BBB Accredited Business since

Maggie's Shoes

Phone: (206) 728-5837 1927 1st Ave, Seattle, WA 98101

BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.


This company offers a retail apparel store.

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Maggie's Shoes meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.

BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.

Reason for Rating

BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for Maggie's Shoes include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 1 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business

Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

1 complaint closed with BBB in last 3 years | 0 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 0
Billing/Collection Issues 0
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 1
Total Closed Complaints 1

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

1 Customer Review on Maggie's Shoes
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 1
Total Customer Reviews 1

Additional Information

BBB file opened: June 13, 2001 Business started: 10/01/1986 Business started locally: 10/01/1986
Licensing, Bonding or Registration

This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.

These agencies may include:

Washington Secretary of State Corporations Division
801 Capitol Way S, Olympia WA 98504
Phone Number: (360) 725-0377

Type of Entity

Limited Partnership (LP)

Business Management
Ms. Magdalena Tsang, Owner
Contact Information
Principal: Ms. Magdalena Tsang, Owner
Business Category

Shoes - Retail Womens Apparel - Retail

Alternate Business Names
Maggie's Italian Shoes Maggie's Shoes LLC

Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Summary

Maggie's Shoes has received 0 out of 5 stars based on 0 Customer Reviews and a BBB Rating of A+.

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

Additional Locations

  • 1927 1st Ave

    Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 728-5837


BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.

Customer Review Experience Value
Positive Review 5 points per review
Neutral Review 3 points per review
Negative Review 1 point per review

BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.

BBB Letter Grade Scale

BBB Rating Value
A+ 5
A 4.66
A- 4.33
B+ 4
B 3.66
B- 3.33
C+ 3
C 2.66
C- 2.33
D+ 2
D 1.66
D- 1.33
F 1
NR -----
Star Rating scale

  Average Score
5 stars 5.00
4.5 stars 4.50-4.99
4 stars 4.00-4.49
3.5 stars 3.50-3.99
3 stars 3.00-3.49
2.5 stars 2.50-2.99
2 stars 2.00-2.49
1.5 stars 1.50-1.99
1 star 0-1.49

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.

Complaint Detail(s)

10/28/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Purchased $385 shoes while in Seattle in May, which ****** discounted 10% and encouraged me to have mailed to avoid tax. After signing credit card chit, employee filled in both my copy of receipt and store's copy (done separately after signing) with FINAL SALE. (Tiny print under signature line says no returns on sale items. ) No one stated this was final sale or that normal merchandise could not be returned. These shoes were NOT on the final sale rack!!!! They were on the side wall of non-sale merchandise and a 10% off-hand discount did not constitute a FINAL SALE. This is a very long story and I want an opportunity to talk with someone and share all the emails and the aggressive behavior of this business. Please do not close this case without giving me the opportunity to talk with someone. My phone is XXX XXX-XXXX. In summary, the shoes arrived **** at my door in Denver just before the Memorial Day holiday and I asked the driver how to return. He said "that's simple," and wrote Return to Sender. I never opened the box. On Tuesday, after the holiday, I called the merchant just to make sure they knew to look for the shoes and could locate my credit card information and credit my card. ****** was "unavailable" but five minutes later the salesgirl called back to tell me ****** said to tell me that they would refuse the return. I was shocked but ****** would not get on the phone the next time I called either. I called ******** ******* right away, but ****** submitted her copy of the sales receipt (which also had the FINAL SALE written at bottom). There are several issues here. The first is the sale would the tiny print under the signature line hold up in a court of law? Can a retailer call any sale "Final" and refuse returns? The fact that there were five of us clustered around the register trying to get two customers rung up and out of the store made the entire process confusing and hectic, but I never dreamed that UNWORN, UNOPENED shoes could not be returned. This is "better" business? Query: If ****** believed that the very tiny print under the signature line would hold up in a court of law, why did the salesgirl ADD in larger letters FINAL SALE? This would be unnecessary ! Second issue: ****** said in an email that if I told her my husband didn't want me to keep the shoes she would have refunded me. So I should lie and then she will be nice and refund? This is bogus. First, she did not speak to me to even discuss the return. All I did was ask the person who answered the phone if they needed help locating my credit card info and alerting them to the fact that they should expect the box in the mail. No one asked why. No one said she would call me. They simply talked to ****** and called right back and said they would refuse delivery!!! Yet on line in the reviews people have posted on Yelp ****** states she is reasonable about returns and glad to oblige people. I understand the BBB cannot control all interactions between all businesses and customers. However, the BBB needs to know that Maggie's way of doing business has raised several red flags, although it appears no one prior to this has filled out a report with the BBB. While obviously this case cannot go to court I have never had an issue with any business or filed a complaint with any BBB or filed any claim in court it would be interested to see whether the tiny words would hold up in court. There were NO verbal warnings about not returning this or it being a FINAL SALE with no returns. ****** finally did call me back only after ******** ******* sided with her. She went on and on about how she has been in business for 27 years and I am trying to destroy her, etc. etc. Lastly, we have no idea where the shoes are. I tried to go to **** to track them since ****** refused to accept the return several times and told me the **** said they would be thrown out. What responsible business owner even if the credit card company sided with them would not want to protect the merchandise and prevent them from being thrown out. They never went back to Denver (I did not want them, I wanted the refund) but Maggie's could have simply accepted delivery, waited for resolution. Instead she told me that she had refused them again and they would be thrown out. This unprofessional approach to business is unacceptable.

