Johnstown Family Vision & Hearing

August 4, 2015   Dear [redacted],   In response to the complaint made by Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] against Johnstown Family Vision (JFV), please take into consideration the following information. On April 22, 2015, [redacted] received a vision exam at our office. The exam was performed by...

Dr. James M[redacted]. During this examination Dr. M[redacted] noted a half diopter increase in her prescription. Previously Mrs. [redacted] had not received an exam at JFV; however, in September of 2011 she purchased a pair of glasses. At this time, an outside prescription was used to make the glasses. On July 2, 2015, four months after she received an examination by Dr. M[redacted], Mrs. [redacted] came back to JFV to order glasses. If Mrs. [redacted] was under the impression she “needed” new glasses with the most current prescription, one has to wonder why she waited four months before ordering them. It was explained to her that the increase in her prescription should improve her eyeglass vision and that with the amount of change that was found; often a patient may need additional time to adapt. Taking into consideration that Mrs. [redacted] had not had a vision evaluation in four years, the change in her prescription could probably seem very noticeable to her. We recommend to our patients they have a yearly eye examination. A yearly examination consists of more than just a refraction to assess if a prescription change is needed, wanted, or has changed. It also is an opportunity to evaluate the health of the eye and to detect the presence of eye related diseases. When Mrs. [redacted] returned to JFV on July 9, 2015 to pick up her eyeglasses, she wore them for a short period of time and expressed a concern that the prescription was not correct. At this time Dr. Joseph G[redacted], another optometrist that practices at JFV, reevaluated Mrs. [redacted] and rechecked the prescription. Dr. G[redacted] found the same values Dr. M[redacted] had originally found. He explained that often the change in a prescription is subjective. A half diopter change can make a big improvement to one patient, a small difference in other patients, and have no perceivable difference in others. Often times the patient needs to wear the glasses for a while to adjust to the new prescription. The optician working with Mrs. [redacted], attempted to explain that the changes she was experiencing were to be expected. At this point, Mr. [redacted], the husband of [redacted], refused to listen to the explanation and demanded his money back.  As part of the standard procedure at JFV when placing an order for prescription glasses, all patients are given a walkout statement that informs them of a 25% restock fee that will apply on cancelled/returned items. It has been our policy since 1991 to charge a restock fee. Eyeglasses are a custom made item and prescription lenses made for one patient cannot be reused for another. Mrs. [redacted] was given a copy of this statement at the time of ordering. I would provide a copy of this walkout statement upon receipt from Mrs. [redacted] permitting the disclosure of her patient information to your organization in accordance with HIPAA. On July 14, 2015, I spoke directly with Mr. [redacted]. During this encounter he acted in a way that was consistent with how my staff described their interactions with him, he was quite irrational and wielded several threats. Instead of having a civilized discussion on the troubles his wife was experiencing with her glasses and coming to a solution, he began to threaten calling an attorney. Additionally, he informed me that he has access to connections at a local newspaper and he would slander our business by spreading rumors as to “how awful” we are. Unfortunately, this is not the first time I have had to deal with this type of behavior and I understand that certain individuals use these tactics to get what they want. Fortunately, we have had very few patients over the past 24 years in which a resolution could not be accomplished. I will go to a great extent to try to satisfy and retain rational customers, but I will also end relationships with individuals that I no longer want to provide services. Caving to his unreasonable outbursts and threats only encourages similar behavior in the future. Johnstown Family Vision has been in business since 1991 and I can count on one hand the number of times this type of situation has come up. While I do not believe that “The customer is always right”, I will do everything in my power to see that our patients are satisfied and confident with their decision to choose us as their eye care provider. Additionally, there are a few points that I would like to address in the [redacted]’s complaint: ·        Line 2:  The description of “Badly blurred” is used. With any increase in power, the focal point of the lens changes to bring reading material closer. Mr. [redacted] did admit to me that his wife could read better with her new prescription. ·        Line 6: Johnstown Family Vision requires half down before glasses are ordered (made). Mr. [redacted] incorrectly stated that “payment in full” was required. ·        Line 10: The phrase “everything is blurred” was used. Mrs. [redacted] stated to me that she could read better out of the new eyeglasses but not enough to want to keep them. This is very subjective ·        Line 17: Dr. G[redacted] was incorrectly quoted. He did not state that the prescription was wrong, he actually stated that he came up with the same findings. He now realized that Mrs. [redacted] liked her old prescription as opposed to the new one, even though she had not given herself a fair chance to adapt. ·        Line 32: Mr. [redacted] stated to me how much he like the service provided by a Ms. Camille S[redacted], Optical Manager of JFV, while his wife was ordering her eyeglasses and even after he requested a refund. Later he accused the Manager, Ms. S[redacted], of a scam. In conclusion, I offered the [redacted]’s several options to choose from, none of which were acceptable to them. At this point I have chosen to follow my office policy on returns, which is well within my rights. I do not set out to have dissatisfied patients but I realize that a resolution cannot be achieved in every situation. Sincerely,   Anthony S. K[redacted] Operations Manager/Owner, Johnstown Family Vision

Review: Glasses provided, eye exam, prescription, new glasses, by Family Vision are incorrectly prescribed and not needed, and makes everything look badly blurred; Family Vision refuses to give a full refund.

