What a Waste: My Sheepskin and Things Moccasins Won’t Make it Through This Winter Let Alone Next Winter

Holes in the lining and the soles falling off- not how one would expect "durable" moccasins to wear in 3 months.

I’m diverging from overpackaging for a post, as I have before to talk about wastefully made items that just create more waste and burden the environment (see a previous post I did on Forever 21 leggings that only lasted me one wear here).

At the end of November, I bought moccasins from Sheepskin and Things online. I bought one pair for my mother and one for myself. I received the moccasins on December 7th. A second box arrived at the same time with a third pair of moccasins in a different size and colour than my mother’s and mine and with an invoice with someone else’s name, address, and part of their credit card number. I immediately contacted Sheepskin and Things through their email address to tell them that I had received this other box of moccasins and asked them what I should do. I never heard anything back.

I was initially pleased with my moccasins. They were much prettier than my last moccasins, with a rabbit fur fringe and beading. They were light and comfortable to wear around my house, making excellent slippers. My place has a lot of wood floors, so I appreciated having warm slippers in the winter.

In early January, I noticed that the inside of my new moccasins, less than one month old were wearing through at the heels. I was shocked. I emailed Sheepskin and Things again. I never heard anything back. I was really disappointed and felt a fool for purchasing moccasins through their website, rather than from a store that I could take them back to.

Holes had started to form in the "sheepskin" linings of the moccasins.

In early February, when the moccasins were less than two moths old, I noticed that the bottoms of the moccasins were starting to come off as the stitching had come undone in places. I’m not sure if they are defective or just badly made, but I would expect more than two months of wear of moccasins before they start to fall apart. My other pairs of moccasins that I’ve had over the years have lasted much longer.

By two months, the holes in linings had become worse.

The soles of the moccasins were coming off already. . .

. . . in multiple places.

This time, I went to the Sheepskin and Things website, and filled in an online contact form. This time I did receive a reply. The fellow from their customer service department told me that they were switching their customer service system and that is why my emails had not been answered. I felt renewed hope that they would help me with my falling apart moccasins. They asked me to send photos of my moccasins.

I sent the photos from early January email and photos from early February. The fellow wrote back and said it looked like my moccasins had been wet from wearing them outside. I wrote back to tell him that I most certainly had not worn my moccasins, which I wear as slippers indoors only, outside. I pointed out to him that I have many, many other shoes to wear outside, including a couple of pairs of beautiful mukluks (not from their company by the way). I also said that I was really upset at the bad customer service that I had had thus far and being accused of wearing these moccasins outside.

It was obvious from looking at the photos that the stitching on the bottom of the moccasins had failed and that is why the soles were coming off. Also, the inside lining of the moccasins was clearly not just sheepskin as it had a strange net-like backing to it. Perhaps this doesn’t wear as well as true sheepskin and that is why my linings were wearing through so fast.

I heard nothing back from the customer service agent. I gave it a week and emailed back. Nothing again. I used the online form on their website again and asked if they would ever be replying to help me. I have heard nothing since. It’s been more than two months since I first contacted them about my defective moccasins.

The Sheepskin and Things website has this to say about their women’s moccasins:
“Providing Canadians and the world with only the best in Canadian made fur moccasins and fur slippers. Our fur moccasins and fur slippers are made with select soft suedes and luxurious leather. Enjoy our fur moccasins and fur slippers in the comfort of your home! Our moccasins and slippers are hand beaded with an assortment of colourful glass beads.”

The description for my particular moccasins on their website states:
“Create your own traditions with our womens [sic] Indian tan rabbit fur moccasins. These are the perfect gift for your family. These womens [sic] Indian tan moccasins are made in Canada with genuine Canadian suede and plush rabbit fur. Each womens [sic] moccasins have a hand sewn glass beaded design on the vamp that is unique to each moccasin. These moccasins are ideal for indoor wear. The suede moccasin sole is soft yet durable [emphasis added] keeping your feet warm and comfortable all year long.”

Besides stating that the moccasins are made with select/luxurious materials, that they’re ideal for indoor wear, and that they’re durable, the descriptions don’t say anything about the moccasins being destroyed if they come into contact with any water in your home (from time to time one may encounter drops of water on the floor of the bathroom or kitchen in one’s home.) In any event, they are most certainly not durable in my experience.

It’s been three months since I received the moccasins and there are holes in the “sheepskin” lining of the moccasins and the sole of each moccasin continues to come off.

Three months of wear and these moccasins look really worn out and sad on their soles . . .

. . . and in their worn out lining.

