Rip Off Britain - Spectacles

nedmundo

Oldbiggles wrote: »

If you think I’ve muddied the waters, as it were, it’s because I read this posted by laz123 (see #67)

And another thing that annoys me is this imposed two year eye test limitation. You can't get a pair of specs if the prescription is older than two years.

But it's for your own good because you may have something wrong which will only be picked up by regular eye tests.

I don't have medical tests every two years, so the choice should be mine, not theirs


Did I misread what laz123 was trying to say?

I fear so - old chap!

tidus

nedmundo wrote: »

100% positive!

Hi again Ned.

Just copied this from the ABDO website:

2.2.2 Registered dispensing opticians, optometrists, and medical practitioners are allowed to dispense spectacles to a prescription that is more than 2 years old. They may also make up spectacles without a prescription e.g. by duplicating an existing pair of spectacles. Practitioners should be aware that if the patient has not had a recent eye examination, they may - by making up spectacles to an out of date prescription - inadvertently encourage patients to delay having another eye examination. This should only be done in exceptional circumstances and the practitioner should consider what is in the best interests of the patient, and the reasons recorded on the patient’s record card.


Question is, what are exceptional circumstances and where does one draw the line? I actually do this fairly regularly. Never for the most common reason though - "I don't want another test. My eyes haven't changed. I don't see why I should pay again. Its just a conspiracy"
Did do it the other day for a lady who had absolutely no time - needed at work, could only barely manage at work without her broken readers. She called in at 9, we had made up her 3 year prescription by 10.00, when she gratefully collected them. Is that an exceptional circumstance though? Could argue that it was her own fault for not having any spares, and refuse, or could argue that it was in her best interests.
The point is its certainly not breaking any law and where it can be justified, its surely no big deal.

Back to the point of the thread, this lady paid about £50 for that pair of glasses. We start from £29. We don't charge any extra for making them that quickly either. Anyone still feel that was poor value for money?

nedmundo

From the Opticians Act 1989:

http://www.optical.org/goc/filemanager/root/site_assets/legislation/act-part4.pdf

(7) Any such order relating to optical appliances consisting of or including one or more lenses shall specify, as a condition subject to which the sale of any such appliance is so exempted, the condition that the appliance must be in accordance with a written prescription, which -
(a) has been given by a registered medical practitioner or registered optometrist following a testing of sight by him; and
(b) bears a date not more than such time as is specified in the order before the prescription is presented to the proposed seller of the appliance.

Took me hours to find it as it isn't obvious.:beer:

nedmundo

Or from:

http://www.optical.org/goc/filemanager/root/site_assets/legislation/rules_and_regulations/sale1984.pdf

(2) The further conditions referred to in paragraph (1)(c) of this Article are
that-
(a) the appliance is in accordance with a written prescription
whichTHE
SALE OF OPTICAL APPLIANCES ORDER OF COUNCIL 1984
(i) has been given by a registered medical
practitioner or registered optometrist following a
testing of sight by him, and
(ii) bears a date not more than two years before the
day on which it is presented to the seller for the
purposes of the sale;

vikingaero

These rip-off threads highlight that of human nature and self-interest. The posters on here are reminded time and time again that there are others costs associated with lenses and focusing on the price of lenses alone is pointless.

Look at your own occupations. Maybe someone on here is a milkman and delivers milk for £1.40 a pint when the base cost is 10p. Maybe someone on here works as a factory operative where the material cost of their work is £50, but the goods are sold for £1,000. Maybe you could sell the goods for £55 and make a loss? "Oh but I don't care what it costs as long as it's cheap."

That's the problem with Rip-off Britain - we're being ripped off by people who shout rip off indiscriminately.

Arg

It is a rip off because the consumer is forced to bear unnecessary costs for the benefit of others.

