Anyone here ever had Hush Puppies...?
J D@work.net Mark J D
a couple of years and found that the soles have turned all soft and
friable...
Seriously: I walked out of the house in them -- and the heels broke away in
a burst of dark brown powder. The uppers are fine; but the soles now have
the strength and consistency of a dried-out chocolate muffin.
What the hell is going on here? These are by no means the oldest shoes I've
got, but none of the others have degraded in this way; and all my shoes are
kept in the same box, so there's been no difference in how this pair has
been stored. In fact, because they are a pair I only wear with one
particular suit, they've had a lot less wear and tear than the others...
Does anyone have any idea what the Hush Puppy people will say about this?
This being Rip-Off Britain, I can't imagine that they're about to say
anything except some circumlocutory version of 'We Don't Give A Shit'; but
maybe I'm not right on this occasion. Surely there's no way a
shoe-manufacturer can sell shoes with a 'use-by' date *that they don't tell
you about*...?!?
Anyone...?
MJD
Brian Watson
"Mark J D" <Mark J D...@work.net> wrote in message
news:h%UVj.40154$yq6....@newsfe14.ams2...
>I ask because I've taken my pair of brown Portlands out of my shoe box
>after a couple of years and found that the soles have turned all soft and
>friable...
Have had Hush Puppies but the heels always wore out before they crumbled to
dust.
It sounds to me that they might have been in your loft and been baked.
--
Brian
"Fight like the Devil, die like a gentleman."
J D@work.net Mark J D
news:68qkraF2tu186U1@mid.
>
> It sounds to me that they might have been in your loft and been baked.
>
Actually, no: they have always lived in a box in my various bedrooms (along
with all the other shoes): they've faced precisely the same temperature and
environmental conditions that I have!
I'm actually pretty annoyed about this. When I buy a pair of shoes, I don't
expect them to behave in this way -- and I've never had another pair that
did!
MJD
Brian Morrison
Sounds to me like a manufacturing fault where something about the
mixture used to make the soles was incorrect.
I would try speaking to Hush Puppy about it, I would expect the Sale of
Goods Act to apply after all.
--
Brian
Robert Campbell
news:g0977d$pa5$3...@news.datemas.de...
> Sounds to me like a manufacturing fault where something about the
> mixture used to make the soles was incorrect.
>
> I would try speaking to Hush Puppy about it, I would expect the Sale of
> Goods Act to apply after all.
>
> --
>
> Brian
Or, in this case, the Sole of Goods Act.
Jon Green
> I would try speaking to Hush Puppy about it, I would expect the Sale of
> Goods Act to apply after all.
In that case, Mark should speak to the retailer, not Hush Puppy, as SoGA
(and its successors) establish the contract terms between vendor and
emptor, not between emptor and manufacturer.
That said, talking to HP might be a rather good idea, particularly if
it's presented as being from a disappointed (but not aggrieved) loyal
customer. If it's a new problem being reported, a responsible company
will take back the faulty goods, investigate the problem, and quite
probably replace them FoC. I've had that treatment a few times.
My late Mum hit the jackpot once - she returned some duff product or
other to Mattesons -- some kind of vac-packed meat product that was
inedibly salty, ISTR. Once they'd analysed it, they were so pleased
with her helpfulness that they sent her two large boxes of their goods
in thanks and compensation, along with a goodly cheque. The boxes'
contents were, I'm glad to report, splendidly edible! I don't think our
friends and neighbours had to buy ham, gammon, etc., for some time
afterwards!
Jon
--
SPAM BLOCK IN USE! To reply in email, replace 'deadspam'
with 'green-lines'.
Brian Morrison
> Brian Morrison wrote:
>> I would try speaking to Hush Puppy about it, I would expect the Sale of
>> Goods Act to apply after all.
>
> In that case, Mark should speak to the retailer, not Hush Puppy, as SoGA
> (and its successors) establish the contract terms between vendor and
> emptor, not between emptor and manufacturer.
Yes, but after a fair period of time, most retailers would rather lose
interest and hence talking to the manufacturer often produces better
results. You are of course correct about the contractual relationship.
