On point 1: THAT is a VERY good reason to request a remake of the
glasses. That was one reason I didn't order rimless from Zenni, seems
99% of their
rimless frames are single screw mount, and I just
don't see how a single screw mount wouldn't become a pivot point if
not torqued down really
tight. And if such a small screw was torqued that
much, it would seem only a matter of time before it came loose, or
cracked the lens from
the stress.
On point 2: How do you know they are not progressives? Did you take
them to a optician and ask to have them checked to see if they have
an
intermediate zone (however narrow it may be), or are
you just going on what you "believe" to be true?
On point 3: See point 2 above.
On point 4: How long has it been since this was done. Do you have
confirmation of delivery?
On point 5: Seems this is a consistant problem with Zenni, not
answering emails. Have you tried calling the CS phone number? Seems
people have
better luck with that, although the wait time is
horrible. Judging from the operating manuals from even major-name
appliances made in China,
I've come to the conclusion that NO one in China can
translate even the simplest of english in the written form. Just
another reason to try the
phone, as they seem to speak english better than they
write (or read) it. ;)
On point 6: Most of the posts I've seen here are not defending any of
the online optical shops. They're just sharing their personal
experiences (good or
bad) and it is up to the consumer as to how they take
them, with a grain of salt or with a sledgehammer. I know Chuck seems
to be
defending them, but I believe he's just playing the
part of devil's advocate. Most of the complaints I've seen here about
Zenni seem to to be of
either the "they take to long" or "their CS sucks"
variety. What I haven't seen is many complaints about the quality of
the optics (especially
for the price paid). I have a pair of their semi-
rimless progressives on their way to me at this moment (fist time
order from Zenni), so when they
arrive I will post my opinion of them, whether good
or bad.
If I were you (and as I am going through a progressive lens problem
with another retailer, I feel your pain), I would call the CS number
and stay on hold for as long as it took to talk to someone. I would
insist that my glasses be remade on the "obvious" flaw that the frames
were broken right out of the box.
I would not even mention the "no-line bifocal/progressive" argument
unless you have a certfied optician's letter stating that. Once I had
the remade glasses "in hand", that would be the first thing I would
do, go to an optician. Just do what I did, and tell them you got them
"out of town" and you *think* there may be a problem with them and
could they PLEASE check them against your script to see if they are
accurate. Heck, I'd even tell them that you're not sure they *are*
progressives because you don't notice an intermediate corridor in
them. Wal-Mart's optical shop did it for me, and that was on a
Saturday and they seemed to be very busy at the time.
Hope everything works out for you.
-Firewalker
On Feb 20, 2:03 pm, "ivm.camp" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 1.) My rimless ZENNI frame fell apart out of the box.
> 2.) ZENNI lenses are noline bifocals not progressive
> 3.) I ordered progressives
> 4.) I returned as requested with statement
> 5.) ZENNI is not answering my emails re: broken frames, and insists
> that lenses are true progressives
> 6.) if any customer, and a number of them on this blog, have had
> problems with this company, ZENNI, then that
> should be considered as valid and the company should not be defended
> just because they did something that you paid them to do and that they
> are supposed to do
>
> On Feb 19, 9:36 pm, Chuck Knight <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > My "church colleagues" bought theirs at Zenni, after my own positive
> > experiences...all are completely satisfied, and report (I wear single vision
> > lenses) that the lenses are shockingly good, with distinct zones for
> > distance, reading, AND intermediate.
>
> > One commented that the corridor was narrow. Another said that they appeared
> > to use the same lenses as her pair from Sears Optical.
>
> > A nurse at my ophthalmologist's office also wears Zenni progressives. I
> > checked in with her...knowing that she would run them through their paces.
> > I wanted to know if they were as good as my single vision glasses. In fact,
> > they tested out as (literally) perfect, and her testing indicates that the
> > lens design provides a narrow corridor. It wasn't a complaint...only an
> > analysis.
>
> > With several successful pairs owned by friends and colleagues, and even a
> > nurse at the ophthalmologist's office, I find it very interesting that you
> > are so adamant that your glasses are not progressives. So, let me ask you a
> > question, if I may.
>
> > You mentioned adhering to the "standard definition" of a progressive. What
> > does that mean...could you enlighten me? What constitutes a progressive,
> > and how did your glasses let you down?
>
> > As for the warranty...the warranty terms are clearly stated on the sites,
> > and you agreed to them when ordering from the site. In the US, warranties
> > have 2 components...express and implied.
>
> > The implied part is that the glasses will be the ones you ordered, and that
> > the lenses will be as-ordered...
>
> > The express part of the warranty can be anything that a company states,
> > expressly.
