Eye test (refused to give PD )

nedmundo

Brookvale wrote: »

Tell me why not? Give me a good reason why a kid should not get an MAR lens. The cost of the frame, lenses and glazing would be easily covered by the £36 optom claims back from the government.

And what about the eye examination which costs an average of £65 to provide and for which we can claim back £20.70 from the government?

nedmundo

Brookvale wrote: »

ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY NOT THE CUSTOMER CARE, OPTOMS ARE CROOKS AND THEY HAVE AND ALWAYS WILL BE!!

What's the matter - has a 'Crook' got your tongue or is it that the poorly researched media that you read hasn't gone to great lengths to explain why the disparity in cost is what it is?

You get what you pay for - everything has a value and cost behind providing it, be it physical product, service or hidden overheads.

Sensationalism sells and anyone who believes everything they are told by the tabloid press, Rip-off britain or Jamie Murray-Wells or whoever is just a mug.

Nicki

A thread about vision problems isn't only read by those with severe vision problems, so can we lose the caps people, or if you think we can't see what you are writing use a bigger font :rotfl:

I've worn glasses since I was a child, and have never had these measurements taken until after I chose the frames and was about to place my order in over 25 years with different opticians in different countries. Have also never come across an optician I thought was a crook. I guess there must be some, like in all walks of life, but can't see any reason why to say the whole profession are

nedmundo

:beer:
Hi 5!

delain

Brookvale wrote: »

Online glasses are not dodgy, in fact they use the same lenses as high street retailers and independents.

There is however huge scope for people to input incorrect information and get glasses that will give them eyestrain, headaches and in some cases worsen their sight, or that are completely wrong. A typo is all it takes

Brookvale

nedmundo wrote: »

What's the matter - has a 'Crook' got your tongue or is it that the poorly researched media that you read hasn't gone to great lengths to explain why the disparity in cost is what it is?

You get what you pay for - everything has a value and cost behind providing it, be it physical product, service or hidden overheads.

Sensationalism sells and anyone who believes everything they are told by the tabloid press, Rip-off britain or Jamie Murray-Wells or whoever is just a mug.

I dont use the media to draw my experiences from, but my experience of working in the industry for over 45 years. I have seen how you its changed first hand.

I know the optical industry from the top down so there is nothing you can say about what your overheads are to make me change my mind, because I KNOW.

nedmundo

Brookvale wrote: »

The UV coating that comes on every MAR lens is more than good enough reason to give children more than just a bog standard plastic lens.

All that time in the industry and you don't even know that an MAR coating doesn't automatically mean UV protection?

I feel sorry for the lab that you allegedly work for:rotfl:

Former_MSE_Andrea

Just a reminder everyone, swearing on our forum isn't appropriate, even if you are responding in kind. Please help us try to make this forum a friendly one.

Thank you!

Andrea

nedmundo

:rotfl:He's not the messiah - he's a very naughty boy