>
> That said, talking to HP might be a rather good idea, particularly if
> it's presented as being from a disappointed (but not aggrieved) loyal
> customer. If it's a new problem being reported, a responsible company
> will take back the faulty goods, investigate the problem, and quite
> probably replace them FoC. I've had that treatment a few times.
>
> My late Mum hit the jackpot once - she returned some duff product or
> other to Mattesons -- some kind of vac-packed meat product that was
> inedibly salty, ISTR. Once they'd analysed it, they were so pleased
> with her helpfulness that they sent her two large boxes of their goods
> in thanks and compensation, along with a goodly cheque. The boxes'
> contents were, I'm glad to report, splendidly edible! I don't think our
> friends and neighbours had to buy ham, gammon, etc., for some time
> afterwards!
Sounds like an amazing response. I've not seen or heard of anything at
that level of generosity before.
--
Brian
Tim Ward
>
> Sounds like an amazing response. I've not seen or heard of anything at
> that level of generosity before.
Does sound a bit over the top. More common is when my father complained that
an M&S pork pie was nearly all jelly and hardly any pork - he got a refund
of the purchase price and a new pork pie.
--
Tim Ward
Brett Ward Limited - www.brettward.co.uk
Jon Green
> Sounds like an amazing response. I've not seen or heard of anything at
> that level of generosity before.
Nor me, before or since. I guess that was back in the days when
"customer service" wasn't in the veterinary sense. Reading between the
lines, I suspect that she probably saved M from thousands of pounds' losses.
Jules
>> I would try speaking to Hush Puppy about it, I would expect the Sale of
>> Goods Act to apply after all.
>
Nice footnote.
Jules
> Brian Morrison wrote:
>
>> Sounds like an amazing response. I've not seen or heard of anything at
>> that level of generosity before.
>
> Nor me, before or since. I guess that was back in the days when
> "customer service" wasn't in the veterinary sense. Reading between the
> lines, I suspect that she probably saved M from thousands of pounds' losses.
Of course in this day and age, any company contemplating such a thing
would likely be put off due to fear of the customer selling their story to
the media - who would then spin the tale such that the company would
lose whatever reputation they had.
These days it's far more sensible to just keep as low a profile as
possible :(
J D@work.net Mark J D
>> Brian Morrison wrote:
>>> I would try speaking to Hush Puppy about it, I would expect the Sale of
>>> Goods Act to apply after all.
>>
>> In that case, Mark should speak to the retailer, not Hush Puppy, as SoGA
>> (and its successors) establish the contract terms between vendor and
>> emptor, not between emptor and manufacturer.
>
> Yes, but after a fair period of time, most retailers would rather lose
> interest and hence talking to the manufacturer often produces better
> results. You are of course correct about the contractual relationship.
>
>>
>> That said, talking to HP might be a rather good idea, particularly if
>> it's presented as being from a disappointed (but not aggrieved) loyal
>> customer. If it's a new problem being reported, a responsible company
>> will take back the faulty goods, investigate the problem, and quite
>> probably replace them FoC.
Alas, not in Rip-Off Britain. I've just had a Hush Puppies 'Customer Service
Manager' on the phone. The shoes are more than 6 years old, so the company
apparently has no legal requirement to do anything about them. (Translation:
"We Don't Give A Shit"). She told me I ought to take the matter up with the
retailer -- who, if they are still in business at all, are around 250 miles
away from where I now live. She also said that if I could produce a receipt
proving that I bought the shoes less than 6 years ago then I could be
recompensed -- which I thought (and pointed out) was a truly demented idea:
who the hell files shoe receipts away for half a decade and more...?
My suggestion that there must have been a manufacturing defect had
absolutely no impact -- as did my pointing out that if a manufacturer is
going to sell a shoe that is destined to turn to biscuit crumbs before the
owner has worn it out, then they are doing something seriously wrong. Nor
did my explaining that everything that happened was being written up in this
n/g have any effect on the lack of interest being shown.
