Specsavers - how do they get away with it?

bladespin

Full disclosure: I hate going for new glasses, this dates back to when I got my first credit card (long ago) I had promised myself a nice pair of glasses instead of the old medical card jobbies, armed with a 'special offer' - glasses and sunglasses for £100 I happily went in and before I know it I was being charged £578; coatings I 'had' to have, frame upgrades for just a little more etc etc - yes I swallowed it all.

Every experience with the optical chains since that has reinforced this, I honestly would rather deal with the roughest used car dealer than these 'professionals'.

Now, I had a lovely pair of raybans until I lost them last year, as summer is approaching i thought I'd get a new set with an up to date prescription so looked about online.

Specsavers seemed to offer a nice pair at a reasonable price of €89 and as the ad said 'comes with standard single vision lenses, a scratch-resistant treatment, case and cloth.' I thought I had a winner.

Their website promised me a free eyetest up to the 30th but found they preferred to go through PRSI when I tried to arrange a test; eh well okay.

Turned up for the test and all went swimmingly, their Navan staff are lovely, very easy to deal with.

So test done I mentioned that I'd seen a pair I liked and could I buy them, we selected the pair from the display (marked at €89 as per the web) and went to order, I was asked about thin lenses and coatings but as these are only really for the car I said no thank you, just the standard.
The calculator came out and I was presented with a bill for €178, a little stunned I questioned this, thinking they were thinking I wanted 2x pairs but no, this was for the pair I'd picked with standard lenses.
I mentioned the price from the website but was told that that was for the frames with 'standard' lenses, when I said that was what I wanted I was told that for 'sunglasses' I would require polarizing or tinted lenses, €60 and/or €89, that the 'standard' lenses that were free were clear lenses, I thanked them for their time, got my prescription and left, I've just ordered 2 pairs (one sunglasses and a spare set of clears) for €64 online so I'm very happy.

I'm just trying to understand how they can get away with that kind of carry on, surely there's some sort of advertising standard that's in breach here, selling sunglasses with standard lenses that aren't sunglasses unless you spend another €60 minimum for a tint, how can they describe clear lenses as standard sunglasses?

Frigating

You wanted sunglasses. That requires the lenses to be tinted. Tinted lenses is not what most people require when they get glasses, it is something extra to the normal lenses, therefore they are not standard. In addition, the website clearly lays out what standard lenses are. Lens tints are listed under "lens extras". Surely you learnt after the first time to research before you buy

bladespin

Frigating wrote: »

You wanted sunglasses. That requires the lenses to be tinted. Tinted lenses is not what most people require when they get glasses, it is something extra to the normal lenses, therefore they are not standard. In addition, the website clearly lays out what standard lenses are. Lens tints are listed under "lens extras". Surely you learnt after the first time to research before you buy

I think you have misunderstood me, I did not select glasses and want them to be made into sunglasses, I selected sunglasses specifically.


I wanted sunglasses, went to their sunglasses section, selected the frames I likes etc, how can they advertise Sunglasses?
Linky

Where does it say that?

L1011

Polarized lenses are expensive (as you'll have noted comparing against the prices where you bought online too); the quoted price was for standard lenses. No ripoff.

You can get sunglasses fitted with standard lenses just as you can get normal glasses fitted with polarised - bit pointless in both cases, but that's not the issue.

bladespin

L1011 wrote: »

Polarized lenses are expensive (as you'll have noted comparing against the prices where you bought online too); the quoted price was for standard lenses. No ripoff.

You can get sunglasses fitted with standard lenses just as you can get normal glasses fitted with polarized - bit pointless in both cases, but that's not the issue.

I think it is tbh, never heard of sunglasses with clear lenses, the picture on the website shows dark, I know they have some room on images but surely it's misleading, I know exactly how much polarizing costs but that's not my gripe, if I want to get anywhere near what is portrayed on their website I have to got to €149 despite a published price of €89, no T&Cs are mentioned on the page.

freshpopcorn

I don't see how it's a rip-off.

bladespin

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I don't see how it's a rip-off.

