🚚 on the house SHIPPING on orders over $50 | ⭐ 4.4/5 from 329+ reviews
Womenβœ“ In StockπŸ”₯ Bestseller 

BAY RICA PANTS - Trousers

β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…4.4 out of 5(329 reviews)
Special Offer Price
$81​
$135
Sale
βœ“ on the house delivery on this item β€’ Limited time offer

Rise : NormalFastening : Concealed flyPockets : Side pockets, back pocketPattern : CheckedArticle number : BR321A04K-C11

πŸ”’
Secure Checkout
🚚
swift Shipping

↩️
uncomplicated Returns

πŸ“‹ Product Description

BAY RICA PANTS - Trousers

Rise : Normal
Fastening : Concealed fly
Pockets : Side pockets, back pocket
Pattern : Checked
Article number : BR321A04K-C11

This product is impeccable for anyone looking for quality Women products.

πŸ“ Specifications

SKU: 1232485

Category: Women > Clothing > Trousers

Original Price:$135 USD

Sale Price:$81 USD

Availability: In Stock

Condition: Brand newly-released

🚚 fulfillment & Returns

βœ“ at no charge shipment on orders over $50

Standard dispatch: 3-5 business days

Express transport: 1-2 business days (+$9.99)

30-Day Returns: Not satisfied? Return within 30 days for a full refund.

⭐ Recommended For You

4.4
β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…
Based on 5202 reviews
KG
Kevin Green βœ“ Verified Purchase
8 months ago Β· Oakland, CA
β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…
A+ quality
I think the BAY RICA PANTS - Trousers is worth the price.
16 people found this helpful
AW
Ashley White βœ“ Verified Purchase
5 months ago Β· Colorado Springs, CO
β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜†
So happy with this
Honestly, it works well enough so no complaints.
35 people found this helpful
AW
Ashley White βœ“ Verified Purchase
6 months ago Β· Cleveland, OH
β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜†
fantastic product
For the price, the BAY RICA PANTS - Trousers feels okay and I don’t regret it.​
35 people found this helpful
NH
Nicole Harris βœ“ Verified Purchase
4 weeks ago Β· Charlotte, NC
β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…
superb find!
The BAY RICA PANTS - Trousers seems rugged enough.
35 people found this helpful
AD
Amanda Davis βœ“ Verified Purchase
11 months ago Β· Cleveland, OH
β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…β˜…
Outstanding quality
So far, it is functional to use which is good enough.
17 people found this helpful