In short, I met the usual entirely immovable wall of 'Customer Service'
intransigence. They got my money; they're not legally obliged; so they don't
give a shit. 'Customer satisfaction' and 'customer goodwill' matter not at
all: in Rip-Off Britain, I'm merely some pain-in-the-arse who was stupid
enough to think a pair of shoes shouldn't self-destruct in the box.
So all that remains to be done, I think, is for me to try and warn people
about the company and its products. People should remember how crap the
shoes turned out to be, and how crap was the company's treatment of my
complaint. Hopefully more than a few readers will now think twice (or more)
about buying Hush Puppies in the future. I'll never buy the brand again as
long as I live -- and I think I can confidently predict that the same will
go for my family and friends, once they have all seen the way the soles have
simply perished.
Why don't we all buy other brands, people? There's got to be better stuff,
and better companies, out there...
...And it could all have been *so different*, *so easily*. A telephone
apology; an interested request to have the shoes sent back for examination;
and an eventual £25 money-off voucher for another pair, and they would have
had a delighted and loyal customer who would have told loads of people about
how nicely he had been treated. But they weren't capable of anything so
savvy. Funny how 'Rip-Off Britain' turns out to be so closely connected to
*Dumb-Ass Britain*, isn't it...?
MJD
Alan
Although of course Hush Puppy are American aren't they? So by all
means rant, but downgrade the right country please.
--
Alan
--
SPAM BLOCK IN USE!
Replace 'deadspam.com' with penguinclub.org.uk to reply in email
Chris Shore
> In short, I met the usual entirely immovable wall of 'Customer Service'
> intransigence. They got my money; they're not legally obliged; so they
> don't give a shit. 'Customer satisfaction' and 'customer goodwill' matter
> not at all: in Rip-Off Britain, I'm merely some pain-in-the-arse who was
> stupid enough to think a pair of shoes shouldn't self-destruct in the box.
If you buycheap shoes, expect cheap service. If you want shoes which will
last more than a couple of years, pay for them.
Chris
HE Elsom
> If you buycheap shoes, expect cheap service. If you want shoes which will
> last more than a couple of years, pay for them.
Paying a lot doesn't necessarily get you quality, especially with
fashion items. And you can get good stuff in the sales for about the
same as or a bit less than full-price disposable brands. The important
thing must be to be able to tell what's going to last and what's not
when you buy.
I'm still wearing two pairs of Paul Cox sandals (not at once, settle
down) that I got for about GPB 30 each in 2000 and have worn
throughout every summer ever since.
Regards,
Helen
Brian Morrison
> I'm still wearing two pairs of Paul Cox sandals (not at once, settle
> down) that I got for about GPB 30 each in 2000 and have worn
> throughout every summer ever since.
I'm afraid I have a rather different approach to shoes. I buy them, wear
them for however long it takes for them to fall apart, feed them to the
bin and then buy another pair (well the last two events are usually
reversed). It's extremely rare that I change shoes at all other than that.
Clarks do well enough out of me, the usual failure mode is when the
soles split and start letting in water. I sometimes get 2 years
continuous wear out of a pair, more usually about 21 months.
--
Brian
Chris Shore
"HE Elsom" <h...@helsom.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:db2a3cae-5ce4-45bf...@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On May 12, 4:21 pm, "Chris Shore" <chris.sh...@arm.nospam.com> wrote:
>> If you buycheap shoes, expect cheap service. If you want shoes which will
>> last more than a couple of years, pay for them.
> Paying a lot doesn't necessarily get you quality, especially with
> fashion items
Especially with fashion items.
>And you can get good stuff in the sales for about the
>same as or a bit less than full-price disposable brands. The important
>thing must be to be able to tell what's going to last and what's not
>when you buy.
>I'm still wearing two pairs of Paul Cox sandals (not at once, settle
>down) that I got for about GPB 30 each in 2000 and have worn
>throughout every summer ever since.
I have just stopped wearing a pair of leather shoes which I bought in
2000. I have had them soled and heeled every year since and the uppers have
just started giving out. I suspect that I could get the uppers repaired and
get another 8 years out of them. The cost of soling and heeling a good
pair of shoes is almost certainly less/comparable to buying a new pair
of cheaper shoes every couple of years.
