Lakeside Family Vision Care

March 28, 2019Dear [redacted] ,This letter is in response to the complaint made by [redacted] As per my phone conversation with you, I am sorry that I did not get the first letter sent out by Revdex.com and that this response is to your 2nd letter dated March 19, 2017.In reading over *** [redacted] 's complaints I can first address the Optical order of her eyeglasses [redacted] did come in for a routine eye exam on January 12, DrN [redacted] did prescribe for her a full time and a computer prescriptionWith her [redacted] insurance we filled the prescription in a frame of her choosing and extended to her ***'s offer of 30% off a 2nd pair(This form is attached)Since Patient was currently wearing progressive lenses, as an optician I do not see why a computer progressive would have caused her to experience an episode of her condition which is why the recommendation was made due to prolong Computer workSingle Vision would not be recommended for such workShe preferred to stay within a budget and chose a budget frame which she was not very keen on.She was called on January 26th that her eyewear was completed and back from [redacted] labsShe came in to pick them up(Our Notes page is attached)As noted she was not sure that they would work for her we did ask her to leave with them and try them for a few days as this is not an unusual occurrence in opticalIf she did not like them they could be remade (our warranty letter is Attached).She did contact LSV on February 1st by email (again in NOTES) and Kathy did respond to herShe came in very purposely with an indignant mannerKathy began to assist [redacted] and I shortly Stepped in due to the toneI tried to understand what the patient wanted and I did write notes on the new prescriptionsI believe I wrote progressives but as she was very upset and would not follow my questioning must have misunderstood her and changed as you see the order to single visionI did fill the prescription as DrB [redacted] had written itAs an Optician, my job is to interpret the RX provided by the ODThe RX can be read as SV distance/near or a combination in many types of bifocals/progressivesThe triangle is short hand for changele: DrRX change.As for what [redacted] will do for a memberI have reached out to them and am understanding their policy to be exactly what I informed the patient of [redacted] will remake a non-adapt, a prescription change, or a problem with the fit or coatings of the lenses within days at no additional cost to the patientThey do not refund any monies and do not as the patient requested charge back to the optical practice any benefits used by the patient for the materials or services the patient was suppliedHowever, to make the patient happy I did call [redacted] to see if there was something that could be done on her behalfI was informed by [redacted] the patient had already contacted them and has re-instated the patient materials benefit to be used in another location.In response to the medical care aspect of the visitWe go above and beyond to take care of our patients in manner Consistent with our Doctor's knowledge and our high-tech instrumentationDrNeal represented to the patient what he saw as a possible problemEvery patient is entitled to a second opinionSometimes that opinion may differ from practice to practiceAs with all medical decisions the patient has every right to question what is being recommendedEven if it is a strong recommendation it is always done in the patients' best interest.In review of her chart the eyeglass prescription is similar in total optical power to that which another Doctor did provide.Since the services where preformed and billed to her insurance we cannot write off an amount that goes against a patient's deductibleHer request for the $to be waived unfortunately cannot take place.Patient's Desired Outcome/Settlement As per the patients request for her desired outcome, Lakeside Vision will credit back to her account Spaid for her two pair of eyewearOnce credited back to her account Swill be applied to her deductible which as I explained above cannot be written offThe remainder of Swill be reimbursed by check to the patient once the return of her eyeglasses has been processedThis takes approximately business week.If there is any additional information needed please feel free to contact me at ###-###-#### or by email, [redacted] @lakesidevision.comI will be out of the office from March 31st to April 13thDrMichael N [redacted] can be reached at [redacted] *** @lakesidevision.comRegards,Barbara T.Optical Manager

