Refuse exchange for brand new Nike Magista Soccer Boot

<p>On the 17/09/2016, we arrived at the East Gate Cross Trainer store and purchased a Nike Magista Soccer Boots with ankle guard i.e sock, after one match, we noticed the stitches are detatching and the base coat is clearly reflecting due to top coat peeling. We returned to the store, pointing out the defaults and was advised the boot will be sent to the head office in Sandton to the Buyer for inspection. We gave had no communication as promised from the store, and upon conducting our own follow up and constantly calling the store, was advised the Buyer Juan Andre refuses to replace the boot, without a sought and thorough explanation. We politely requested a call from the Buyer Juan Andre and was informed by the staff at the store he refuses to call us. We obtained his contact details, but we were unable to speak to him? We have then at this point received calls from staff at East Gate Cross Trainer, Isabella and Sharon and advised they have informed the Buyer Juan Andre and basically begged him to contact us.......but to no avail. At this point we decided to contact Nike SA and directly liaised with them, they are although a helpful and empathetic bunch, we were informed regarding the ruling according to the Consumer Protection Act Section 56 which entails the replacement of failed goods and the 6 month warranty. We contacted the store, again, updated them regarding the communication with Nike, and surprisingly enough, neither or had anything to say beside, we will call the Buyer. Neither of the Cross Trainer staff had a clue pertaining to the CPA Act, that's astonishing A few days pass and thank God my son utilises soccer Boots for different occasions and luckily has a specific pair for his daily training, as the store was not communicating with us, only to be advised, they did not have my son's boots at the store, and on some joyride with the company driver!!?? Finally, we have had it, I once again, dissatisfied, disappointed and disgustedly left the store, with disgraceful comments and remarks direct from the Buyer i.e Juan Andre, we were advised he refuses to replace the boot, communicate with me and does not feel the need to explain why he declined the replacement , and states he has no knowledge of the CPA section 56 ruling as it is not his problem I purchased a **** product. He as well stated he will return all the boots in the same make of my son's but will not consider replacing my son's.....at this point, it is apparent the buyers manager will connduct another inspection before concluding. I am due to await that response, that's if I don't have to conduct a follow up again, as they are famous for not contacting or returning my calls. </p>