Baby steps to replacing buggy

SOUNDING OFF: A reader from Dublin travelled with her husband and infant twins to the Algarve in the middle of March. While in transit to Faro the couple's twin buggy was badly damaged. They made contact with Aer Lingus upon their return and were told that while they were perfectly entitled to make a claim it could take up to 10 months to get a response from the airline.

Amazed, the couple lodged a formal complaint but decided that they could not wait forever to hear back from the airline as, based on they time frame they were given, their two boys would be walking to school before the issue was resolved.

They took the twin buggy, which retails for in excess of €700, to a repair shop and were told that it was too badly damaged and would need to be replaced. The couple have since tried and failed to make contact with the airline to ascertain the status of their claim. "One of the most frustrating things about this whole thing, quite apart from the ridiculous delay, is how hard it is to get through to someone in Aer Lingus," they wrote. "There are no numbers we can call and nowhere we can e-mail to find out what is going on."

We made contact with the airline to find out what was the status of our reader's complaint and how Aer Lingus was planning to proceed. We received a statement which said Aer Lingus Customer Relations acknowledges all correspondence within three to five working days and aims to resolve all queries and claims within five to seven working days. "We regret that this has not been the case in this instance." The spokeswoman said a customer service representative had made contact with our reader and resolved the issue. "In the case of damage to a buggy or car seat, we advise customers to replace the item for safety reasons. Customers can make a claim for the replacement item through their travel insurance if they are in possession of same, or by sending the receipt to our Customer Relations department," the statement continued. "Aer Lingus apologises for the delay in responding to the passenger in question and for any inconvenience caused."

Footing the bill

Karen Keyes has a seven-year-old daughter with size three feet. "When I went to buy her a pair of Nike runners I was told that the Vat was higher on shoes over a size 2½. Her runners were therefore €75 instead of €50. I went to a sports shop across the road and the runners were €50 up to and including a size three. What is the correct cut-off and is there any way to claim back the Vat? Is there any Government department I should complain to about this?"

In 1985 legislation was passed which said that shoe sizes which did not exceed the size appropriate to children of average foot size at 10 years old but excluding shoes which were not described, labelled, marked or marketed on the basis of age or size attracted no Vat.

Ten years ago, the legislation was amended after changes in trends made it difficult to distinguish between children's and adult shoes. A strict interpretation of the law could have seen a child's size three Doc Marten being liable to Vat at the standard rate of 21 per cent as the boots were not specifically designed for children. In order to avoid such a situation, the Revenue Commissioners agreed with representatives of the footwear trade that footwear manufactured in the full range of sizes from the smallest children's to adults' sizes could be zero rated up to and including size 5½ for these specific styles.

Readers who are concerned about mis-pricing in any stores should contact the National Consumer Agency with their concerns.