Reebok Kids' Shoes Wore Out in 2 Months, Denied Warranty Claim

35

I purchased a pair of Reebok kids' shoes on September 4 through their website. After just two months of use, the shoes started to show significant wear and tear. I sent them to FLO under warranty, but the claim was rejected, citing consumer fault.

I find it unacceptable that a product costing ₺1,300 barely lasts two months. We didn’t pay this amount for shoes meant for such a short usage period. I request that Reebok addresses this issue and resolves my grievance. This experience has been disappointing, and I expect the brand to stand by its quality promise and provide a replacement or a refund.

Comments

Similar Complaints

Reebok Shoes Worn for 1 Month Already Tearing – Refund Request Denied

35

I purchased a pair of Reebok shoes about six months ago, but my son only started wearing them in September. He uses a se...

Reebok Shoes Worn for 1 Month Already Tearing – Refund Request Denied
Reebok Shoes Worn for 1 Month Already Tearing – Refund Request Denied
Reebok Shoes Worn for 1 Month Already Tearing – Refund Request Denied
Reebok Shoes Worn for 1 Month Already Tearing – Refund Request Denied

My Reebok Shoes Rip After 2 Months

45

I purchased a pair of Reebok shoes that started ripping within 2 months. I don't run or exercise in them, just wear them...

Reebok Warranty Denied! Month-Old Glide Unisex Shoes Rip

52

I bought a pair of Reebok Glide Unisex Black sneakers for everyday use. Merely a month post-purchase, the top section of...

Reebok Warranty Denied! Month-Old Glide Unisex Shoes Rip
Reebok Warranty Denied! Month-Old Glide Unisex Shoes Rip

Reebok Denied My Warranty Claim Despite Quick Heel Damage on New Shoes

30

On July 1, I purchased a pair of Reebok shoes from the Torium store. Even though I used the shoes only for walking, the ...

Reebok Denied My Warranty Claim Despite Quick Heel Damage on New Shoes
Reebok Denied My Warranty Claim Despite Quick Heel Damage on New Shoes