My wife, [redacted], went to Family Vision for an Eye test to determine if she needed new glasses; the test was done by Dr. M[redacted] and employee of Family Vision. He said that her eyes had a big change and wrote a new Rx. On 7/02/2015 [redacted] was fitted with frames and we paid Family Vision for new glasses that would be ready in 7 to 10 days. Note; Family Vision requires payment in full before glasses are made. [redacted] went in on July 9, 2015 to get the glasses. Upon trying the glasses, everything was blurred and she could not see anything clearly. The Family Vision technician who was fitting the glasses for her said that the prescription was a big change and try them for a week or so to let her eyes adjust to the new glasses. [redacted] stated that she wasn't taking them because she can not see out of them, everything is blurred. The Tech. insisted she tries them for a while. [redacted] and I walked to a store next door and she looked at a picture for sale on the wall but could not read the identification tag on it and the picture was totally blurred. We immediately went to Family vision and told them again that the glasses are not right, everything is blurry and we are not taking the glasses. We asked for an appointment to have the Dr. who wrote the prescription to check what the problem is. The appointment was made for Monday the 13th. She was seen by the only available Dr. DR. G[redacted], when he checked the glasses they made he confirmed that they were made to the prescription of Dr. M[redacted]. When he examined her eyes he stated that the prescription was wrong and that her old glasses were what she needs, not the new one by Dr. M[redacted]. Dr G[redacted] gave her the new glasses and took her out to the Technician. The technician asked him what she should do, He told her "what ever Mrs. [redacted] wants" . My wife stated that she wanted a full refund. [redacted] told her that she came to Family Vision because they had the doctor to do the exam and make the glasses so there would not be any problem. Now that she knows that she does need new glasses she wants a full refund. The problem is their Doctor's and if would have told her that she did not need a new prescription she would not have ordered them.

The technician said she could not give the refund, the manager has to do that and she was not in; she would have her take care if it the next morning. The manager called us at about 9:00am today and asked for our credit card number so she could issue a credit for $210. My wife stated that we paid $339.90 and we want a full refund, the manager stated that they are charging a restocking charge. She said that there is a statement on the order form that they have a 25% restocking charge for returned glasses. My wife told her that we would be down to see her about this today. The contract states "A 25% Restock Fee will apply on Cancelled/Returned Items!"

1, Family Vision never pointed that out or stated that when we paid and they never left us read the "STATEMENT OF CHARGES & PAYMENTS" before we aid and when they printed it out they folded it up and handed it to my wife.

2. Note tat 25% of $339.99 is $85.00; NOT THE $129.99 THE MANAGER TRIED TO SCAM US WITH.

3. When we went to the store to talk with the manager she was out to lunch and we were told we would have to talk to the owner Anthony S. K[redacted], who was also out, I gave them my cell hone number for him to call me.

4. Anthony called me about 1:30pm and asked what the problem was,I told him and said he could not afford to refund my money, he has costs in those glasses; after a heated conversation in which I told him I woy=uld not accept anything less than a full refund. His employee Dr. M[redacted] did an incompetent job, the glasses are not needed his Rx is not correct as evidenced by his other employee Dr. G[redacted]. As owner It is his responsibility for the incompetence. He then stated that he would need to talk to Dr. G[redacted] and will call me back in a short time.

5. He did not call until about 5:30 Pm. He started out asking if [redacted] had a spare set of glasses; do I have spare glasses etc. At which point I said that I wanted a full refund period. He started to tell me about the numbers on the Rx and that the incorrect Rx was not that bad and some people don't have a problem with that much difference and I lost my demeanor and stopped him be stating that my wife could not see out of them and I don't care what it is all we want is a full refund. At this point we did get into an argument over my attitude and not listening to his employees and not willing to work with him. The bottom line he said he was not going to refund the full purchase price, I told him that I was filing a complaint with the Revdex.com and that I have already di it with my Credit Card and he will be getting the notice that the charge was in dispute, and that I will do all I can to get the full refund which is HIS ethical and moral responsibility. He said he would look at it some more and call be on Thursday the 17th.Desired Settlement: Family Vision to give me a FULL REFUND.