Desired Settlement: Refund of $366 paid in May 2014. This could have been resolved so simply. ****** could have accepted the UNOPENED box with the UNWORN shoes, refunded my $366, and put the shoes back on the rack. There was no issue about whether the shoes could go back on the floor. Please contact me to discuss. I have copies of the receipts. I have emails ****** sent to her distributor in Germany saying incorrect things about my husband (!). But I don't think even if technically the words are under the signature block that a reputable business would refuse return of an unworn unopened item mailed back immediately! Granted, if this item was on the FINAL SALE rack, clearly marked FINAL SALE, and the sales people had made sure I knew it could not be returned, this would be different. Or if I had worn the shoes and returned them months later making something up about the quality of the shoe, I would understand ******'s reluctance to do a return. But I simply do not get it in this case. ********* ********* *** ** ****** ** Denver CO 80230 XXX XXX-XXXX

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1010, 6, 2014/08/26) */ About ********* complaint that I do not take care her shoes while we are in dispute. The following is the answer, since I told her that I will not accept the shoe and is going back to her one more time, then **** will dispose it. She has the chance to get her shoes back, but she chose not to. Now she points her finger at Maggie's Shoes. Is this fair???????????? Here is the email that I sent to ********* about getting her shoes back from ***** after ***** settlement in my favor. Instead she said that I am bluffing. The price of the shoes is $385 without the 10% discount, plus shipping fee is $20. The total should have been $405. She did not question us why $366.5 instead of $405 because she understood we give 10% discount and is a final sale. All the print on the receipt are in the same size font including the return policy. Only the merchant copy has customer signature. We are small business, so everything is hand done. I am in business for 27 yrs. nobody complaints about the hand written description. We are honest merchant there is nothing to hide. I will mail your a copy of the ** 2 times settlement, both are in Maggie's Shoes' favor. You will see all the supported documents. I am not going to refund anything. Please give a small business some respect, they work very hard. ***SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REDACTED BY BBB*** Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2014/09/05) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Sept. 2, 2014 Response to ****** *****'s response to ********* Complaint BBB Vision: An ethical marketplace where buyers and sellers can trust each other Unfortunately, this matter has brewed major mistrust in both directions. This is the first time I have filed a BBB complaint; I have never encountered a merchant that took such a hard line from the outset and prior to talking with the customer, and failed to protect the merchandise. I disagree with several statements in the attachments and in the merchant's response to the BBB. The Merchant in her response did not resolve the complaint and made no offer of settlement. I still believe this situation is due to the unreasonable and unprofessional actions of the merchant, which is why I brought this to the attention of the BBB. However, I understand the BBB would like matters resolved rather than go to mediation, so I am willing to make one settlement offer. If the merchant and I can agree: that neither the merchant nor myself possesses the shoes that the merchant holds the entire $366 sales price (minus the $20 of that $366 which she applied to shipping) and I am out $366 I would propose that we subtract the $20 shipping fee from the $366 and split the $346 down the middle. This would mean the merchant would refund to me the amount of $173. If the merchant recovers the $298 insurance, half of that amount would also be mailed to me. And in the unlikely case that she would obtain and resell the shoe instead of obtaining an insurance amount, I would receive half of that sales price as well. I believe this would prevent unjust windfall to the merchant in this case and refund the customer (myself) half of purchase price plus half of any other income the merchant realizes in regard to these shoes. I would point out the following: 1. This merchant did not pick up the phone to discuss the return with me. The shoes arrived in Denver Friday or Saturday of Memorial Day weekend and I asked the **** driver how I could return them and he took them (unopened) and returned them. There is nothing unusual about returning an unopened unused item to a sender. Since my $20 covered the cost of shipping and insuring, the merchant was not out of pocket on the shipping. A simple matter then escalated immediately due to the merchant's actions. 