In addition, they are more comfortable (shoes, in my experience, get more
comfortable the longer you wear them), look better and don't make my feet
as smelly as would shoes made of synthetic materials.
Chris
Jules
> On May 12, 4:21 pm, "Chris Shore" <chris.sh...@arm.nospam.com> wrote:
>> If you buycheap shoes, expect cheap service. If you want shoes which will
>> last more than a couple of years, pay for them.
>
> Paying a lot doesn't necessarily get you quality, especially with
> fashion items.
Indeed. Long ago I used to buy Levi jeans for 50 quid a go until I
realised that they had a design life of around 1/10th that of other jeans.
There's some real expensive junk out there, but unfortunately it's
sometimes hard to tell how well a product's going to last.
> I'm still wearing two pairs of Paul Cox sandals (not at once, settle
> down)
heh heh - one pair on your head, just in case of some unexpected bodily
inversion event? :)
cheers
Jules
The Natural Philosopher
Buy shoes with leather soles.
The Natural Philosopher
I used to buy 50 quid shos that lasted 6 months and were irreparable,
Now I buy 100 quid shores that last 5 years and then need resoling and
do another 15 after that..
Rubber sandals for 10 quid that last a year are reasonable value, too.
The Natural Philosopher
> On May 12, 4:21 pm, "Chris Shore" <chris.sh...@arm.nospam.com> wrote:
>> If you buycheap shoes, expect cheap service. If you want shoes which will
>> last more than a couple of years, pay for them.
>
> Paying a lot doesn't necessarily get you quality, especially with
> fashion items. And you can get good stuff in the sales for about the
> same as or a bit less than full-price disposable brands. The important
> thing must be to be able to tell what's going to last and what's not
> when you buy.
Go to the Busy Bee in Newmarket, and get some suede boots for a hundred
and something, that will LAST.
Jon Green
> I used to buy 50 quid shos that lasted 6 months and were irreparable,
> Now I buy 100 quid shores that last 5 years and then need resoling and
> do another 15 after that..
Where from? Are they custom-build, by any chance? My feet are evilly
difficult to fit shoes to, and I'm tired of getting blisters at big
trade shows, so I'm up for any advice on getting well-fitting shoes that
don't cost the earth.
magwitch
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> I used to buy 50 quid shos that lasted 6 months and were irreparable,
>> Now I buy 100 quid shores that last 5 years and then need resoling and
>> do another 15 after that..
>
> Where from? Are they custom-build, by any chance? My feet are evilly
> difficult to fit shoes to, and I'm tired of getting blisters at big
> trade shows, so I'm up for any advice on getting well-fitting shoes that
> don't cost the earth.
>
> Jon
The Busy Bee (top of Newmarket High St near the clocktower) does all the
jockeys' racing and yard boots... and stock various ranges of quality
gents shoes and boots with a handmade feel.
They can more or less repair anything as well.
The Natural Philosopher
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> I used to buy 50 quid shos that lasted 6 months and were irreparable,
>> Now I buy 100 quid shores that last 5 years and then need resoling and
>> do another 15 after that..
>
> Where from? Are they custom-build, by any chance? My feet are evilly
> difficult to fit shoes to, and I'm tired of getting blisters at big
> trade shows, so I'm up for any advice on getting well-fitting shoes that
> don't cost the earth.
>
> Jon
Can make you a set of lightweight racing (horse) boots if yuu want..
Jon Green
> Jon Green wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> Now I buy 100 quid shores that last 5 years and then need resoling
>>> and do another 15 after that..
>>
>> Where from? Are they custom-build, by any chance?
>>
> Can make you a set of lightweight racing (horse) boots if yuu want..
Many thanks, also to Magwitch. I think I might pay them a visit.
Chris Shore
"Jon Green" <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
news:arKdnfuMnJx_ALXV...@bt.com...
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> I used to buy 50 quid shos that lasted 6 months and were irreparable, Now
>> I buy 100 quid shores that last 5 years and then need resoling and do
>> another 15 after that..