Can't believe that these moccasins are so worn out after only three months. What junk.

I feel upset every time I wear them, thinking about not only how I was ripped off, but also how the company treated me when it was clear that the moccasins were defective. I still can’t believe they chose to accuse me of wearing them outside and then never email me back. It’s one of the worst cases of customer service failure that I have ever experienced in my life. Who knows if that fellow whose moccasins got delivered to me ever got a replacement pair. And I still haven’t been told what to do with his moccasins. If I were the owner of the company, I would be embarrassed and worried if I had sent someone’s name and full address and part of their credit card number to another customer. In these days of identity theft, that’s a really bad move. Accidental or not, clearly their system needs some work.

My mother has not worn her moccasins much yet and maybe she’ll have a better experience, but given the company’s lack of customer service or willingness to stand behind the quality of my moccasins, I don’t feel optimistic.

I’ve bought many wonderful things online, but these moccasins are an example of either junk or something defective that a company won’t stand behind. It’s a shame for resources to be wasted on items that will just be thrown out before they should be. I try to buy items that will last as long as possible because that’s better than buying disposable or poorly made items that will just create more garbage in the landfill. Now I must look for a new pair of slippers soon, as these will be garbage much sooner than they should be. What a shame and what a waste.

I’ve been burned before and I’m sure I will be again shopping online, but one thing is for certain. I’ll never be buying anything from Sheepskin and Things again.

Gillette and Equate Disposable Razors: Dense Packaging That's Totally Unnecessary

Disposable razors are almost always cheaper than buying blades for a razor. They are disposable by their nature and therefore create more waste than just a blade, but for some reason, the companies that sell them insist on creating even more waste with their packaging.

Here are two examples of disposable razors that I've bought in the past several months.

Gillette Venus Disposable Razors

These razors come in a semi-rigid plastic tray with a piece of plastic fused over the top that one must peel back to access the razors. There is a bunch of wasted plastic in this format. Why can’t they just come in a little Ziploc bag?

Equate Disposable Razors

These razors also came in the plastic tray format with the piece of plastic fused over top to be peeled back. There was a lot of empty space in the tray.

I just can’t believe that they can’t think of better way to package disposable razors. Or is the large packaging just a ploy to get consumers to notice them on a crowded shelf and in a crowded industry? Whatever the reason, I hope that someone stops this trend of giant plastic packages for disposable razors and thereby leads the way to less waste. Everyone benefits when overpackaging stops.

Old Navy: Junk Clothing, Random Tall Sizing, Overpackaging, and Abysmal Customer Service

Like a disappointing Christmas morning . . .

Almost a month ago, I placed my first order with Old Navy online. Having just had a baby and being confined mostly to home with the baby and in need of clothes in the dreaded tall size (can’t find that very many places), I took the plunge. What a mistake. Read on to find out why I’ll never be shopping with Old Navy again whether online or in store.

Placing the order itself was difficult, as in the reviews there were continuous complaints about things being randomly sized. One item will fit completely differently than another item, making it almost impossible to know what your Old Navy size is without trying something on. Unfortunately for tall women, none of their tall line is in ANY of their brick and mortar stores. None. So, I tried to use the size chart provided on the Old Navy website, plus reviews to gauge which size of various items I would fit in. I own a couple of Old Navy shirts and a dress from the brick and mortar store in Vancouver, so I thought I had a pretty good idea of what sizes I needed (these items were not tall sizes). I ordered three long sleeved shirts, a pair of workout leggings, and a canvas field jacket.

I then waited for my order to arrive. When it arrived I was excited. The box was not overly big, but it was absolutely full of plastic bags. Every single item was in a plastic bag, some of them huge. There was so much waste and overpackaging.

Tall women beware, inside may be disappointment.

So much garbage!

I tried on the three shirts. Two of them were the same, just different colours. While they fit my body (including a nice long torso- that never happens!) the sleeves only went halfway down my forearm. I was confused and annoyed. Hadn’t it said, “long sleeves” online? I went back to the Old Navy website and checked. It did say “long sleeves” in the description for the two shirts. Then I noticed that there wasn’t a single picture of the model with the sleeves down her arm all the way. They were scrunched up in every picture. Was this to camouflage that the sleeves weren’t long enough for tall people? Or was this just styling? The length of sleeves is actually a three-quarter sleeve (FYI, Old Navy, this is what you call sleeves that only go partway down the forearm). I don’t mind some three-quarter sleeves in my wardrobe, in fact I’m used to them as most long shirt sleeves are not long enough for me, so I just wear them as three quarter length sleeves. But I’m particularly annoyed that I ordered the tall size of a long-sleeved shirt and it doesn’t even have long sleeves. Come on! I don’t have orangutan arms. Since I’m in need of shirts, I’ll just keep them, but I’m displeased that Old Navy induced me to buy these shirts with a false description.

