On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 23:16:36 +0200, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
electrons, so they looked like this :

... On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 21:11:21 GMT, "Lennart Petersen"
... <[email protected]> wrote:
... >
... >"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
... >news:[email protected].. .
... >> [email protected] writes:
... >>
... >>> One month isn't normal wear and tear for a pair of man's shoes.
... >>
... >> Why not?
... >>
... >> My shoes last a bit over a year--but I can put 5000 km on them in that
... >> time.
... >That's 14km/day or 3h daily walking in average pace.
...
... That's normal for a guide surely?
...
... >Deduct sleeping and all the hours spend with the computer and r.t.e what's
... >left ?
...
... sunsets?

And, if you are lucky, some rainbows too. :))

On 2004-10-31 00:04:56 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]> said:

    > [email protected] writes:
    >
    >> What tribunal?
    >
    > If you file a lawsuit that's usually where it ends up.

If you put it in a pie it ends up in the oven. Your point being?

J;

--
Encrypted e-mail address. Click to mail me:
http://cerbermail.com/?nKYh3qN4YG

In article <[email protected]>,
Jeremy Henderson <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Her -You've got to be ****ing joking. That's normal wear.

She did not really say that.

Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Miguel Cruz writes:
    >> Soles worn through after 4 weeks of light use is not "normal wear and tear".
    > Who said anything about light use?

The guy who posted "After 4 weeks of occasional wear".

    > And how do you know what's normal without knowing how well the shoes are
    > made?

Huh? The point is that they seem to have been poorly made. What's normal is
for them to be decently made.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu

Miguel Cruz writes:

    > Huh? The point is that they seem to have been poorly made. What's normal is
    > for them to be decently made.

That depends on what you pay for them. Poorly made shoes are legion,
and you don't necessarily have a claim against a manufacturer of poorly
made goods, unless you can show that you were misled into believing they
were better made, or that they are of such poor quality with respect to
the price that they contain a "vice caché" (hidden defect).

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

"Jeremy Henderson" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[email protected]...
    > In a continuing series...
    > A little over a month ago I bought a pair of shoes from Minelli - a
    > chain of shoe shops here in Frogland. After 4 weeks of occasional wear
    > to take me from home to the RER station to work and back I noticed that
    > the heels of both shoes were completely destroyed, with holes appearing
    > where the thin rubber had been worn away. It's true that I am hard on
    > shoes, but this is certainly the first time that they've disintegrated
    > quite so rapidly.
    > So I decided to return them to the shop.
<SNIP>
    > So I will end with a plea for advice from our French readers, and other
    > knowledgeable folk: what organisations exist to look after the rights
    > of consumers in France, what recourse do I have, and where can I inform
    > myself of my options (yes, Google ... :-)
As this story appears not to involve anything requiring EU intervention,
IMHO the most appropriate organisation is:
L'Union fédérale des Consommateurs - Que Choisir:
http://www.quechoisir.fr

Regards,

- Alan (in Brussels - mind the spamtrap)

On 2004-10-31 04:54:34 +0100, poldy <[email protected]> said:

    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > Jeremy Henderson <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> Her -You've got to be ****ing joking. That's normal wear.
    >
    > She did not really say that.

What she said was something along the lines of "Vous me foutez?"

J;

--
Encrypted e-mail address. Click to mail me:
http://cerbermail.com/?nKYh3qN4YG

On 2004-10-31 08:20:04 +0100, "Alan \(in Brussels\)"
<[email protected]> said:
    >
    > "Jeremy Henderson" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de
    > news:[email protected]...
    >>
    >> So I will end with a plea for advice from our French readers, and other
    >> knowledgeable folk: what organisations exist to look after the rights
    >> of consumers in France, what recourse do I have, and where can I inform
    >> myself of my options (yes, Google ... :-)
    >>
    > As this story appears not to involve anything requiring EU intervention,
    > IMHO the most appropriate organisation is:
    > L'Union fédérale des Consommateurs - Que Choisir:
    > http://www.quechoisir.fr

Thanks, Alan - that looks useful.

J;
--
Encrypted e-mail address. Click to mail me:
http://cerbermail.com/?nKYh3qN4YG

Alan (in Brussels) wrote:

    > "Jeremy Henderson" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de
    > news:[email protected]...
    >
    >>In a continuing series...
    >>A little over a month ago I bought a pair of shoes from Minelli - a
    >>chain of shoe shops here in Frogland. After 4 weeks of occasional wear
    >>to take me from home to the RER station to work and back I noticed that
    >>the heels of both shoes were completely destroyed, with holes appearing
    >>where the thin rubber had been worn away. It's true that I am hard on
    >>shoes, but this is certainly the first time that they've disintegrated
    >>quite so rapidly.
    >>So I decided to return them to the shop.
    >
    > <SNIP>
    >
    >>So I will end with a plea for advice from our French readers, and other
    >>knowledgeable folk: what organisations exist to look after the rights
    >>of consumers in France, what recourse do I have, and where can I inform
    >>myself of my options (yes, Google ... :-)
    >
    > As this story appears not to involve anything requiring EU intervention,
    > IMHO the most appropriate organisation is:
    > L'Union fédérale des Consommateurs - Que Choisir:
    > http://www.quechoisir.fr
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > - Alan (in Brussels - mind the spamtrap)
    >
    >
Hmmm. Looks like a useful site. Maybe I can find something about a 3
year old roof that allowed gallons of water to run into my art studio
this morning. ;-(