Business

Response:

August 4, 2015 Dear [redacted], In response to the complaint made by Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] against Johnstown Family Vision (JFV), please take into consideration the following information. On April 22, 2015, [redacted] received a vision exam at our office. The exam was performed by Dr. James M[redacted]. During this examination Dr. M[redacted] noted a half diopter increase in her prescription. Previously Mrs. [redacted] had not received an exam at JFV; however, in September of 2011 she purchased a pair of glasses. At this time, an outside prescription was used to make the glasses. On July 2, 2015, four months after she received an examination by Dr. M[redacted], Mrs. [redacted] came back to JFV to order glasses. If Mrs. [redacted] was under the impression she “needed” new glasses with the most current prescription, one has to wonder why she waited four months before ordering them. It was explained to her that the increase in her prescription should improve her eyeglass vision and that with the amount of change that was found; often a patient may need additional time to adapt. Taking into consideration that Mrs. [redacted] had not had a vision evaluation in four years, the change in her prescription could probably seem very noticeable to her. We recommend to our patients they have a yearly eye examination. A yearly examination consists of more than just a refraction to assess if a prescription change is needed, wanted, or has changed. It also is an opportunity to evaluate the health of the eye and to detect the presence of eye related diseases. When Mrs. [redacted] returned to JFV on July 9, 2015 to pick up her eyeglasses, she wore them for a short period of time and expressed a concern that the prescription was not correct. At this time Dr. Joseph G[redacted], another optometrist that practices at JFV, reevaluated Mrs. [redacted] and rechecked the prescription. Dr. G[redacted] found the same values Dr. M[redacted] had originally found. He explained that often the change in a prescription is subjective. A half diopter change can make a big improvement to one patient, a small difference in other patients, and have no perceivable difference in others. Often times the patient needs to wear the glasses for a while to adjust to the new prescription. The optician working with Mrs. [redacted], attempted to explain that the changes she was experiencing were to be expected. At this point, Mr. [redacted], the husband of [redacted], refused to listen to the explanation and demanded his money back. As part of the standard procedure at JFV when placing an order for prescription glasses, all patients are given a walkout statement that informs them of a 25% restock fee that will apply on cancelled/returned items. It has been our policy since 1991 to charge a restock fee. Eyeglasses are a custom made item and prescription lenses made for one patient cannot be reused for another. Mrs. [redacted] was given a copy of this statement at the time of ordering. I would provide a copy of this walkout statement upon receipt from Mrs. [redacted] permitting the disclosure of her patient information to your organization in accordance with HIPAA. On July 14, 2015, I spoke directly with Mr. [redacted]. During this encounter he acted in a way that was consistent with how my staff described their interactions with him, he was quite irrational and wielded several threats. Instead of having a civilized discussion on the troubles his wife was experiencing with her glasses and coming to a solution, he began to threaten calling an attorney. Additionally, he informed me that he has access to connections at a local newspaper and he would slander our business by spreading rumors as to “how awful” we are. Unfortunately, this is not the first time I have had to deal with this type of behavior and I understand that certain individuals use these tactics to get what they want. Fortunately, we have had very few patients over the past 24 years in which a resolution could not be accomplished. I will go to a great extent to try to satisfy and retain rational customers, but I will also end relationships with individuals that I no longer want to provide services. Caving to his unreasonable outbursts and threats only encourages similar behavior in the future. Johnstown Family Vision has been in business since 1991 and I can count on one hand the number of times this type of situation has come up. While I do not believe that “The customer is always right”, I will do everything in my power to see that our patients are satisfied and confident with their decision to choose us as their eye care provider. Additionally, there are a few points that I would like to address in the [redacted]’s complaint: · Line 2: The description of “Badly blurred” is used. With any increase in power, the focal point of the lens changes to bring reading material closer. Mr. [redacted] did admit to me that his wife could read better with her new prescription. · Line 6: Johnstown Family Vision requires half down before glasses are ordered (made). Mr. [redacted] incorrectly stated that “payment in full” was required. · Line 10: The phrase “everything is blurred” was used. Mrs. [redacted] stated to me that she could read better out of the new eyeglasses but not enough to want to keep them. This is very subjective · Line 17: Dr. G[redacted] was incorrectly quoted. He did not state that the prescription was wrong, he actually stated that he came up with the same findings. He now realized that Mrs. [redacted] liked her old prescription as opposed to the new one, even though she had not given herself a fair chance to adapt. · Line 32: Mr. [redacted] stated to me how much he like the service provided by a Ms. Camille S[redacted], Optical Manager of JFV, while his wife was ordering her eyeglasses and even after he requested a refund. Later he accused the Manager, Ms. S[redacted], of a scam. In conclusion, I offered the [redacted]’s several options to choose from, none of which were acceptable to them. At this point I have chosen to follow my office policy on returns, which is well within my rights. I do not set out to have dissatisfied patients but I realize that a resolution cannot be achieved in every situation. Sincerely, Anthony S. K[redacted] Operations Manager/Owner, Johnstown Family Vision