Plastic, plastic everywhere . . .

FYI, Old Navy, these are three-quarter sleeves, not long sleeves.

The other long-sleeved shirt was actually long sleeved. The cotton was not the greatest, but I needed shirts, so I just decided to roll with it. I mean it’s Old Navy, not Brooks Brothers.

All of the tall shirts fit pretty well (except for the sleeves on the two out of three shirts), a touch big, but they were relaxed fits so that made sense.

I tried on the leggings next. They were weird. First of all, the material was a blend and it was scratchy. Secondly, the leggings, while they were long enough in the legs, they bunched up weirdly in places. Also, the waist was somewhere between a high waist and a natural waist, so they sat at an uncomfortable place. I was really disappointed.

Then, lastly, I tried on the item I was looking forward to the most, the canvas field jacket. It had looked good online, the reviews were pretty good (although sizing seemed to be all over according to reviewers), and I really wanted a  light jacket for fall walks with the baby. Was I ever disappointed. Parts of the jacket were too big in some places, the rest of it was too snug, and the material was cheap. The thing looked badly made and ugly.

Seeing that Old Navy stood behind their products 100% according to the receipt in the box, I emailed them a picture of the sleeve length of the two shirts on me and told them about how poor the entire order had been, how disappointed I was, and ask what could be done. I received back two emails from Old Navy. One email said they would “look into” the “long sleeved” shirt. The second just said “it has long sleeves.” But I sent them a picture of the shirt only reaching partway down my forearm; it does not have long sleeves! This indicated to me that Old Navy hadn't even bothered to read my email. Why even waste one's time sending an email if no one will even read it and respond in a meaningful way?

"We stand behind our products 100%." No you don't, Old Navy.

Then I called the Old Navy customer service number. I was passed between three different agents until I somehow ended up with a Gap agent in the U.S.. They couldn’t even find my order number and had to look me up by email address. The agent assured me that someone would just come and pick the box up and returns were free. Well, in Canada, you have to take it to a shipping depot. I don’t have time to do that. I’m here all alone with a fussy infant. She asked if someone I lived with could do it. My husband travels almost constantly for work. Then she asked if a friend or neighbour could do it. Right, I’m going to saddle someone with returning this crap clothing because Old Navy can’t follow its own sizing charts or give proper descriptions online of what the items are or use proper fabric. The woman said I could take it back to an Old Navy store, but that I couldn’t do exchanges there, because they have no tall clothing. Well, I don’t care, I don’t want their crap, more landfill clothing that will wear out in two seconds.

Twenty-six minutes on the phone with three agents and they would not give me any help. They said they couldn’t do anything, even though the shirt description had been wrong for two out of the three shirts that I bought. It was their fault, but they won’t admit it. Other companies would normally admit that they were wrong and then try to fix the problem, whether through credit or something else.

Then I tweeted about my experience on Twitter. Old Navy responded fairly quickly and asked for my order number. Unfortunately, a few messages back and forth resulted in no help at all. They said they would give my feedback to their design team. Great, but that doesn’t help me, the customer who they deceived.

This Old Navy experience is truly in the top five worst customer service experiences I’ve ever had. I have no idea why this company is so popular. I guess it’s because their cheap disposable clothing goes with our consumer, landfill culture.

So, my only option is to return the completely unsalvageable parts of the order. There’s a good reason to return in person, I read online from others leaving reviews on the customer service at Old Navy that it can take weeks and weeks and weeks AFTER Old Navy receives your order back to give you a refund. No, thank you; they’ve had my money for long enough. I’ll cut my losses and go to the brick and mortar Old Navy store this weekend when my husband is in town to unload the jacket and leggings. The shirts I’ll just keep since they weren’t that expensive and I need shirts (and I don’t have time to go looking for any because I have an infant!).

But this has taught me a valuable lesson, never shop at Old Navy, especially online (and since I’m tall that’s my only option.)

Oh, and I’ll be taking all the packaging that I received with this monstrous order back to Old Navy. They can deal with their overpackaging.

Never Again.

The Hudson Bay's Lord & Taylor Cashmere Cardigan Comes With Copious Casing

During Boxing Week sales, I ordered a Lord & Taylor cashmere cardigan on sale from The Bay a.k.a. The Hudson's Bay online. The cardigan arrived about a week later in a very large plastic bubble wrap envelope.