2. The merchant's statement in the attachments that "last Tuesday she called my shop while I was on vacation, mentioning her husband is chewing her off about the shoe being too expensive" is not correct. I was unable to chat with the merchant at all when I called or prior to her making her decision to refuse to accept the package. I called the merchant Tuesday morning after Memorial Day as a courtesy to let her know the package would be arriving and to ask if she needed help locating my credit card information. The staff person said I couldn't talk to her because ****** allegedly wasn't there, and then immediately called me back and said "****** says to tell you she will refuse the return." There was no opportunity to discuss the return with ****** or anyone authorized to do so. 3. ****** refused **** delivery on May 30, prior to talking with me. This is an unreasonable business practice. 4. Because of the abrupt determination by the merchant (communicated by a salesperson who could not discuss the matter) that she would simply refuse the return, I decided to contact her supplier and my credit card company. 5. The merchant asserted in an email to her supplier on June 3 that "If she ask me politely that my husband does not want me to buy the shoe and cannot afford it, then I am more than happy to refund her." This statement implies that there was a conversation about a return and that I said the wrong words. There was no conversation between the merchant and myself. It also implies that she would have refunded the money had I said certain words. It also implies she is reasonable about returns. 6. I disagree with the merchant's statement that she sent me **** information in an email. I cannot locate that email. 7. I never received a call from ****** until after ******** ******* sided with her, at which point she called to yell at me that I was ruining her business and she would again reject the shoes and that the Post Office told her they would be destroyed if I didn't want them. I responded that I still wanted the refund, and continue to pursue a refund. 8. Contrary to the merchant's statement that the shoes came back to Denver another time, the shoes never came back to Denver. See **** tracking information submitted by merchant. It appears from the **** printout that they were returned several times to the merchant and then sent to Atlanta Georgia. 9. I am aware ******** ********* supported the merchant (a decision I still contest), but this does not provide support for the merchant's behavior or unreasonable business practices. These shoes were not on the sale rack (sales rack is prominently featured when you enter the store). This was a verbal markdown offered during the time I was looking at the shoes, and never promoted as any kind of FINAL SALE. No one discussed this being a final sale or that merchandise could not be returned. 10. There are two different "technical" issues here. The first is the line under the signature block, which says "No Return on Sale or Used Items." As I have stated, it is unclear that this would hold up in a court of law. This would apply to every "Sale" the store makes, not only final sales or discounts. The ambiguity in the word "Sale" would leave us debating this issue for years. I do not think it is determinative of the matter before us. 11. The second is the hand entry of the words FINAL SALE, which was added (separately) to both my unsigned receipt after purchase, and (apparently) to the storekeeper's signed receipt after the transaction was complete. The receipts are NOT carbon copies of each other but are different. If the merchant was confident the tiny lettering under the signature block would hold up, there would be no need to add these words in large print after the transaction was complete. It could be found that adding these words was an attempt to turn my purchase into a "final" sale. This sale took place at the very end of the day and everything was rushed in order to wind up and close. Everyone was busy trying to convince me not to take the shoes but to ship them for $20 and avoid sales tax, but no one thought to mention this would be a "final sale" and that I could not return the shoes. 12. No one wants to go to mediation or court to resolve this matter. The merchant claims that I am harassing her business when it was the merchant herself who initiated the aggressive relationship by having staff inform me that she would reject the shoes without talking with me. That is the only message delivered in the phone call. No one asked me if there was a problem with the shoes. No one asked me why I was returning, or if my husband said we didn't have the money. No one said, "I will have ****** call you." I was never given an opportunity to discuss the matter. This was entirely unprofessional and simply does not breed trust. Final Business Response /* (1000, 15, 2014/10/13) */ Hi *********, Thanks for your offer which I have to turn down. Maggie's Shoes has been in business for 27 yrs., going to be 28 in December. My practice is up to professional standard, we are honest in every aspect. The store policy is posted in front of the cash register. As mentioned ** refused to reverse the charges twice, in favor of Maggie's' Shoes. Also there is no insurance can be claimed from the post office because ********* refused to accept her own goods. It is not the post office's fault, they did their job. I also warned her about the delivery, but she did not believe me. I did my part of work, everything has fulfilled. I have spent 5 months in this case. I am done with it and need to put my energy back to my busy.