Viberg - any other horrible experiences?

[TREEMAN]

Oh yea, that's definitely the belly part of leather. It's like that because it's not stretched over the back muscle of an animal but instead hangs across & under the belly area and there's also a lot more fat under it.
In turn, this leather is thinner, stretchier and slightly weaker but it's still more than usable for clothes, just perhaps not as much for footwear.

Regardless, I don't really see this happening on Cyber Lips boots. It could be close to the belly but it's still, well, good.

Either way, it's one million percent not damage and people claiming it's damage should get sent to jail.

The company itself looked at the photo sent and said it was damaged during shipping.

 

[One Drop]

You can see almost identical creasing in their stock photo. I would guess it's a result of lasting with this leather.

First thing I noticed when I saw the pictures, had to go back and confirm they were Viberg pix and not from the seller. They literally have the identical crease, and these are studio shots of what I assume are unworn boots.

Perhaps Viberg should give more information about what to expect with theor different leathers f the are out of the ordinary, but they don't require a refund IMO.

I think a store credit is reasonable, but YMMV.

 

[jonbuilder]

What was the resolution? Did you keep the shoes, return for store credit?

 

[Cyber Lip]

What was the resolution? Did you keep the shoes, return for store credit?

I ended up filing a dispute with my credit card company, and they found in my favor and refunded my $$. This was after I went around and around with their customer service person via email and they refused to budge. I would have happily taken them up on their offer of store credit (IF they covered return postage), but they were sold out of this shoe in my size, and didn't have anything else I wanted. I was ONLY in the market for a brown oxford style shoe, and have more than everything else I need footwear-wise.

Now my friends, a note to any and all potential knuckleheads LOL: before you jump in and start hammering at me for not just bending over and talking it and going this route to get my $$ back, let me just reiterate that per their own customer service person who reviewed the photos I sent, it was "damage caused during shipping". Now, I know this probably wasn't really the case (they were packed well) and the "damage caused during shipping" seems to be a generic response from what I read online from people that contacted them with similar issues and got that exact same reply. It was clear to me what it really most likely was, was an inferior/mismatched/undesirable piece of leather used for one section of one of the shoes. In any event, unacceptable for an $850 pair of shoes. You don't even see this on a $69 made in China pair of Clarks at the mall. And yes, their 'no refund' return policy is stated on their site, but IMO sticking that up on a website doesn't absolve a seller from pulling bait and switch style scams.

 

[cbez]

There was no bait and switch scam, multiple people demonstrated for you that that's just how that leather typically creases and the same type of creasing is visible in their product photos and on virtually every used pair in that leather.

Hopefully your next pair you find a leather that creases how you prefer, it pays to do some research.

 

[Cyber Lip]

There was no bait and switch scam, multiple people demonstrated for you that that's just how that leather typically creases and the same type of creasing is visible in their product photos and on virtually every used pair in that leather.

Hopefully your next pair you find a leather that creases how you prefer, it pays to do some research.

To clarify...I wasn't accusing Viberg of a bait and switch scam. Although I do suspect that they intentionally sent me a bad pair that was either a customer return, or a 'factory 2nd' that they were hoping I would accept, which ain't cool, but I digress. Anyway, the point I was making was that a business can't send out products that are other than as advertised then hide behind a 'no refunds' policy to deny refunds when customers complain, and I was using 'bait and switch' style operations as an example of 'well of course you can't do that, otherwise shady bait and switch practices would be legal'. So is that clear? or you just one of these internet contrarians that just wants to argue.

As for suggesting I'm just a dope that didn't like the way my shoes creased...go back and read my posts. Hopefully your next internet interactions will be better, it pays to do some research.

 

[cbez]

I am happy to let others review the many photos provided to you and come to their own conclusions.