This envelope was well over a foot long and wide.

When I opened this, I found a plastic wrapped high quality large cardboard box that says "Lord & Taylor." There was also the receipt and a packing slip from The Bay.

Why did this box inside a plastic envelope come wrapped in another layer of plastic?

I took off the plastic wrap.

So far the packaging included a large bubble wrap envelope, packing slip, receipt, plastic bag, and a large cardboard box.

I opened the box. Inside was another lid, this time made of clear plastic, proclaiming that this was a cashmere robe (it could be used as this if you were quite short, but it was marketed as a tie front cardigan) and the original manufacturer's suggested price.

Why does this box have a plastic insert?

I took this additional lid off and finally hit the cardigan, along with tissue paper.

Tissue paper inside the cardigan.

The cardigan had its tags and a very very meagre spare thread that really couldn't be used to repair much more than the tiniest of holes, so I suppose Lord & Taylor wants this cardigan to be basically disposable, so that you'll just buy another one as soon as it gets a hole in it. We are living in a disposable society after all.

Gee thanks for the cashmere thread to repair holes with. What a generous amount, Lord & Taylor.

When I stacked all of the packaging together, I was amazed that one cashmere cardigan, that could have fit in a much smaller bubble wrap envelope and could have been sent like that without any box or additional plastic or anything could have resulted in this much garbage/recycling/waste. Every business needs to start assessing how much packaging they're using to send out purchases now that so many people are buying items online instead of in stores. Yes, some items that are fragile like electronics and glass need more packaging, but a sweater does not need this much packaging.

This really is an astonishing amount of waste for one sweater.

This Lord & Taylor cashmere cardigan from The Bay a.k.a. The Hudson's Bay is a prime example of overpackaging (and I bought a different style of Lord & Taylor cashmere sweater for someone this winter in store from The Bay and it came with zero packaging, so this is online shopping causing overpackaging in this particular instance).

P.S. On January 20th, 16 days after receiving my sweater in the mail, I discovered two holes along one seam of the sweater. I have contacted Hudson's Bay and am waiting for their customer service department to deal with this extremely disappointing turn of events. The Hudson's Bay Twitter contact person is very helpful and quick though and was able to collect information from me and then send it to the customer service department to start an escalation process very soon after I tweeted them. As I stated above, there is definitely not enough thread to make more than one micro repair to this sweater and really a two week period of wear before it has holes makes this sweater almost disposable. Disposable cashmere? What will our society think of next? AJEG

Two holes at the seam of the sweater have formed after only 16 days of having this sweater in my house. Shockingly bad quality.

P.P.S. January 26, 2017- I have received an email from the customer service department at Lord & Taylor/ The Hudson's Bay apologizing for the poor workmanship of the sweater and offering a full refund as there are no equivalent cardigans to replace mine with. While a hole-free cashmere sweater is preferable, at least The Hudson's Bay is standing behind their merchandise. I have accepted this proposed resolution. AJEG

Phillips Sonicare Electric Toothbrush Replacement Heads- Lots of Waste in a Very Expensive Package

My husband and I use a Phillips Sonicare EasyClean Electric Toothbrush (the charger is original, the toothbrush itself had to be replaced after a drop that ruined it, but we found a replacement on eBay for an okay price) and while we like the product itself (it seems to clean the teeth well and with sensitive heads lead to minimal gum irritation), buying its replacement heads is always a painful task. First of all, for a package of only three little replacement heads, it's crazily expensive ($39.99 Canadian plus tax in most places for the sensitive type that we buy, which is $45.59 including tax per pack, or $15.20 per toothbrush head! N.B. the replacement heads were not that expensive to begin with- it's one of those situations where they release a new type of toothbrush, make its replacement heads way cheaper than the ones for the older models, you buy that new model, then they raise the price of the new model's replacement heads over and over again until you contemplate whether or not it's worth upgrading to a newer model or changing companies altogether.). It's also annoying, because there are so many different types of heads for the myriad of different types of Phillips toothbrushes, so you always have to remember which is your particular model of toothbrush, and check on the package of replacement heads that they will work for your particular model (our replacement head package lists seven different types of Phillips toothbrushes that this type of replacement head apparently works with and there are several other types of heads to choose from in the Phillips Sonicare section of the toothbrush replacement head aisle).

Further, when you get the package of replacement heads home, there are other frustrations. Our particular type of replacement head package come with three replacement heads. Who is this pack geared towards? If you have two people in a house, then you have to buy two packages to even out the number of replacement heads. If you have a family of four, then it creates an even worse numbers situation.

