1-800 contact Mining?

[cmarx]

The past 2 days we have been inundated with 1-800 Contacts request for Rx verification. All of these RX's are well past expiration some from as early as 2002 since seen in this office and many have never been fitted for contact lenses, as far as we know. The funny thing about this is that the letter states we do not need to respond within the 8 business hours that the federal law requires but by 12/19/2014? Is it only our area or is the entire country under siege or is it just our region? It take time to research and then once faxed now it must be scanned into the EMR. Wasting time and money.

[coupe]

If I am correct, the selling of CL online is not allowed in NY State. I would just ignore the letter. It is most likely Big E trying to cover their a_s, since they bought CC. They know the legal responsability implied and are now trying to protect themselves.

[cmarx]

No, we must comply.

[coupe]

If you must repond , then attach a service fee to each response. Let's say $20.00 and keep a record of the billing. Send an itemized statement to CC at the end of the month requesting payment. There is no law that says you have to do this for free (as it incurs cost on your part). BTW when in doubt check with your professional assoc.

[CCGREEN]

My last understanding of this you should reply ONLY if the Rx was not valid in some fashion. That is the only time I respond to them.
If its a good Rx why should I take time and go out of my way to fax them information so that they are assured their records are good? The patient has already given them all the information they need. Why do I need to repeat the patient?

[DanLiv]

No, we must comply.

Hopefully not. If so and within 8 hours CC would have a fun strategy in simply sending you 500,000 rx verifications every day. The time you would have to spend simply vetting whether they are your patients or not would grind your business to a halt. An analog DDOS attack.

My understanding of the federal requirement was simply that if you do not respond and countermand the Rx within 8 hours, the Rx is assumed correct and they are free to fill it as written. If it was written with an expiration date it's still expired and they would not be able to fill it, whether you respond or not. Your local edicts may vary, but my reading of the federal requirement allows inaction as an option.

[CCGREEN]

I concur with DanLiv.............but if it was written with a expiration date, do you really think the one ordering the contacts will give THAT information. They want a product and if no one is standing in front of them to keep them honest they are not going to be.

[newguyaroundhere]

I concur with DanLiv.............but if it was written with a expiration date, do you really think the one ordering the contacts will give THAT information. They want a product and if no one is standing in front of them to keep them honest they are not going to be.

Exactly...online vendors are not going to ask the customer/patient to tell them whether their rx is still valid or not, and lets be honest, most people either do not know if it still valid or they don't care if it is valid or not.

We have pre-made forms for such requests already on file that if we get a request in, all we have to do is fill in the missing info and send it in. Little effort required on our part.

[Mizikal]

According to The Fairness to contacts lense cunsumer act. Yes, you do have to reply within 8 business hours. No you cannot charge for verifying the RX. The expiration date only matters if it is expired. By not replying you are saying the RX is correct. If the RX is incorrect you must give them the correct RX. I used to keep a copy of this in my desk draw but now I don't mess with contacts lenses . I highly recommend everyone read it.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-10...108publ164.pdf

[HarryChiling]

An analog DDOS attack.

I once went into a walmart and used their display computers to print a fake Rx which I then walked into the dispensary with and bought contact lenses. The system is flawed beyond belief but your analog DDOS strategy was in a post I pointed out some time back and I found it on a contact lens consumers forum where the discussion was: "if everyone used the same doctors office they couldn't possible verify them all", consumers are getting smarter and circumventing laws to make the process easier and more convenient.

[Blunder Woman]

I hope this isn't off topic, I can move this if considered so but....

I just went in to place a dummy order for 1-800 Contacts. Has this check box always been there?
Any idea exactly what it means? It was auto clicked when I scrolled to the bottom of the page. What would happen if I un-clicked it and then placed an order? Would they not contact my eye-care professional to obtain a copy of my Rx? Not interested in putting in my credit card info to find out.

[fjpod]

If I am correct, the selling of CL online is not allowed in NY State. I would just ignore the letter. It is most likely Big E trying to cover their a_s, since they bought CC. They know the legal responsability implied and are now trying to protect themselves.

Replacement contacts are allowed to be sold by online vendors. .. In every state, with a valid prescription, of course. It's a federal law. You may be confusing this with the fact that in NYS, it is technically illegal for eyeglasses to be fitted and dispensed without face to face contact with a licensed dispenser. But this law is flagrantly violated every day, in the name of "consumer rights".

[Uilleann]

Replacement contacts are allowed to be sold by online vendors. .. In every state, with a valid prescription, of course. It's a federal law. You may be confusing this with the fact that in NYS, it is technically illegal for eyeglasses to be fitted and dispensed without face to face contact with a licensed dispenser. But this law is flagrantly violated every day, in the name of "consumer rights".

Bingo!

Which instantly and completely makes the whole ego thing null and void from the licensed states as well as the non.

[drk]

The whole thing is a freaking sham.

The "passive verification" thing was a joke from the beginning. On the one hand, I don't want to be forced to submit Rxs all day long, so some short-sighted AOA ODs agreed that it was acceptable (or at least didn't point out the farce that "passive verification" is).

What if the fax is unreadable? What if the communication is incomplete? What if you're closed? What if a million things. It just means that the onliners "tried". If they "tried" and got no response, well, then, sell away sell away sell away.

[drk]

There is only one reasonable way to do it that preserves the integrity of the concept of a prescription: the patient takes the prescription including quantity and refills from the prescriber who controls it's release, the patient relinquishes the prescription to the supplier (who is a licensed professional in the state of the buyer, if the citizen of the state that's purchasing requires it), the prescriber fills it exactly and that's that.

That's the "medicine model" of prescriptions. No more of this silly "glasses model" for contacts.

[drk]

If Coastal is covering their butts, all they have to do is send out the fax. Then they "tried". That's what this is, no doubt.

Compliance with the law or not is up to you.