Really, priced at €89 but you have to give them €149 to get what's actually described while a similar product can be purchases for €32 (with lenses).

Refusing their own voucher over a PRSI claim?

L1011

bladespin wrote: »

I think it is tbh, never heard of sunglasses with clear lenses, the picture on the website shows dark, I know they have some room on images but surely it's misleading, I know exactly how much polarizing costs but that's not my gripe, if I want to get anywhere near what is portrayed on their website I have to got to €149 despite a published price of €89, no T&Cs are mentioned on the page.

The page very clearly says "standard lenses".

bladespin

L1011 wrote: »

The page very clearly says "standard lenses".

I'm sorry but standard lenses in sunglasses are dark IMO, extremely misleading and the end product would not match description either.

RossieMan

Standard lenses are not tinted. I don't understand how you don't understand this.

freshpopcorn

bladespin wrote: »

Really, priced at €89 but you have to give them €149 to get what's actually described while a similar product can be purchases for €32 (with lenses).

Refusing their own voucher over a PRSI claim?

We most have a different understanding of what standard lenses are!

bladespin

RossieMan wrote: »

Standard lenses are not tinted. I don't understand how you don't understand this.

Maybe it's me but I honestly can't how you can describe an item as 'sunglasses' but supply them with clear lenses or expect a customer to pay double the advertised price to actually get the product pictured.

This morning, I purchased a pair of 'sunglasses' from a UK company, I called them to make sure the lenses were dark and the person on the other end of the line (who must have thought I had too much over the weekend) replied, of course - they're sunglasses.

bladespin

freshpopcorn wrote: »

We most have a different understanding of what standard lenses are!

I think we have a different understanding of what sunglasses are really!
It's not just the lenses but as said already I would think standard lenses in sunglasses have some tint, I'd also expect a company to honor their own vouchers.

Oxford english dictionary

C3PO

I am a very happy repeat Specsavers customer but come on lads ........ sunglasses with clear lenses?

emeldc

RossieMan wrote: »

Standard lenses are not tinted. I don't understand how you don't understand this.

Sunglasses with (standard) clear lenses. What fuggin' use would they be

TimeToShine

RossieMan wrote: »

Standard lenses are not tinted. I don't understand how you don't understand this.

True but if he was looking at Ray Bans specifically you can bet good money it was a pair of tinted sunglasses as standard.

bladespin

C3PO wrote: »

I am a very happy repeat Specsavers customer but come on lads ........ sunglasses with clear lenses?

I used to be happy with them too, still am, kind of, I have bought soft contacts from them many times without an issue, they're lovely to deal with etc but it's the website offer that's bugging me, that and having wasted my time.

twowheelsonly

Anyone that can't see the OPs' point really needs to go to Specsavers. ;-)

IMO that's an out and out misleading advert, no ifs, buts or maybes .

twowheelsonly

RossieMan wrote: »

Standard lenses are not tinted. I don't understand how you don't understand this.

Standard sunglasses lenses are - or should be. Otherwise you just sell / advertise them as glasses. I don't understand how you don't understand this.

Koptain Liverpool

OP - you are right. It is misleading.

Don't listen to the silly replies stating that it should be obvious etc etc.

Koptain Liverpool

RossieMan wrote: »

Standard lenses are not tinted. I don't understand how you don't understand this.

:rolleyes:

bladespin

Thanks guys, thought I was going mad, as someone who builds and sells custom microscopes I do honestly know the difference between filtered, polarized and standard lenses but I would never show a darkfield image to a customer if I was trying to sell them a bright field scope.

thebiglad

Has anyone posting here questioning the ability of OP to choose sunglasses without knowing they have dark lenses actually visited a Specsavers store?