Then you have to get the package open. It's one of those hermetically sealed plastic creations that turns the most docile of consumer into a brutal baboon, grunting and pulling at the package to try to get inside.

A surprisingly large package for three little toothbrush heads. Guess they're trying to make it look like more value since you're paying over $15.00 per toothbrush head . . .

I had to cut open the package at least partially before my brute force released the contents of the package.

This oversized package is full garbage.

And boy is there ever a lot of stuff in that plastic package. First of all, the package is too big for just three little toothbrush heads (executives of Phillips might chime in here with the exception to packaging rule that if something is likely to be shoplifted then the package can be made unnecessarily big- but in most stores they put the electric tracking stickers in these packages so that if they are shoplifted, the store alarms go off). Secondly, there are several different components to the package including a plastic tray to hold the toothbrush heads, three toothbrush heads each with its own plastic travelling cover, a little plastic bag with three different coloured plastic bands that you can use to change the colour of the band of your toothbrush head with if you want to have a different one from whoever else you're living with, a paper coupon for the Phillips Sonicare Airfloss (coupons for more toothbrush heads would be more useful, I'm never going to buy that other contraption no matter how many coupons I see for it during the course of buying packages of toothbrush heads), two paper card inserts that go at the front and back of the plastic package, and the unnecessarily large plastic container itself that houses all this garbage.

Why are there so many unnecessary components in here? Some people will recycle them, but I'm guessing a lot of this crap will end up in the landfill never ever used and completely unnecessary to begin with.

Just look at the empty plastic package next to the only necessary items, the three toothbrush heads. How much waste could we cut down on if we had a small package with less junk crammed into it? Phillips Sonicare Electric Toothbrush Replacement Heads are definitely an example of overpackaging.

Why is this package so big? Cut down on the packaging, Phillips, you're wasting precious resources and making the end product more expensive for your customers. We definitely don't enjoy paying over $15.00 per toothbrush head and as you keep raising the price, more and more customers will just decide that your product is not worth it.

Forever 21's Disposable Leggings

Technically, this is not overpackaging, but since it adds to the planet's garbage situation, I'm putting it in my blog. When I was shopping in Vancouver during Boxing Week, I purchased a few pairs of Forever 21 leggings. They were not on sale, but cheap ($6.90 plus tax each in Canadian dollars). I didn't expect them to be stellar, but just kind of basic, something that would last me a while. The last two pairs I had from Forever 21 weren't fantastic, but they lasted a while and for the price were not that bad.

I wore one of the new pairs of leggings the next day while I was out shopping. Not only was I disappointed that the leggings kept falling down because their waistband elastic was crappy, but towards the end of the day, I looked down and on one leg, there was a line of tiny holes all the way up the seam of the leggings! One wear and they were ruined.

I took them into Forever 21 the next day to return them, as they were clearly defective. I mean the sign in the store didn't say "disposable leggings" or "wear them once then throw them out- never do laundry again." I brought the other two pairs of leggings with me as I figured that they would be just as defective and disappointing and I was not willing to take a chance on them.

The store clerk told me point blank that they don't do returns at Forever 21, so I could have a store credit. Excuse me?! So, Forever 21 sells defective merchandise and then you're expected to buy something else shitty from them with a store credit? I don't think so. I pointed out to the clerk that since the leggings were defective and not regular merchandise, any store policies would not apply (read the Sale of Goods Act, people!). She looked surprised, as if no one had ever demanded a full refund before. She told me that sometimes the leggings get holes in them when you pull them up. So how exactly are you supposed get leggings on if you don't pull them up, telekinesis? Since I was not buying this bullshit, she went to find her manager.

My husband and I were standing there for a while, during which time, I snapped a hasty picture of the ruined single use leggings. It's not the greatest picture, but does show some of the many holes along the seam of one leg.

This is just a small sampling of the holes that went all the way down the seam of my right leg, but not my left.

She returned and said she would give me a refund in cash, since they had no way of putting the sum back onto my credit card (yeah, so I guess everyone else with this defective disposable shit just accepts the store credit?). I took the cash and refused her offer to find something else in this temple of garbage. No thank you.

So, if you ever end up with defective merchandise, take it back and make companies produce better items that won't end up in the landfill immediately. Demand your money back. Defective merchandise is not the same as regular merchandise and can never be treated the same under store policies if they have restrictive return policies. If we don't speak up as consumers, companies are just going to continue producing and selling us garbage.

Single use leggings are a waste and I refuse to let companies like Forever 21 get away with this.