Converse Rejected My Claim for Heel Tear Despite Careful and Short Term Use
As a result of my application dated 19.04.2025, my Converse shoes—torn at the heel—were inspected and I was informed that the claim was rejected. However, considering I used the product for only a very short period and with great care, such damage suggests a manufacturing defect. I do not accept the conclusion that this was due to user error. Given the short usage period and the specific location of the damage, it is highly unlikely that such a tear could occur under normal use. After receiving the negative response, I informed the store staff that I wanted to appeal the decision, and they suggested resubmitting the shoes for a second inspection. On 28.04.2025, I submitted the shoes again, clearly stating that I had used them as intended. However, they were returned with the exact same explanation as before. Therefore, I am requesting that a more thorough and detailed inspection be carried out, preferably by an independent technical service if necessary. I kindly ask that my issue be resolved and that the product be either refunded, replaced, or repaired.
