lens replacement

rossco90

Hello,

I recently had my cracked lenses replaced at a high street optometrists for which they charged me around £70 and I signed a disclaimer stating that I was aware of the risks involved and I would be liable for the cost of new frames if broken during the process, blah, blah. Within a few weeks, the lenses had cracked due to being worn in the sauna (not outwith the design envelope of a pair of lenses I would imagine...).

Anyway, said opticians, kindly agreed to replace my lenses free of charge and hastily took my frames without me signing a disclaimer. A few weeks later, I was informed that my £200 (ish) lenses had broken during the process.

What does everyone think would be a fair compensation to settle on, if any? Just curious to hear an impartial view...

Cheers,

R

neilmcl

None, you were aware that the frames may break, the fact you didn't sign anything the second time around is irrelevant.

Wicked_witch

Bit lost here. First you did sign a disclaimer, then you didn't, then the lenses cracked in the process which wasn't on the disclaimer anyway?

Poppie68

Wicked_witch wrote: »

Bit lost here. First you did sign a disclaimer, then you didn't, then the lenses cracked in the process which wasn't on the disclaimer anyway?

It seems the lenses broke when the op wore the glasses in the sauna....are you supposed to wear glasses in the sauna? What exactly would be the point of that?

Edit:Sorry Wicked-witch...just re-read that the lenses broke again after the sauna jaunt, this time if i have read it correctly while they are still 'weeks' later with the opticians.. (do lense repairs take weeks to complete?) were they obliged to repair them for free?
Why would compensation be needed?

dalesrider

What are you doing that is causing so many cracked lenses?

What type of material are they?

Wicked_witch

The timeline seems to be: lenses cracked, replaced with disclaimer regarding frames, lenses crack again, replaced with no disclaimer, lenses break. So if the disclaimer only mentioned the frames, which didn't break, the lenses should presumably be replaced.

I was wondering if it was actually the frames that broke and the OP wrote 'lenses' again accidentally as that would make more sense. But unless/until they clarify, we'll never know...