They have a display with a price over it showing €89 etc and all of the glasses within that display (sold as sunglasses) have dark lenses - it is therefore reasonable to assume that is what you are purchasing for the price above the display.

I had intended to purchase prescription sunglasses in Specsavers myself in the next few weeks so will maybe test the waters now before I bother to spend too long picking out a pair.

If correct, and little reason to doubt OP it is extremely sharp practice.

uck51js9zml2yt

Op, take a screenshot and report them to advertising standards.
They are normally good at replying.

I usually get my eyes tested in specdaver and buy online.

bladespin

Ivan Noisy Sack wrote: »

I usually get my eyes tested in specdaver and buy online.

that's my approach from here on.

L1011

bladespin wrote: »

I'm sorry but standard lenses in sunglasses are dark IMO, extremely misleading and the end product would not match description either.

I don't find it even vaguely misleading, to be honest. As I said, you can get polarised lenses in "normal" glasses and v/v. The pricing is generic for different types of frames and very clearly specifies standard lenses.

It would be a consumer issue, not a rip off, anyway if the concern is about misleading info.

bladespin

L1011 wrote: »

I don't find it even vaguely misleading, to be honest. As I said, you can get polarised lenses in "normal" glasses and v/v. The pricing is generic for different types of frames and very clearly specifies standard lenses.

Really, I didn't look for normal glasses with any special lens, I was only looking for sunglasses, bog basic standard; which should have some tint as far as I'm concerned.
In my view it's exactly the same as selling a car but charging extra for the wheels (which are actually in the product representative picture).

L1011 wrote: »

It would be a consumer issue, not a rip off, anyway if the concern is about misleading info.

I think leading with a price of €89 and then attempting to charge the customer €178 is a rip off tbh.

rawn

Sorry to butt in but where do people buy glasses online? I just got new glasses but after a few weeks with my new frames I've started to hate them, definitely can't afford another pair at the price I paid!

bladespin

rawn wrote: »

Sorry to butt in but where do people buy glasses online? I just got new glasses but after a few weeks with my new frames I've started to hate them, definitely can't afford another pair at the price I paid!

I used Spex4 less this morning, one of our guys in the UK has used them many times and speaks very highly.

nhunter100

rawn wrote:

Sorry to butt in but where do people buy glasses online? I just got new glasses but after a few weeks with my new frames I've started to hate them, definitely can't afford another pair at the price I paid!

Once you have your prescription there are plenty of online sites framesdirect.com one example

Jimoslimos

bladespin wrote: »

I mentioned the price from the website but was told that that was for the frames with 'standard' lenses, when I said that was what I wanted I was told that for 'sunglasses' I would require polarizing or tinted lenses, €60 and/or €89, that the 'standard' lenses that were free were clear lenses, I thanked them for their time, got my prescription and left, I've just ordered 2 pairs (one sunglasses and a spare set of clears) for €64 online so I'm very happy.

I'm just trying to understand how they can get away with that kind of carry on, surely there's some sort of advertising standard that's in breach here, selling sunglasses with standard lenses that aren't sunglasses unless you spend another €60 minimum for a tint, how can they describe clear lenses as standard sunglasses?

Disclaimer: I've worked for Specsavers before (though not in Ireland) and a tint (colour and level) was always included on prescription lenses in the 2 for 1 offer price. Extras were driving tints, transitions and polarised lenses.

On single pairs the standard tint was always charged as an extra as well, or else you could purchase them off the shelf for the advertised price with no prescription.

Anti-reflective coating was also extra, but there is no way you would put that on a pair of sunglasses!

Price for single pair of prescription sunglasses =/ price of sunglasses on website.

From SS website, price should have been around €127 (€89 + €38) for standard tint or €178 for polarised

readytosnap

Ivan Noisy Sack wrote: »

Op, take a screenshot and report them to advertising standards.
They are normally good at replying.

I usually get my eyes tested in specdaver and buy online.