Thankfully in this instance we don't need to tolarate it anymore.

nedmundo

But the exam is very good value. So how would you propose your eye exam is funded? Pay £65 each time?

georginga

Prince Harry's pal Mr MurrayWells can't stop harping on about the cost of basic lenses and frames, but the truth remains there is a huge mark up on everything we buy these days. The communist journalists trying to demonise every form money making business should think about the mark up they make on their most basic form of media... Newpapers???
The trashy quality of newspaper, combined with the ink... you can't tell me the cost of the raw materials is worth the £1.00 they cost to buy. Nobody quibbles as its a low amount spread across the year. Most rational folk will recognise that they are also paying for the production of the paper, including paying high fees for the journalists and photographers who work on the content. In addition like optical items, papers are produced in bulk and the cost will be calculated against any wastage from newspapers being unsold. Bear in mind such organisations recieve high levels of income not just from the readers but also from the huge amount of advertising that you find in these publications!
Basic glasses are available in most independents and high street branches for under £50. Coatings/thinner lenses to improve visual quality and comfort, or the designer frames are luxury items... much like whether you choose to buy tesco value tomatoes or organic vine ripened plum tommys, noone twists their arms to get them but most people oddly want to see and look as good as they can! If Jennie Bond hasn't seen cheap glasses in her opticians might I suggest she move to a practice outside of Knightsbridge, but be warned she won't find her BVLGARI frames in a budget range!

The cost of glasses covers the overheads involved in running a practice, including the advanced screening technology many opticians stores now offer as part of the examination, the high salaries of the eye specialists who conduct the tests and dispensing, insurance... the list goes on! In my experience 25% thinner single vision lenses cost £3.82 retailing at £110, 13 years ago, obviously prices have gone up since then, and the mark up on frames in considerably less. These days totally bespoke top of the range varifocals will start around £400, with cheaper alternatives around £170, its up to the individual as to how much they spend, but, believe me, the cost price of these lenses is considerably more than that implied by that bigotted show.
The Rip Off Britain show pointed out that eye tests are underpriced, this is very true... but I would argue is worthwhile as it encourages regular health checks for individuals whom may not need spex. Many ocular and general health conditions are picked up at an early stage during a routine examination while the patient is still at an asymptomatic and treatable stage. If opticians charged for the true value of the chair time required, very few of these conditions, which in include diabetes, glaucoma and even tumours, would be undiagnosed until they left a permanent mark on the individual's quality of life, as many people simply wouldn't pay £60-70 if they weren't having any problems. The NHS only give a third of the true cost for the time involved, however unlike dentists we have all opted to continue providing an NHS service running at a loss and making up for this through the sale of spectacles.
Furthermore with supermarkets delving into the market and providing sight tests and glasses and at total loss so customers shop in their food hall, believe me they pay the optician more than the department makes in gross sales, we simply can't compete by charging for the examination. If we were to submit to this, the likes of tesco would take over, the industry would collapse, and there simply wouldn't be any means of obtaining the information you require for your glasses to be made - on or offline!

qetu1357

SpammyTheSpammer wrote: »

I have not seen them in the Pound Shop but do occasionally get pairs from Wilkinsons or QD -these are about £1.99

I need extra pairs as I keep sitting on them after I leave them on the seat after readimg for a while then getting up to make a coffee. Doh!

I do this too!

Glad I am not the only one..................

Lirin

A good optician will not just be examining your eyes for the purpose of ascertaining the strength of your lenses- iron deficiencies, kidney and liver problems, blood problems and the much reported retinablastoma cases are just some of the health problems diagnosed.. An optician is in many ways similar to a doctor. I am happy to pay a higher price on things from my local optician to get that level of service, no matter what it's subsiding.

I am happy to pay for this expertise- and I know it's marked up. Everything is- that's how you do business! For example, in another industry, I know the cost price, including labour of my car bumper is nothing compared to the final sale price- there's a £200 markup. Yet I paid it knowing the value and labour and specialised work it required to create it.

I think honestly, the optical industry is merely the latest targeted by the rise of the internet.