I suspect I'll just have to pay to have it redone. The fellow who did it
decided he was tired of working as a handyman and moved back to Normandy
a couple of years ago. Sigh.

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 00:04:56 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >[email protected] writes:
    >> What tribunal?
    >If you file a lawsuit that's usually where it ends up.

as somebody said in the UK it's not normally necessary to file a law
suit in guarantee situations.
--
Martin

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 00:30:13 +0200, Magda
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 23:16:36 +0200, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
    >electrons, so they looked like this :
    > ... On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 21:11:21 GMT, "Lennart Petersen"
    > ... <[email protected]> wrote:
    > ... >
    > ... >"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
    > ... >news:[email protected].. .
    > ... >> [email protected] writes:
    > ... >>
    > ... >>> One month isn't normal wear and tear for a pair of man's shoes.
    > ... >>
    > ... >> Why not?
    > ... >>
    > ... >> My shoes last a bit over a year--but I can put 5000 km on them in that
    > ... >> time.
    > ... >That's 14km/day or 3h daily walking in average pace.
    > ...
    > ... That's normal for a guide surely?
    > ...
    > ... >Deduct sleeping and all the hours spend with the computer and r.t.e what's
    > ... >left ?
    > ...
    > ... sunsets?
    >And, if you are lucky, some rainbows too. :))

and the occasional waterspout :-)
--
Martin

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 03:54:34 GMT, poldy <[email protected]> wrote:

    >In article <[email protected]>,
    > Jeremy Henderson <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> Her -You've got to be ****ing joking. That's normal wear.
    >She did not really say that.

Of course not, Jeremy provided a loose translation.
--
Martin

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 09:18:10 +0100, Jeremy Henderson <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >On 2004-10-31 04:54:34 +0100, poldy <[email protected]> said:
    >> In article <[email protected]>,
    >> Jeremy Henderson <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Her -You've got to be ****ing joking. That's normal wear.
    >>
    >> She did not really say that.
    >What she said was something along the lines of "Vous me foutez?"

and you accepted? She was offering compensation in kind.
--
Martin

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 08:10:05 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >Miguel Cruz writes:
    >> Huh? The point is that they seem to have been poorly made. What's normal is
    >> for them to be decently made.
    >That depends on what you pay for them. Poorly made shoes are legion,
    >and you don't necessarily have a claim against a manufacturer of poorly
    >made goods, unless you can show that you were misled into believing they
    >were better made, or that they are of such poor quality with respect to
    >the price that they contain a "vice caché" (hidden defect).

That's not what the law says.
--
Martin

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 09:49:40 +0100, Ellie C <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >Alan (in Brussels) wrote:
    >> "Jeremy Henderson" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de
    >> news:[email protected]...
    >>
    >>>In a continuing series...
    >>>A little over a month ago I bought a pair of shoes from Minelli - a
    >>>chain of shoe shops here in Frogland. After 4 weeks of occasional wear
    >>>to take me from home to the RER station to work and back I noticed that
    >>>the heels of both shoes were completely destroyed, with holes appearing
    >>>where the thin rubber had been worn away. It's true that I am hard on
    >>>shoes, but this is certainly the first time that they've disintegrated
    >>>quite so rapidly.
    >>>So I decided to return them to the shop.
    >>
    >> <SNIP>
    >>
    >>>So I will end with a plea for advice from our French readers, and other
    >>>knowledgeable folk: what organisations exist to look after the rights
    >>>of consumers in France, what recourse do I have, and where can I inform
    >>>myself of my options (yes, Google ... :-)
    >>
    >> As this story appears not to involve anything requiring EU intervention,
    >> IMHO the most appropriate organisation is:
    >> L'Union fédérale des Consommateurs - Que Choisir:
    >> http://www.quechoisir.fr
    >>
    >> Regards,
    >>
    >> - Alan (in Brussels - mind the spamtrap)
    >>
    >>
    >Hmmm. Looks like a useful site. Maybe I can find something about a 3
    >year old roof that allowed gallons of water to run into my art studio
    >this morning. ;-(
    >I suspect I'll just have to pay to have it redone. The fellow who did it
    >decided he was tired of working as a handyman and moved back to Normandy
    >a couple of years ago. Sigh.

He's probably gone back to shoveling manure.
--
Martin