Discussion in 'Shoes and Apparel' started by kimguroo, Jul 27, 2010.
Yes. It should be okay.
Thanks for the reply.
Hey I picked up the fila sentinel white/navy/green in July and now my toe dragging has opened a hole in it. (Will post a pic soon) Anyway it's no longer on the website for sale so I was wondering what happens if I return it. Also since I live in Canada will I have to pay customs on the replacement?
Is it enough for warranty?
Yes. The midsole was exposed in the middle of right shoes so it will qualify for a warranty.
Thank you. But Nike warranty card is saying that it has to be worn out through midsole.
No. See other pics, if midsole is exposed, you are okay to claim warranty.
BTW midsole is form material.
Claim was approved by Nike and I got $95 voucher. Thank you.
Why did Nike give you only $95???
You should get a voucher which is MSRP of the shoes instead of receipt price.
Did you claim as a outsole warranty? Manufacturer's defects?
Strange... Hope Nike did not change their warranty policies.
Ballistec Advantage MSRP is $95 now.
Did not know ballistec advantage has the warranty and I thought the pic of outsole was zoom cage.
is this enough on the edge?
other shoe for comparison: http://i.imgur.com/VbwOMAW.jpg
Outsole is almost done but I don't see midsole yet.
Usually TW is generous that warranty exchange might be granted but not sure either Adidas or Nike.
Tough call. If you still have warranty period left, use more Until you see the midsole.
Should I send these in based on the heel part on the right shoe?
Has anyone sent Fila shoes back for warranty replacement? I have had a very inconsistent experience with them!
I have another Ballistec Advantage in question.
And actually they have more problems on top. Is it a workmanship? The hole on top appeared in about 2 weeks of playing.
Warranty is for outsole. not upper part. It does not look like workmanship problem for upper part.
Nike is generous about warranty but I prefer to expose midsole (foam) in order to qualify the warranty.
About an outsole. Is it enough for warranty or not yet? First picture.
I checked the pic again and I see that right side shoes exposed midsole so I think it's good enough.
Wilson denied my warranty claim on these.
1- has anyone experienced anything similar to this?
2- does Wilson expect me to play in these?
What was the reason?
Willson should grant your warranty claim. Nike and Adidas will definitely grant shoes which is similar to your condition. Try to contact to Wilson and find an answer. If Wilson does not give you appropriate answer, probably No Wilson shoes for life.
The shoes were returned with a note explaining that my warranty claim was denied because the outsole had not been worn through 'showing the interior'. This used to mean showing the midsole (which is clearly exposed in my picture), but perhaps they've changed the definition. It would be a shame if they required further wear for a warranty claim-- it's not safe for me to play in them anymore.
I've opened a case with Wilson customer service and provided them pictures along with the rejection letter. Hopefully they'll reconsider. I've really enjoyed the Rush Pro and would hate to have to switch brands over this.
Wilson is actually good with warranty claims. It's a good idea to ask them reconsider. But Rush pro is discontinued.. they'll probably send a pair of rush pro 2
Agreed. I had a claim last year on a pair of Rush Pro 1.0s and received the Rush Pro 2.0s as the warranty pair. I enjoy them as well.
While it could be assumed the flat spot was enough for warranty replacement, the cut appears to be damage from use other than normal tennis.
~80 hours of normal tennis use over 8-9 weeks-- although I am quicker than most other guys in their 30's
First time I've posted pics here, because normally there is no question as to whether someone will accept my warranty claim. I always have obvious holes in my shoes in about 4 months, but my Lotto Raptor Ultra 4's have been super durable, and I only have two weeks until the 6 month warranty runs out. Do you think they qualify? On one of my shoes I've worn through what I consider the outsole into the softer white part. Any advice? Thanks in advance.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd say that left shoe qualifies.
Will this qualify?
Haven't dealt with Adidas much but I think this should qualify. Thoughts?
Lunar ballistec 1 month 20 days..going for warranty claim for the first time..the outsole below the toe is completely worn out, rest is intact..will it qualify? will post pics soon - somehow
50 days and this is what's happened..i want my money back my last pair lasted 7 months
I'm pretty sure all the manufs list toe dragging as disqualifying for warranty.
I have dealt with Adidas and this should qualify. Good luck.
Gel Resolution 6, what do you think?
Any thoughts on this pair? I'm trying to wear them out before the warranty is up in October. Thanks
They look good to turn in. The sides have the foam visible.
Separate names with a comma.