>
> Where from? Are they custom-build, by any chance? My feet are evilly
> difficult to fit shoes to, and I'm tired of getting blisters at big trade
> shows, so I'm up for any advice on getting well-fitting shoes that don't
> cost the earth.
I buy mine from John Lewis. Their own-brand shoes are made by Loakes
and are significantly cheaper than buying Loakes shoes. I tend to find that
the factory-fitted soles don't last as long as the ones I subsequently have
them replaced with.
Once you've been wearing a pair of shoes for more than 2-3 years, they
become wonderfully comfortable...
Brian Watson
Nor me. Very odd.
Brian Watson
"Jules" <jules.rich...@remove.this.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2008.05.12....@remove.this.gmail.com...
Oi, leave it!
The poor guy's on his uppers.
Brian Watson
> So all that remains to be done, I think, is for me to try and warn people
> about the company and its products. People should remember how crap the
> shoes turned out to be, and how crap was the company's treatment of my
> complaint. Hopefully more than a few readers will now think twice (or
> more) about buying Hush Puppies in the future. I'll never buy the brand
> again as long as I live -- and I think I can confidently predict that the
> same will go for my family and friends, once they have all seen the way
> the soles have simply perished.
That's me off Hush Puppies.
Can't say I was about to buy a pair, but the thought's planted.
magwitch
which are over 5 years old fit perfectly, yet they are at least a whole
size down from the ones I buy now.
Eleanor Blair
>
>Another thing that irritates me about modern manufacturing is my clothes
>which are over 5 years old fit perfectly, yet they are at least a whole
>size down from the ones I buy now.
Do you mean down or up?
I thought sizes were getting bigger, so if you were a size 12 5 years
ago you'd be a size 10 in new clothes now.
magwitch
> magwitch wrote:
>> Another thing that irritates me about modern manufacturing is my clothes
>> which are over 5 years old fit perfectly, yet they are at least a whole
>> size down from the ones I buy now.
>
> Do you mean down or up?
>
> I thought sizes were getting bigger, so if you were a size 12 5 years
> ago you'd be a size 10 in new clothes now.
>
No I mean, in general, clothes bought now are cut a lot smaller than
they were then. (I suppose to save cloth and maximise profits).
I'd been feeling quite depressed about my ever expanding figure, until I
dug out some 4 y/o size 12 toast jeans the other day which were a
perfect fit and far roomier on than the new (same brand) size 14s I've
been wearing.
Not just this particular pair either, as an old size 12 skirt fitted me
as well.
HE Elsom
> magwitch wrote:
>
> I thought sizes were getting bigger, so if you were a size 12 5 years
> ago you'd be a size 10 in new clothes now.
Victoria Beckham sizes are getting bigger to flatter the well-heeled
but bumless customer; larger sizes are getting small to save fabric.
The crossover point probably varies between brands (I'm too close to
the top of the range ever to see it).
Regards,
Helen
magwitch
should a bumless woman want clothes bigger than would actually fit her?
I thought the whole point of starving yourself and spending every waking
moment at the gym or in the operating theatre was to be able to wear
skin tight clobber yet still look like a stick woman.
Roland Perry
Fri, 16 May 2008, magwitch <a@c.d> remarked:
>>> I thought sizes were getting bigger, so if you were a size 12 5 years
>>> ago you'd be a size 10 in new clothes now.
>> Victoria Beckham sizes are getting bigger to flatter the well-heeled
>> but bumless customer; larger sizes are getting small to save fabric.
>> The crossover point probably varies between brands (I'm too close to
>> the top of the range ever to see it).
>>
>As with most things VB says I really don't understand the logic... why
>should a bumless woman want clothes bigger than would actually fit her?
>
>I thought the whole point of starving yourself and spending every
>waking moment at the gym or in the operating theatre was to be able to
>wear skin tight clobber yet still look like a stick woman.
No, the objective is so women who don't go to those extremes can still
buy a VB size 8 (and brag about it), even though they are really a size
10.
--
Roland Perry
magwitch
I'm slightly dismayed to hear that a size 12 is considered 'Large' these
days ...
I reckon anything over a 16 would be a large size, and even that depends
on the person's height and build.
