Boots

[triskellian]

Talking of things I did back in August... as well as trying to document the music my head plays at me, I bought a lovely pair of red boots. Without really thinking about the practicalities of footwear in a city where you can't avoid doing lots of walking, I took them to Venice, because they were new, and I'd hardly worn them. I was lucky. They were tremendously comfortable, and although my feet were sometimes sore, I avoided blisters entirely.

Yesterday, I noticed that my lovely boots both have seriously split soles. I checked my wallet, and I still have the receipt - I bought them for fifty quid on 31 August. My immediate thought is, Venice or not, I expect fifty quid boots to last longer than two months.

The Citizens Advice Bureau says that goods should:

• be of satisfactory quality. This means that the goods should be of the quality that a reasonable person would expect given the description, price and any other relevant circumstances.
• be fit for the purpose. This means that you must be able to use them for the purposes that you would normally expect from this type of product

But that the trader isn't responsible if:

• you have damaged the goods yourself
• the problem is the result of normal wear and tear
• the goods have lasted for as long as could reasonably be expected.

Is split soles after two months of wear 'normal wear and tear'? Am I going to be laughed out of the shop when I go in later for a refund or replacement? Does the fact that I wore them for two weeks walking around Venice (which I'm not going to tell the guy in the shop) count as 'damaging them myself'? Would you go back and complain, or would you just shrug, try and fix them with glue, and/or just shell out for a new pair of boots?