didn't call him as she had his phone number, and she said that her phone doesn't work. We both pointed out that if the shoes had been that way when we dropped them off it would have been completely apparent to both her and my husband when they looked at what needed to be repaired (it would have been impossible to miss) and it would have been her responsibility to note the damage on the claim tag.
Her shoe repair person was not onsite so we left the shoes there so he could look at it when he is back in the shop 5 days from now.
Assuming that her shoe repair person can't restore the shoes to their previous condition (and I really can't see how that would be possible given the extent of the damage), what recourse do we have? My husband already paid cash for the repairs to the heels (which were performed). I would think we would be entitled to a refund for the repair work plus an amount equal to the depreciated value of the shoes. Is that correct? Even if it is correct, do we really have any recourse to get her to pay - other than small claims court, which seems like a lot of trouble for a $70 pair of shoes?
When we returned to pick up the shoes, the side of the upper support of one shoe was completely caved in. The actual solid form of the shoe was indented as if it had been crushed by a heavy object. It was impossible to pull it back to its original condition and the shoe is not physically wearable in that condition as the indentation blocks the opening where you would insert your foot. The owner insisted it was that way when we brought it in. We pointed out that the shoe is not wearable in that condition, so why would someone pay to repair a small item on a shoe and not ask to repair the greater damage that actually makes the shoe unwearable? We also pointed out that she hadn't noted the damage on the claim tag that she gave my husband. She said she tried to run after my husband as he was leaving the store to point it out to him but she couldn't catch him. We asked why she didn't call him as she had his phone number, and she said that her phone doesn't work. We both pointed out that if the shoes had been that way when we dropped them off it would have been completely apparent to both her and my husband when they looked at what needed to be repaired (it would have been impossible to miss) and it would have been her responsibility to note the damage on the claim tag.
Her shoe repair person was not onsite so we left the shoes there so he could look at it when he is back in the shop 5 days from now.
Assuming that her shoe repair person can't restore the shoes to their previous condition (and I really can't see how that would be possible given the extent of the damage), what recourse do we have? My husband already paid cash for the repairs to the heels (which were performed). I would think we would be entitled to a refund for the repair work plus an amount equal to the depreciated value of the shoes. Is that correct? Even if it is correct, do we really have any recourse to get her to pay - other than small claims court, which seems like a lot of trouble for a $70 pair of shoes?