Ryan Construction

This is the first I am hearing about thisI wish this would've came to me earlier so that I could resolve it It is never our intent to make any of our patients feel cheated or deceived in any wayAfter speaking with *** I believe that it was a misunderstanding*** had no reference
other than the billing department and invoiceThe optician who originally helped you failed to make any notes in your account and is no longer with us for *** to speak with I don't think *** understood what happened fully and failed to bring it to my attention, for that I am sorryUnfortunately, we do have many patients with open balances who fail to pay and this one slipped through the cracks. I would be happy to take care of the $and call the credit department if necessary I would like a chance to make this up to you and will give you a set of new lenses ($value) that you will be able to use at any time. Feel free to reach out to me at anytime. Thank you,*** ***, Owner

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 11617026, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of why I am rejecting this response appear below:
The term "generous," is not being used in the appropriate context as it applies more to my refusal to acknowledge the improper notices for alleged payment then your attempt to pay me to go away. Again, I was awaiting a refund that I was told would occur as a result of the sales rep being misinformed and selling me an expensive pair of Maui Jims. He should have known the manufacturer of Maui Jims would never make what I requested. At this point, after all that's transpired, I have no reason to believe he didn't do that on purpose to obtain a higher financial commitment from me to work with. Either way, I was then sold a pair of Oakley's over the phone, sight unseen, and assured a refund of the notable difference in price. I had no way of knowing that the glasses were not only unsatisfactorily made but actually detrimental to my vision, until I decided to seek the help of another eye care professional. Fortunately, it is merely part of their process to check the prescription of the existing pair a client is wearing when they request an exam. As far as me being able to tell the glasses you sold me were faulty: you know one's vision is always affected negatively when receiving glasses with a new prescription(even when it is correct) initially and the recommendation to the client is to "put them on first thing the next morning and your eyes will adjust better," just as your representative had reassured me at the time of pick up as my prescription had "drastically," changed..  I decided to seek the care of another eye care professional because of all the following contributing factors: 1.) I was told by your optometrist that he "wouldn't give me my full prescription," 2.) I was mislead into a commitment regarding the Maui Jim pair the manufacturer ultimately refused to make 3.) The obviously dubious upsell tactic of "the lab made a mistake and made a third pair of lenses for you," in the attempt try to sell me a third set of frames (it's just plain subversive) and finally 4.) I started  receiving notices all of a sudden, almost a year after service (coincidentally the timeframe most of the world starts to consider new glasses in) of payment DUE for the amount projected as a REFUND to me. These 4 factors are what lead me to work with another eye care provider who only incidentally provided me the 5th and most reprehensible factor. You have a much wider selection of frames then anywhere I know, I was still considering the small chance of taking my prescription to you - straighten out the refund issue and apply it to another couple of pairs. All I would need is another lab to verify that your lab had done its job properly this time. However, the 5TH indiscretion crossed my threshold of tolerance. I did make that "one phone call," that you claim in your last statement would have resolved all of this. After she located my account and saw what I directed her attention to, I was met with stutters, stammers, long holds and then a promise to return my call after she spoke with the "other," manager. I then called, in the days in between her responses, and calmly indicated to her that I could produce proof of payment via my bank statements if that would help clarify her investigation. The next "one phone call," I received was a message indicating that "it's been determined that you do own that balance." I was previously thinking of what compromise I could make to assist you in managing away the indiscretions of your business and it's members. Now, all I can do is try to think of another way in which your business could take advantage of a client and I can't seem to think of a single one. From the exam to sales to delivery, every aspect of your business model was corrupted by either ineptitude or conscious malfeasance. Yet now, after being offered all of that tangible, measurable proof of such, you still seek to find a way to place the responsibility for any of this on me? I was turning the other cheek until you smacked me the 5th and final time.My previous offer to you to, which is LESS than what you have already proposed, of the rounded down amount paid directly to me in a check (lower than the refund and the value of the lenses combined) still holds. The rounded down full refund to become an active client again is now no longer a consideration. I await the decision that you feel is best for your business and its reputation. There is still time for you to do the right thing. Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 11617026, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of why I am rejecting this response appear below:
I unfortunately have no contact point for the owner of the business who replied to the complaint, only a name. I also needed to use the "reject," option even though I am willing to accept a portion of it, with a minor modification, to consider the matter resolved. Again, I would have reached out to the respondent directly if I had a point of contact to do so. Regarding their offer to contact the collection agency, "handle," the balance of $137.09 and prepare a new set of lenses for me with  a value of $289, I will accept the following. As I have already paid the $137.09 in full to said collection agency (to avoid any affect it may have had on my credit score during this dispute resolution process) I will accept a more direct form of reimbursement. If a check is issued to me and sent to my address for both the sum of the $137.09 I have already paid and the value of the lenses ($289 according to the owner) I will consider the matter resolved once the check has cleared the payment process at my financial institution. I will submit the check for payment to my bank within a reasonable time after receiving it by mail. Some form of registered or more formal mail is recommended to ensure payment arrival. In addition, I assume that the estimated value of the lenses was most likely stated at retail value and not the cost to Direct Optical. I also understand that, while not fulfilling my initial settlement request in entirety, they are making some effort for resolution and therefor so will I. If they generate a check for a total sum of $337.09 ($137.09 already paid and only $200 of the $289 value stated) and mail it to me in a reasonable time frame, I will consider the matter resolved and not pursue any other form of action. While the only resolution that would truly change my opinion of this business's practices, effectively encourage me to become an active client again and even recommend them to anyone seeking vision care services would be the original offer I requested for full reimbursement, I will accept their intent to merely resolve this matter rather than regain a potentially very lucrative customer for years to come. In summary:  a check for $337.09 made out to me, sent in a reasonable time frame to my home address and successfully completing the check cashing process (i.e. not cancelled after production etc.) would change the status of my complaint to resolved. However, my initial request of full reimbursement (which I would round down in consideration of their current efforts to $600) would both change the status of my current complaint and that of my potential to become an active and satisfied customer once again. I will leave it to Direct Optical to determine which outcome, of the two potentials, they would consider most beneficial for their ongoing business.
Regards,
[redacted]

The offer that I made is very fair. Three notices were sent to the patient BEFORE being sent to collections. The third notice had a warning that the account would be sent to collections. Had the patient responded to any of these, we would not being through this process. This could have been avoided before it ever happened with a simple phone call. That is the reason for 3 notices, to avoid this type of situation. The patient had no complaints with the eyeglasses or exam that had been purchased until now. Asking or suggesting a refund for eyeglasses  and lenses that have been worn and satisfactory of over a year is not a reasonable request. Offering to reverse any confusion and a free pair of lenses is a generous offer. [redacted], owner [redacted]