March 18, 2015Dear *** ***,Please find my response in the complaint of *** ***, against Lakeside VisionI am happy to assist you in any information you may need.*** *** came to LSV on January 21, for an eye exam and eye wear Her insurance is *** This insurance plan
allows the patient an eye exam and a complete pair of eye wear The eye ware was ordered on January 22nd and sent to the *** lab for manufacturing as this is who actually supplies the materials. On February 9th the product was received by our office incorrectly and returned to *** On February 13th *** informed our office that the product was still in process of being completedOn February 23rd the lenses arrived back in the office still incorrect The patient was notified and very upset. I did offer to make her a spare pair of eye ware to get by at no extra chargeShe declined I explained the issue but was rebuffed I told her I would let her know when they were in again and hoped they would be correct. *** ***, Jessica's mom, called to cancel the order and receive a refund I explained to her that I could not do that due to the fact it was in process with her insurance I explained how the process worked at which she posted a long and negative review on *** (attached) Logged a complaint with Revdex.com and your office I called her twice to again assist her with understanding how *** worked and that we did not bill her insurance but processed her order in the manner at which he insurance requires. I spoke to *** several times as *** contacted them to express her frustration*** called me on March 3rd and informed me that they would be refunding the ***'s the fee of $and would reinstate their benefit to be used at another practice At this point I believe that *** is still expecting to be refunded by our officeOur office is only a middle man and must go by what her insurance company states. I wish her well and am sorry that our office could not have met her understandable expectations in this situationHowever I do not feel the very negative and out right attack on our office is warranted Her ending statement of wanting her out of pocket expenses refunded is being done by her insurance company It is her insurance company that did not provide the product Our office would very much like *** to delete her negative post on our *** wall. Thank you, Barbara T. Office Manager

This letter is in response to the recent complaint made against Lakeside Vision by a patient who is also a previous employee of Lakeside VisionThis person was released of her employment duties on 11/01/This complaint was submitted days later, 11/10/2016.This patient/employee had a
comprehensive eye examination on 9/26/A frame, a pair of progressive addition lenses, and a custom polarized sun clwere ordered on 10/20/using her Vision Service Plan (VSP) vision insuranceThe optician and the patient/employee discussed lens options and VSP co-paysAs Lakeside Vision is not allowed to make glasses for a VSP patient, this eyeglass order was sent to the VSP authorized labHer $examination co-pay was waived as an employee benefitHer remaining balance of $was from her VSP insurance company's labA print out of those co-pays was given to the patient/employee at the time of order as well as the estimated completion date of 3-weeks.Once we received her eyeglasses from her VSP lab, we sent her eyeglasses out to a second lab so her custom polarized sun clcould be fabricatedThe patient was notified on 11/11/that her eyeglasses and custom polarized sun clwere ready to be dispensed.Lakeside Vision received a phone call from VSP on 11/07/The patient/former employee called VSP claiming she never received her eyeglassesOur optical department informed the VSP representative that her eyeglasses were received from the VSP lab and were sent to a second lab for her custom Sun clip-on.Lakeside Vision's optical department called VSP on 11/08/to notify them that this patient/former employee wished to cancel her eyeglass orderA VSP representative stated they cannot be cancelled after the glasses were madeLakeside Vision spoke to this patient/former employee with this information obtained from her VSP insurance company's lab.The patient/former employee came into Lakeside Vision on 11/23/On this date, her new eyeglasses were fitted on her face and she paid her outstanding balance of $As of the date of this letter, she has a zero outstanding balance in our officeI feel this issue has been resolved.Regards,Amy MN***, OD Optometrist/Owner, Lakeside Vision

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because the contents of the businesses response are inaccurate and unacceptable. Barbara's documented recollection of our personal interaction is inaccurate.  In light of how many issues they have with customers (some I witnessed during my lengthy waits while in the facility and others I've heard from other local customers who will not frequent their business for this very reason), I can understand how she has difficulty keeping all of the encounters straight.  I actually did not document this particular interaction in my original complaint as it was one that was a seemingly positive experience.  When I arrived, I was asked to sit for a period of time before Kathy was able to take me.  Kathy was always kind during our interactions.  When I presented the prescriptions, she was uncertain as to whether or not they could be honored as they were coming from another doctor.  She advised she had to speak with management and left me to go to a back room for a period of time.  Kathy and Barbara returned with my prescriptions and Barbara was quite courteous.  She said the change would not be a problem, but would be done on a one time only event.  I confirmed that I wanted the progressives in the black frames and the single vision reading in the blue frames.  There was no discussion regarding any distance lenses.  There was no exchange of negative words, there was no questioning....it was a pleasant experience.  I said very little during this exchange.  Barbara advised she would fill the prescriptions as they were on the papers and I would not be able to have the lenses altered after LSV changed them.  After that, I left.  The notes Barbara supplied confirm the limited interaction.  When I returned to pick up my glasses 3 weeks later, I was presented the distance only lenses instead of the progressives that was indicated on the prescription.  In looking at the prescription closely (I have the original and have attached a picture), the original notes Barbara wrote on the prescription clearly were from a pencil with a dull point causing a grainy effect to the lead.  She selected a different pencil when she purposefully changed the prescription to erase what you can clearly said "progressive" and wrote over it "RX SV Dist Only".  This documentation was written with a different pencil as the point clearly is sharper and there is no grainy effect of the lead on the paper.  This would lead someone to believe this was done at a later time and contradicts Barbara's statement that she misunderstood.   I am confused over the timing and content of the 3-28-17 letter to me that was included in LSV's response.  I did not receive progressive lenses on or about 3-28-17.  My progressives were originally ordered 1-12-17 and the new prescription for progressives were supposed to be ordered at the beginning of February.  Instead, I received the single vision lenses on 3-6 which I still have in my possession.  I have not received any correspondence from LSV except the billing for my son's glasses that turned out to be an accounting error in my favor.  [redacted] (my vision insurance) is only allowing me to get the lenses changed to the correct prescription into the frames that [redacted] paid for purchased through Lakeside Vision (the reinstatement of the patient materials Barbara spoke of).  [redacted] paid Lakeside Vision $138.20 of the $171.00 charged for the frames.  I paid the balance.  If I return the frames and the lenses to Lakeside, I will have to pay full price for the frames at another facility and lose the $138.20 coverage benefit.  I am not eligible to purchase another set of frames under [redacted]s coverage for another two years.  Barbara's assertion that the money billed to [redacted] totaling $200.97 cannot be written off is false.  I have spoken with [redacted] and not only can it be reversed, but the manner in which the claim was presented was inappropriate according to the representative Michelle that I spoke with earlier in March.  Lakeside Vision presented 2 ICD codes to [redacted] which generated 3 clinical policy bulletins.  They should only produce one.  [redacted]'s representative questioned this practice.  The ICD codes they presented were [redacted] and [redacted] for Open Angle Borderline Findings Low Risk Bilateral.  I was advised I had moderate to severe open angle and two groupings of tests needed to be done asap as I could go blind.  Based on Lakesides own coding and the findings of the second opinion doctor, my issue was not moderate to severe as LSV described to me.  Lakeside was to supply the findings from the first round of tests to [redacted] for consideration for approval for the second round of tests.  Lakeside did not supply the findings or wait for the approval and instead told me to get scheduled as soon as possible so the tests were within a short time of each other.  The second opinion doctor rendered all of the tests not necessary.   I do not feel I should be held financially responsible for their misrepresentation of my condition resulting in unnecessary testing.  [redacted] advised that all I need to do is send [redacted] the resolution at fax number ###-###-#### and they will remove these charges from my deductible.  
The $444.79 Lakeside is proposing is what I paid out of pocket and beyond my [redacted] coverage.  Lakeside also owes me an additional $10 for an overcharge I paid on my account (and/or my son Andrew Sciano's account...it is unclear where this credit sits) due to their accounting error.  This has been brought to their attention on 3-8-17 for which they have not acknowledged or addressed.  Immedately:  I will accept the following immediately in exchange for returning both sets of glasses:$444.79 the total out of pocket that I paid directly to LSV for two pairs of progressive glasses only to receive two pairs of single vision glasses$138.20 the total [redacted] paid to LSV for the frames I will now need to repurchase$10.00 over payment made on my account due to their accounting error$200.97 medical balance waived and [redacted] notified of the resolution of the account so this can be removed from the deductible.  I will accept a check payable to [redacted] for $592.99 made available at the same time the glasses are returned to Lake Side vision.  I will not accept a check payable a week later as there is no guarantee the check will be issued, accurate or timely.  The check should be cut for the above amount and I am to be notified when it is available.  I will exchange the glasses for the check at the same time. After May 18, 2017:  I am only being given 60 days from 3-21-17 by [redacted] insurance to get the lenses changed in the frames purchased through Lakeside vision.  After that, I will lose that benefit and my demand for resolution to this matter will increase to:$195.00 Multi focal "computer" lenses per receipt provided by LSV patient payment $608.00 Progressive Daily wear lenses per receipt provided by LSV patient and insurance payment (which I will completely lose after 60 days from 3-21-17)$10 over payment outstanding on Jennifer or Andrews account.  $200.97 balance waived per above. The total due will increase to $813.00 which will include my out of pocket as well as the vision benefits lost if not resolved timely.  Same conditions apply with the check and glasses being returned as above.  Thank you for your attention and I look forward to hearing from you. 
Regards,
[redacted]

March 28, 2019Dear [redacted],This letter is in response to the complaint made by [redacted]. As per my phone conversation with you, I am sorry that I did not get the first letter sent out by Revdex.com and that this response is to your 2nd letter dated March 19, 2017.In reading over [redacted]...

[redacted]'s complaints I can first address the Optical order of her eyeglasses. [redacted] did come in for a routine eye exam on January 12, 2017. Dr. N[redacted] did prescribe for her a full time and a computer prescription. With her [redacted] insurance we filled the prescription in a frame of her choosing and extended to her [redacted]'s offer of 30% off a 2nd pair. (This form is attached). Since Patient was currently wearing progressive lenses, as an optician I do not see why a computer progressive would have caused her to experience an episode of her condition which is why the recommendation was made due to prolong Computer work. Single Vision would not be recommended for such work. She preferred to stay within a budget and chose a budget frame which she was not very keen on.She was called on January 26th that her eyewear was completed and back from [redacted] labs. She came in to pick them up. (Our Notes page is attached). As noted she was not sure that they would work for her we did ask her to leave with them and try them for a few days as this is not an unusual occurrence in optical. If she did not like them they could be remade (our warranty letter is Attached).She did contact LSV on February 1st by email (again in NOTES) and Kathy did respond to her. She came in very purposely with an indignant manner. Kathy began to assist [redacted] and I shortly Stepped in due to the tone. I tried to understand what the patient wanted and I did write notes on the new prescriptions. I believe I wrote progressives but as she was very upset and would not follow my questioning must have misunderstood her and changed as you see the order to single vision. I did fill the prescription as Dr. B[redacted] had written it. As an Optician, my job is to interpret the RX provided by the OD. The RX can be read as SV distance/near or a combination in many types of bifocals/progressives. The triangle is short hand for change. le: Dr. RX change.As for what [redacted] will do for a member. I have reached out to them and am understanding their policy to be exactly what I informed the patient of. [redacted] will remake a non-adapt, a prescription change, or a problem with the fit or coatings of the lenses within 30 days at no additional cost to the patient. They do not refund any monies and do not as the patient requested charge back to the optical practice any benefits used by the patient for the materials or services the patient was supplied. However, to make the patient happy I did call [redacted] to see if there was something that could be done on her behalf. I was informed by [redacted] the patient had already contacted them and has re-instated the patient materials benefit to be used in another location.In response to the medical care aspect of the visit. We go above and beyond to take care of our patients in manner Consistent with our Doctor's knowledge and our high-tech instrumentation. Dr. Neal represented to the patient what he saw as a possible problem. Every patient is entitled to a second opinion. Sometimes that opinion may differ from practice to practice. As with all medical decisions the patient has every right to question what is being recommended. Even if it is a strong recommendation it is always done in the patients' best interest.In review of her chart the eyeglass prescription is similar in total optical power to that which another Doctor did provide.Since the services where preformed and billed to her insurance we cannot write off an amount that goes against a patient's deductible. Her request for the $200.97 to be waived unfortunately cannot take place.Patient's Desired Outcome/Settlement As per the patients request for her desired outcome, Lakeside Vision will credit back to her account S444.79 paid for her two pair of eyewear. Once credited back to her account S200.97 will be applied to her deductible which as I explained above cannot be written off. The remainder of S243.82 will be reimbursed by check to the patient once the return of her eyeglasses has been processed. This takes approximately 1 business week.If there is any additional information needed please feel free to contact me at ###-###-#### or by email, [redacted] @lakesidevision.com. I will be out of the office from March 31st to April 13th. Dr. Michael N[redacted] can be reached at [redacted] @lakesidevision.com. Regards,Barbara T.Optical Manager

Review: I went to Lakeside Vision to have my eyes checked for new glasses and during the exam the optometrist thought I may

have glaucoma and had me return for more tests.I returned for more tests which according to them where medical procedures.

NO one in the office ever informed me that these where medical procedures and I would not have let them continue because they did

do not accept my medical insurance. My insurance has refused payment for this and now they want me to pay them out of my pocket.

I have since gone to a specialist in glaucoma and he found my eyes to be in excellent condition.

My first visit for this was May 2013 and as of Sept. 2013 I have NO glasses, all I've gotten is unjust bill.

Business

Response:

Revdex.com Concern. ID #[redacted]

This patient was seen for a comprehensive eye examination on May 14, 2013. At this time, he chose to order an eyeglass frame in the similar frame style that he was currently wearing. When this frame was special ordered, we were notified by the manufacturer that it was on back order until June 12, 2013. After an updated back order date of July 15, 2013. we were informed that this frame had been discontinued. At that time, our sales representative was called upon to request a warehouse and optical search to possibly locate this frame. The patient was advised of the situation and asked to return to the office to select a different frame, The patient’s vision insurance was never billed for eyeglasses.

The doctor educated this patient in length on his findings of being a glaucoma suspect, informed him of the medical necessity of returning for additional testing* and recommended he bring his wife to that appointment to discuss the findings. The billing manager verified this patient's medical insurance ([redacted] Health Plan) online on May 21, 2013. This patient was seen for a medical visit including baseline diagnostic testing on May 23, 2013. When the patient arrived for this appointment, he did not bring his referral from his medical doctor. He stated he was unaware that he needed a referral. At that time, the billing manager called his insurance company to double check that he did indeed need a referral. The billing manager phoned the patient on May 24lh, 2013 to remind him to have his medical doctor fax us a referral so we can submit to his insurance company. The billing manager made another phone call to his insurance company on May 24, 2013 where a different representative stated we are non-par with this insurance. The patient was notified on May 24, 2013 of this and future appointments were cancelled. Our billing manager contacted this patient's medical doctor’s office on August 22, 2013 requesting a referral. The medical doctor's office stated they could not send a referral because we were non-par with his insurance. The insurance company informed the billing manager that this patient does not have any out of network benefits and to bill the patient. This was mailed to the patient on August 23, 2013. This patient’s wife called the office on August 26,2013 and stated she would pay his balance by the end of September.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: No one ever called me to come back and pick a new pair of frames, the only call was to request that I pay for the so called tests .

There was no comprehensive dialogue and NO one talked to me about my insurance. I GOT RIPPED OFF. THANKS FOR NOTHING.

Regards,