My Reebok Shoes Tore Within Months but FLO Refused a Replacement
About eight months ago, I purchased a pair of Reebok shoes, size 40, with barcode number 1200161016646, from the FLO store in Sincan, Ankara. Although the shoes were used only under normal daily conditions, they quickly became deformed and eventually tore. Because of this premature damage, I submitted the product for a warranty inspection.
Regarding my purchase 9990100000000028IKR5R, the inspection conducted on July 7, 2026, under inspection document number FP260707-456-0620903, concluded with a standard statement claiming that "no material or manufacturing defect was found in the product." As a result, my request for a replacement was denied. However, I was never provided with a technical report or any concrete evidence explaining why the damage was classified as user-caused.
The shoes were never subjected to impact, misuse, or improper care. They were used only for normal, everyday wear, yet they still developed serious damage within a short period of time. A product deteriorating and tearing this quickly does not reflect the level of quality I expected from trusted brands such as FLO and Reebok.
To resolve this issue, I request that the defective shoes be replaced with a new pair or that another appropriate remedy be provided under the applicable consumer warranty. If my request is not honored, I will exercise my legal rights by filing a claim with the Consumer Arbitration Committee under Consumer Protection Law No. 6502.
