Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: optician has been struck off after being found guilty of dishonestly overcharging ...

  1. #1
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240

    Redhot Jumper optician has been struck off after being found guilty of dishonestly overcharging ...

    Dishonest optician overcharged patients.
    A cheating optician has been struck off after being found guilty of dishonestly overcharging hundreds of patients.


    Lee Bernard, who lives in Bures, appeared before a hearing of the General Optical Council held in London.
    It found his fitness to practise as a dispensing optician was impaired, and barred him from practising as an optician


    Mr Bernard was a partner at a branch of Specsavers in Witham, Essex, where he admitted that – over a two-year period from 2010 to 2012 – he failed to ensure patients were supplied with 426 lens products they had ordered.
    Instead, they received a product with an inferior lens, resulting in customers being overcharged more than £12,000.


    He also admitted patients were not informed they were receiving an inferior product to the one they ordered, and did not get their consent to do so.
    However, he disputed he had acted dishonestly, denying he knew or believed patients were receiving inferior lenses.

    Continue reading =======> http://www.suffolkfreepress.co.uk/wh...ents-1-6343674

  2. #2
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    532
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Ryser View Post
    Dishonest optician overcharged patients.
    A cheating optician has been struck off after being found guilty of dishonestly overcharging hundreds of patients.


    Lee Bernard, who lives in Bures, appeared before a hearing of the General Optical Council held in London.
    It found his fitness to practise as a dispensing optician was impaired, and barred him from practising as an optician


    Mr Bernard was a partner at a branch of Specsavers in Witham, Essex, where he admitted that – over a two-year period from 2010 to 2012 – he failed to ensure patients were supplied with 426 lens products they had ordered.
    Instead, they received a product with an inferior lens, resulting in customers being overcharged more than £12,000.


    He also admitted patients were not informed they were receiving an inferior product to the one they ordered, and did not get their consent to do so.
    However, he disputed he had acted dishonestly, denying he knew or believed patients were receiving inferior lenses.

    Continue reading =======> http://www.suffolkfreepress.co.uk/wh...ents-1-6343674
    There is no law in determining the maximum one can charge a patient, however baiting and switching is illegal if proven.

  3. #3
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Denver
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    429
    Quote Originally Posted by HindSight2020 View Post
    There is no law in determining the maximum one can charge a patient, however baiting and switching is illegal if proven.
    Baiting and switching is usually the description of advertising one price, and then when customer gets into the store, up-selling them something else at a higher price by convincing them they need to better quality product. It is not illegal unless the seller never had any product of the lower price available to sell. I don't believe the penalties for that in the US are a criminal offense (would probably be a civil matter).

    Claiming to sell a certain brand/model, but substituting a brand/model of lessor price (but charging the higher price of the brand/model claimed), is criminal fraud. It sounds like this is what is referred to in the OP. It probably happens more often than people realize, since it is hard for consumers to id a lens brand/model.
    Last edited by m0002a; 10-26-2014 at 08:15 AM.

  4. #4
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Fayetteville, NC, USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    2,009
    Notice this is in England, folks, where Opticianry is more regulated. Opticians in England have to complete a rigorous education program, as compared to the pulse required here in the majority of states.

  5. #5
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    532
    Quote Originally Posted by m0002a View Post
    Baiting and switching is usually the description of advertising one price, and then when customer gets into the store, up-selling them something else at a higher price by convincing them they need to better quality product. It is not illegal unless the seller never had any product of the lower price available to sell. I don't believe the penalties for that in the US are a criminal offense (would probably be a civil matter).

    Claiming to sell a certain brand/model, but substituting a brand/model of lessor price (but charging the higher price of the brand/model claimed), is criminal fraud. It sounds like this is what is referred to in the OP. It probably happens more often than people realize, since it is hard for consumers to id a lens brand/model.
    I think most are quite aware of what it is but thanks for the detailed definition.

  6. #6
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Denver
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    429
    Quote Originally Posted by wmcdonald View Post
    Notice this is in England, folks, where Opticianry is more regulated. Opticians in England have to complete a rigorous education program, as compared to the pulse required here in the majority of states.
    That is true, but charging patients for one brand/model lens but actually supplying them with a less expensive brand/model lens, has nothing to do with opticianry regulation. It is simple commercial fraud in the UK or US.

  7. #7
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Fayetteville, NC, USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    2,009
    Correct, but not it was the GOC, not the legal system that took care of that business. They stripped him of his license, something you folks in Colorado don't have. Shame you don't.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. NC OD Pleads Guilty
    By Shwing in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-30-2007, 04:52 PM
  2. Hooray-Jury finds Muhammad guilty in sniper trial
    By Cindy Hamlin in forum Just Conversation
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-01-2006, 06:35 AM
  3. Michael Jackson found NOT Guilty
    By For-Life in forum Just Conversation
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 06-15-2005, 04:49 AM
  4. Scott Peterson Guilty
    By Cindy Hamlin in forum Just Conversation
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-16-2004, 08:31 AM
  5. It's Official-Yates Guilty of Murder
    By Cindy Hamlin in forum Just Conversation
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-12-2002, 08:10 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •