What would you do?

Brian Scoggins wrote:Your trip is ruined because you ordered late and now need to return it? Provided that the transaction was executed in a timely manner, you don't get to complain.

He didn't order late. The shoes arrived in time for his trip, but they made the mistake of sending the wrong ones. I've ordered things many times so that they arrive "just before" I need them, as I'm guessing many other people have too. This is why retailers offer shipping guarantees and why people will pay extra for short-term shipping.

Brian Scoggins wrote:What if the shoe was defective, but correctly picked? Is it still the retailer's fault that you ordered too late to address that problem? It takes time to resolve any issue, and when you order too late, you remove the possibility of adequate resolution.

That's a completely different issue. You can't blame the retailer for a defective product, and I'm sure if the OP received a pair of defective shoes he wouldn't be complaining about the retailer right now.

if you paid with a credit card, sent the CC company a letter explaining the situation and refusing to pay for the shoes that you sent back. it takes a bit of hassle but should work.

i completely disagree w/ everyone that seems to be blaming you for the merchant's fuck up. it is bait and switch, plain and simple. you tried out the shoes and gave them the benefit of the doubt, but they aren't acceptable substitutes. it's totally on them in my book.

I agree with Dylan. For my part, i know it was not ideal to use the shoes, i was hamstrung with only those shoes and wasn't about to tell my girlfriend we can't go running on a rare weekend alone (her passion) because i potentially couldn't return these shoes I didn't order. It was worth the $100 hit to have a nice running weekend together in the mountains.

It also is not best practices by the retailer either. I value everyone's input. and I value my REI membership even more (and buying things in person). I'll move on- and pray for Sportiva to bring back the C-lite 2.0

Cheers,
-J

They sold you the wrong shoe - some might even say they defrauded you.

Suppose you'd bought the shoe as a gift for a friend. They would've worn them being none the wiser. Clearly, the retailer would be solely responsible in this case.

You were in a situation that gave you no choice other than to go barefoot or wear improper shoes (presumably). Some might argue you had no choice, and that wearing the shoes was the only option to avoid injury or loss, either through wasted time and travel expenses, or, alternatively, wearing improper shoes in a potentially dangerous environment. It's unreasonable to imply that you have a responsibility to check whether reputable retailers are going to defraud you by selling you a product you did not buy.

Write management and go as high up the ladder you can. Forward the email en masse to corporate employees(if corporate employees exist). I also agree with disputing the CC charge. It might work.

Good luck.

germsauce wrote:I'll move on- and pray for Sportiva to bring back the C-lite 2.0

Thanks for at least providing us with the name of the retailer so we can avoid it.

Re: the C-Lite 2.0s, have you tried the new Bushidos?

May not have your size but

sierratradingpost.com/la-sp…

Sign up for the e-mail newsletter or check Twitter, there's always 30% off coupons for STP going around

thanks guys- i'll look into the bushido's when i can afford another pair, they look pretty sweet currently eating $70 for a pair I'm not all that into. i'm a size 45- nobody seems to have the 2.0 in my size any more since they've discontinued.

in all fairness- this is from Rock Creek

Jeremy,

Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I’m very sorry to hear that you are displeased with this transaction and I do sincerely apologize for the entire issue. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion and entitled to post your thoughts and experiences on public forums such as Mountain Project. We appreciate your feedback, as well, as it helps us as a company to modify our practices. But I have confirmed with multiple people in the company that we are going to stand behind our policy of not accepting returns of used items, regardless of whether or not the item was incorrect. We sell thousands of products on our site and in our stores in Chattanooga, and from time to time the photos or information might slip through incorrectly— so we take full responsibility for that! In those cases, we promptly correct the issue, send customers complimentary return labels, and give them either a full refund for the returned item or free 2 day shipping on a replacement order. Since the shoes you returned to us were used, we were unable to accept them, which is clearly stated in our return policy ( rockcreek.com/return-policy…).

Because there may have been a miscommunication about whether or not the shoes were used, we made an exception and gave you a 40% discount on them. If you would like to order anything else in the future I can give you a $15 off coupon code and free 2 day shipping. As far as returning these shoes, we will still be unable to accept them. I sincerely apologize for the inconvenience this has caused you.

Please let me know if you have any other questions, concerns, or want to give us any other feedback, as I would be more than happy to hear it. Also, if you would like to give me a call at 1-888-707-6708, I would be more than happy to discuss this with you. Thank you again and I hope have a nice day.

Ian Stewart wrote: He didn't order late. The shoes arrived in time for his trip, but they made the mistake of sending the wrong ones. I've ordered things many times so that they arrive "just before" I need them, as I'm guessing many other people have too. This is why retailers offer shipping guarantees and why people will pay extra for short-term shipping. That's a completely different issue. You can't blame the retailer for a defective product, and I'm sure if the OP received a pair of defective shoes he wouldn't be complaining about the retailer right now.

If he ordered late enough that there was no time to resolve any potential issues, then yes, he ordered late. Its my belief that when you operate on a just-in-time approach for vital gear, you surrender the ability to resolve issues when (not if) they arise. That includes mispicks, bait-and-switches, and poor decisions by management (I think all three are relevant here).

The bait-and-switch issue, I agree with. The online store listing should accurately reflect what the online store sells. But if you're insisting that some minimum wage warehouse goon should be a 100% perfect, I've got some ocean-front property you should check out.

Brad Gone wrote:They sold you the wrong shoe - some might even say they defrauded you.

And those people would be wrong. It was a mistake that Rock Creek would have been more than willing to fix if they weren't USED.

It would be like if you ordered a video game and the store sent you the wrong one: if it's unopened, they'll return/exchange it. But if you decide to open and play it anyways, it's your own dumb fault when they say no because of their "no opened games" return policy.

If they had told the OP that they would return them despite being used then yes, I am definitely on the side that they should be returned. But on the other hand, if no such promise was given, I can't say much more than "shouldn't have worn them".

I'm sure glad I don't run a business. This "customer is always right" bullshit has gone too far.

germsauce wrote:in all fairness- this is from Rock Creek Jeremy, Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I’m very sorry to hear that you are displeased with this transaction and I do sincerely apologize for the entire issue. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion and entitled to post your thoughts and experiences on public forums such as Mountain Project. We appreciate your feedback, as well, as it helps us as a company to modify our practices. But I have confirmed with multiple people in the company that we are going to stand behind our policy of not accepting returns of used items, regardless of whether or not the item was incorrect. We sell thousands of products on our site and in our stores in Chattanooga, and from time to time the photos or information might slip through incorrectly— so we take full responsibility for that! In those cases, we promptly correct the issue, send customers complimentary return labels, and give them either a full refund for the returned item or free 2 day shipping on a replacement order. Since the shoes you returned to us were used, we were unable to accept them, which is clearly stated in our return policy ( rockcreek.com/return-policy…). Because there may have been a miscommunication about whether or not the shoes were used, we made an exception and gave you a 40% discount on them. If you would like to order anything else in the future I can give you a $15 off coupon code and free 2 day shipping. As far as returning these shoes, we will still be unable to accept them. I sincerely apologize for the inconvenience this has caused you. Please let me know if you have any other questions, concerns, or want to give us any other feedback, as I would be more than happy to hear it. Also, if you would like to give me a call at 1-888-707-6708, I would be more than happy to discuss this with you. Thank you again and I hope have a nice day.

If they said they'd take them back used they should take them back used. However, it reads like there is some dispute to whether they agreed to take them back used in the first place. Reading that last email it sounds like they are really trying to accommodate you as best they can while maintaining their return policy.

As a business I probably would have taken them back (sell locally on CL?) before this was made public. But, now that this is public, I would stand vehemently with the original policy.

Take the 40% discount and $15. That sounds damn fair given both parties responsibility in this mess.

Ian Stewart wrote: This "customer is always right" bullshit has gone too far.

So has this "seller is always right" bullshit.

He has no obligation to return them - used on unused. He never ordered them.

Perhaps RockCreek should just own up to their mistake, either send the guy the shoes he ordered or refund his money, or just take the loss and "learn their lesson." "Take the hit and move on." "They should not have [sic] shipped the wrong shoes"

germsauce wrote:in all fairness- this is from Rock Creek Jeremy, Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I’m very sorry to hear that you are displeased with this transaction and I do sincerely apologize for the entire issue. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion and entitled to post your thoughts and experiences on public forums such as Mountain Project. We appreciate your feedback, as well, as it helps us as a company to modify our practices. But I have confirmed with multiple people in the company that we are going to stand behind our policy of not accepting returns of used items, regardless of whether or not the item was incorrect. We sell thousands of products on our site and in our stores in Chattanooga, and from time to time the photos or information might slip through incorrectly— so we take full responsibility for that! In those cases, we promptly correct the issue, send customers complimentary return labels, and give them either a full refund for the returned item or free 2 day shipping on a replacement order. Since the shoes you returned to us were used, we were unable to accept them, which is clearly stated in our return policy ( rockcreek.com/return-policy…). Because there may have been a miscommunication about whether or not the shoes were used, we made an exception and gave you a 40% discount on them. If you would like to order anything else in the future I can give you a $15 off coupon code and free 2 day shipping. As far as returning these shoes, we will still be unable to accept them. I sincerely apologize for the inconvenience this has caused you. Please let me know if you have any other questions, concerns, or want to give us any other feedback, as I would be more than happy to hear it. Also, if you would like to give me a call at 1-888-707-6708, I would be more than happy to discuss this with you. Thank you again and I hope have a nice day.

While I think this is a gray area, and both sides have a point, in this case I would tend to side with the consumer.

That aside, I find the e-mail to be irksome and short sighted. It would have cost Rock Creek surprisingly little to accept this return. Instead, they choose to hide behind "policy" and leave a disgruntled customer in the wake of the few bucks they saved by not accepting the return. When compared to the money that they could have made off of germsauce over his lifetime, the money they saved by declining the return is a paltry sum. Quite simply, this is just a stupid move on the part of RC. The politely worded snark about posting on MP also rubs me wrong.

YMMV, but after thinking about this I have decided that RC can suck it. I have spent money there in the past, but will go elsewhere in the future.

Dude, you wore them. So suck it up and keep wearing them. Or throw them away. Sure, it would be great if the retailer gave you a refund but they don't owe you anything.

Those Bushidos look sick. My last few pairs of running shoes have been Salomon Speedcross 3s.
Anyone know how the Bushidos compare to them?

The amount of time = money wasted on this thread could have bought hundreds of pairs of shoes.