Specdaver? I'd get a second eye test if I were you :D

OP maybe they were not sunglasses, they could of been stunglasses?

pilly

I totally agree with OP, advertising Sunglasses that you have to pay to get made into sunglasses? Total rip-off.

animaal

I've also been (and continue to be) happy with Specsavers, but in this issue I agree with the OP.

If it has clear lenses, it's not a pair of sunglasses. I would have thought it would fall under the Sale of Goods Act; i.e. "fit for the purpose intended". SUNglasses that don't protect the eyes from the sun???

All we're missing is the "You weren't forced to buy it so it's not a rip off" brigade...

Tar.Aldarion

bladespin wrote: »

Really, priced at €89 but you have to give them €149 to get what's actually described while a similar product can be purchases for €32 (with lenses).

Refusing their own voucher over a PRSI claim?

Where did you get the 32e ones?

bladespin

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

Where did you get the 32e ones?

Spex4 less, UK company recommended by a work mate.

Calhoun

Not as bad as optical express in new bridge , some hot shot (or so he thought ) option trying to up sell me on Lasik the whole time, No means no.

If I can find a nice local option I try go to them rather give my business to people who appreciate it but it is hard. Especially if you want decent selection.

bladespin

That's definitely my lesson from my experiences, it's hard to beat the chains for cheap (lol) frames though, in this case all I wanted was a cheapo pair for the car/hols.

Jimoslimos

pilly wrote: »

I totally agree with OP, advertising Sunglasses that you have to pay to get made into sunglasses? Total rip-off.

Specsavers don't really sell "sunglasses" though. They sell suggested frame ranges (similar to kids, women and men) that are suitable for including a prescription with. That's why you'll never see a pair of wraparound shades - because the curvature isn't suitable for most prescription lenses.

That said I do agree it is disingenuous to put up a picture of a frame with tinted lens and a price for non-tint (despite the text stating standard single vision) on the website. The price should state no tint/UV or at the very least have a drop down where you need to specify tint/no tint for the actual price. Lens options are already confusing enough to most customers.

nosilver

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Specsavers don't really sell "sunglasses" though. They sell suggested frame ranges (similar to kids, women and men) that are suitable for including a prescription with.

So this range doesn't exist?

https://www.specsavers.ie/glasses/view-all-designer-glasses#f%5Bbrands%5D=aurora,boss-orange,cheap-monday,converse,fcuk,french-connection,gok-wan,john-rocha,karen-millen,karl-lagerfeld,max-and-co,osiris,puma,red-or-dead,replay,roxy,tommy-hilfiger,jeff-banks,quiksilver,timberland,love-moschino,hackett&f%5Blifestyle%5D=sunglasses

ItHurtsWhenIP

Calhoun wrote: »

...

If I can find a nice local option I try go to them rather give my business to people who appreciate it but it is hard. Especially if you want decent selection.

I had previously been with SpecSavers for many years, but chose the local option the last time I got glasses. I thought the eyetest was better, though the selection of frames was limited. I have a large head (quit sniggering down the back! ) so she only had about 3 frames that fit me. The only one I liked was €200, so I got it.

It lasted less than 2 years before the frame broke while sitting on my face, with a lense flying off to the ground. I'm back to wearing my previous SS provided glasses, which I had for 3 years with no problem (cost €129 I think).

So I think I better go (back) to Specsavers.

BTW - I saw something on BBC Watchdog last season about one of the "eye-test-chains" charging stupid money for a "blue-light coating" to "reduce the stress on your eyes from reading smartphone/tablet screens all day." Apparently it is complete and utter bovine excrement. :rolleyes: Do Specsavers try that one?

rawn

ItHurtsWhenIP wrote:

BTW - I saw something on BBC Watchdog last season about one of the "eye-test-chains" charging stupid money for a "blue-light coating" to "reduce the stress on your eyes from reading smartphone/tablet screens all day." Apparently it is complete and utter bovine excrement. Do Specsavers try that one?

Myself and my husband got that coating on ours... Say it ain't so!