Eleanor Blair
>
>I'm slightly dismayed to hear that a size 12 is considered 'Large' these
>days ...
I've come across shops where XS/S/M/L/XL means 6/8/10/12/14, but yes,
it's unusual for a 12 to be considered large. Normally XL is a 16 or
18.
>I reckon anything over a 16 would be a large size, and even that depends
>on the person's height and build.
Yes, and people are in general taller these days too. My sister's best
friend was about 5'10" when they were in school and looked incredibly
willowy at a size 12, whereas at 5'0" a similar figure would be more
like a size 8. Mind you you'd certainly consider the former to be a
larger size than the latter, even if they're both equally slim.
wendyjmi...@gmail.com
It was very embarrassing for him......rather amusing for me!!!! to have his shoe soles literally crumble and fall off in large chunks with every step he took. He ended up with only the top of his brogues intact and looking in need of some financial help to purchase shoes rather than advice on his pensions and investments etc..!!!
We haven't complained to the manufacturer......seems pretty futile as we have no proof of purchase or indeed when and where we bought them.
Have bought hush puppies shoes for years and yes they used to last years as well.....usually ending up as gardening shoes.
Can provide photos of these shoes for any interested person before they are donated for the local Guy on bonfire night!
Rhodri James
they were hardly worn for several years, and whatever the sole was made of
had perished over time and fell apart as I walked around. I think the
manufacturers normally rely on people using their shoes more frequently so
that the wear is less unexpected.
--
Rhodri James *-* Wildebeest herder to the masses
Disclaimer: it's all my fault.
The Natural Philosopher
turns to crumbs. buy quality leather soles and fit urethane oversoles if
you want grip..
--
Ineptocracy
(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.
Al Grant
> yerrs..seen that occasionally in rubber, especially under UV..it sort of
> turns to crumbs. buy quality leather soles and fit urethane oversoles if
> you want grip..
for years is generally due to hydrolysis, not UV.
John
similar
occasions. The tread pattern is still 90% there and they are as good as new.
jks
zulu
When I were a lad we used to call condoms *Push Huppies*
:-)
--
zulu
Paul Oldham
of having a pair of hardly worn.......weddings funerals etc!...not too
many of these either!!!...black brogue hush puppies self destruct at a
very important and rather posh financial forum held in a lovely manor
house in kent.
> It was very embarrassing for him......rather amusing for me!!!! to
have his shoe soles literally crumble and fall off in large chunks with
every step he took. He ended up with only the top of his brogues intact
and looking in need of some financial help to purchase shoes rather than
advice on his pensions and investments etc..!!!
tops. Happened while we were at a visit to a consultant at Cambridge
Leas. Hopefully he couldn't see my shoes over his desk ...
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.milton.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"HEADACHE: Method of contraception most widely used by women"
christina...@yahoo.co.uk
Espen Koht
> Hi, I know this is 11 years on after your post but omg yep. This has just happened to mine today. I’ve bought these from a lovely woman on eBay who had never worn them and they were new in the box. After having them on for a little over 5 hours today I’ve came home and most of the sole on the right sable/flip flop has disintegrated. Hubby made a remark saying it was my weight. The cheeky bugger. I’m only 10st. But I’m so upset coz I actually bought 2 pairs for my holiday tomorrow ☹️ I’m scared to wear the 2nd pair now.
shoe manufactures have had a problem with the manufacturing processes
using this material resulting shoes disintegrating after prolonged
periods of storage due to hydrolysis. Here is a note from Clarks Shoes
on the matter:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5KsBtLRQQH4m2kPvN1w5fYd/clark-shoe
and is reasonably well covered when you start looking for it.
Ironically the clue to the problem is that she had never worn them;
regular use (compression) keeps the problem in check, but when you then
put the shoes away in storage the process starts. This happened to a set
of my Eccos on my way out the door to open a conference; thankfully just
as I was about to leave and not when I stepping up on stage!
rajeev...@gmail.com
Keith Willshaw
> I had a similar problem i had purchase hush puppies shoes 2 yrs ago, and I was not wearing it regularly said only when I remove it after 2 months I notice the soul's got powdered
>