Tbf we spend a lot of time on the computer and I do find my eyes don't feel at tired as they used to at the end of the day, so it seems to work for me!

Orion

The op is wrong on this being a rip. As so many people have said the tint is extra.

That said the cost of glasses in Ireland is a total ripoff. I'm now on varifocals and the opticians said nearly 300 for the lenses. Frames extra. Bought two pairs of designer frames with varifocals for around 140 delivered. Varis were £50 on top of frame price (which included standard lenses).

Been buying from glassesdirect for years. Excellent service. One of the frames didn't fit well - sent them back and got a different set no quibble even though there was nothing wrong with the frames - they just didn't fit. First time that's happened tbh.

ItHurtsWhenIP

rawn wrote: »

Myself and my husband got that coating on ours... Say it ain't so!

Tbf we spend a lot of time on the computer and I do find my eyes don't feel at tired as they used to at the end of the day, so it seems to work for me!

It's so.

And here is the programme in question - jump to 1:58:

I spend most of my day on the computer and phone (have done so for most of my life). Even back in the days when the massive B52 CRTs (5250 monitors) were irradiating my brain, I had no problems.

bladespin

Orion wrote:

The op is wrong on this being a rip. As so many people have said the tint is extra.

Interesting you believe that a tint on sunglasses is an 'extra' but each to their own, when you buy a car do you pay extra for tyres?

jimmycrackcorm

Orion wrote: »

The op is wrong on this being a rip. As so many people have said the tint is extra.

Have you actually looked at the link - it's very blatant. The price and a tinted lenses. It's not even in the same league as a McDonalds ad showing a burger that is just a taller version of the squashed actual one you get handed.

Very clear misrepresentation IMO.

Senna

This is definitely a case for consumer protection agency.

emeldc

Orion wrote: »

The op is wrong on this being a rip. As so many people have said the tint is extra.

Jesus H what is wrong with some people. How can they be classed as SUNglasses if there's no fuggin' tint

Jimoslimos

emeldc wrote: »

Jesus H what is wrong with some people. How can they be classed as SUNglasses if there's no fuggin' tint

To be sold as sunglasses they just need to provide UV400 protection, which can be achieved with a polycarbonate or clear coated standard lens. Tint levels are categorised 0-4, but I don't think there is any minimum specification for sunglasses - might depend on jurisdiction though.

nosilver wrote: »

So this range doesn't exist?

https://www.specsavers.ie/glasses/view-all-designer-glasses#f%5Bbrands%5D=aurora,boss-orange,cheap-monday,converse,fcuk,french-connection,gok-wan,john-rocha,karen-millen,karl-lagerfeld,max-and-co,osiris,puma,red-or-dead,replay,roxy,tommy-hilfiger,jeff-banks,quiksilver,timberland,love-moschino,hackett&f%5Blifestyle%5D=sunglasses

I can only speak from experience in working in a physical store, but the range was called "Sun", not sunglasses - as in they were frames that were suitable for fitting a prescription lens and would "look" good as sunglasses as well. Pricing for tints was always indicated. If you want fashionable sunglasses go to sunglass hut but you won't get a prescription in most of those frames. Personally I prefer polarised non-prescription with contact lenses but each to their own.

Also IIRC identical frames were often in different sections (Mens/Sun), pricing was done on the dummy lens to avoid confusion (with different coloured stickers). This meant that different prices could be listed on the tint and clear, despite the frames being the same.

As I've said earlier I do agree that the website pricing is misleading but the staff in the retail stores have little control over this.

beauf

This has to be one of the most insane threads on boards.

sunglasses
ˈsʌnɡlɑːsɪz/
noun
glasses tinted to protect the eyes from sunlight or glare.

beauf

Jimoslimos wrote: »

To be sold as sunglasses they just need to provide UV400 protection, ....

I wonder if thats the same person who thought it was ok to define unlimited as limited for broadband.