>
> > Many of the online retailers operate from a relatively small profit margin
> > -- if they charged $300 for a pair of glasses, they could "eat" a relatively
> > small loss and provide a new pair for a customer. With the smaller profit
> > margin, the online companies decided to do a 50% refund for unhappy
> > customers -- I've not heard of any of the "big 5" refusing to remake
> > defective glasses, on their own dime.
>
> > A return because "I didn't like them" is an entirely different story.
>
> > Would it be more acceptable to you, if it were worded this way? 100% refund
> > if dissatisfied (minus 50% restocking fee)
>
> > -- Chuck Knight
>
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:54 PM, ivm.camp <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > I did not mean that "progressive" lenses are a scam but that the
> > > refund policies and what appears to be standard refund practice is a
> > > scam, as is defining progressives as bifocals..I understand that there
> > > are a large number of different quality types and manufacturers of
> > > progressive lenses but ..a reputable US based company, regardless if
> > > the Essilor lenses are made in France or Singapore, will issue a 100%
> > > refund, and will respect the standard definition of progressive as
> > > multifocal (at least far-distance/ intermediate-computer/near distance-
> > > reading). I have been burned by ZENNI with frames which fell apart out
> > > of the box and defective lenses. I have come into a stonewall with
> > > their illiterate "customer service". Glad to have an excellent bank
> > > working with me. Shall keep you apprised
>
> > > If you look carefully at the websites and hidden small print, you will
> > > see that many define progressives as noline bifocals.....perhaps some
> > > people, who do not use intermediate distance for 10 hours/day and read
> > > without glasses, are satisfied with bifocals, I am not. Further, once
> > > the online company has your returned glasses, they argue that the
> > > customer returned them and that there was nothing wrong with the
> > > glasses. The customer must have a written analysis of the glasses
> > > from another optician to continue making their argument
> > > online......I stands to good business practices that there is 100%
> > > refund with any defective product....not 50%.....that is the
> > > scam.....try and get your money back from China.....I cannot believe
> > > that some people on this blog accept such a 50% refund policy as
> > > ok.....at which online company did your church colleagues buy their
> > > progressives?
>
> > > I would really appreciate hearing from which online company people
> > > filled progressive scripts which were filled correctly with 3
> > > distnaces. Thanks a lot for your help. I am hesitating getting a pair
> > > of progressives for my husband after my experience, although I bragged
> > > that I could get a pair of progressives for $60 instead of his
> > > $350....
>
> > > On Feb 19, 10:22 am, "Ira (GlassyEyes)" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > ivm.camp,
>
> > > > Good luck finding lenses manufactured in the United States -- at any
> > > price.
> > > > Essilor has 15 plants worldwide and only 2 of those facilities are in
> > > > the
> > > > United States. It's unclear whether they manufacture lenses in either of
> > > > those US facilities.
>
> > > > The fact is, the vast majority of lenses are made in Asia -- along with
> > > > televisions, furniture, clothing, cell phones, coffee makers, luggage,
> > > you
> > > > name it... and lenses have been made in Asia and Europe longer than the
> > > > ever-lengthening list of other products.
>
> > > > The lenses in this case were definitely made incorrectly. Progressives
> > > > online are by no means a scam, but you may have better luck with the
> > > > more
> > > > reputable stores and I'm not sure I'd do a first pair of progressives
> > > > online.
>
> > > > - Ira
>
> > > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:20 PM, Chuck Knight <[email protected]
> > > >wrote:
>
> > > > > Several people at my church are wearing progressives that were
> > > purchased
> > > > > online, and have no trouble with them whatsoever. And, they were the
> > > > > standard lenses..not the upgraded Essilors.
>
> > > > > The optics, the placement of the corridor, etc...it's all perfect.
> > > > > Or,
> > > > > sufficiently close to perfect that the nosepads can adjust the rest of
> > > the
> > > > > way.
>
> > > > > Progressives, while a bit trickier to fit, are *definitely* NOT a
> > > > > scam,
> > > > > when purchased online.
>
> > > > > I agree with ivm.camp -- you should contact the company and tell them
> > > that
> > > > > the corridor is in the wrong place, by a full 5mm. That's not
> > > attributable
> > > > > to "tolerances," that's a defect.
>
> > > > > Many of the online retailers monitor this group. Your dissatisfaction
> > > may
> > > > > already be known to them.
>
> > > > > -- Chuck Knight
>
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 4:36 PM, ivm.camp <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > >> I do not think that any of these online lenses are made in the US and
> > > > >> most of the online companies have either no definition for
> > > > >> progressives as multifocal, or define progressives to be
> > > > >> bifocals....ZENNI for one, Glasses4U another, etc..
>
> > > > >> You should get a full refund because the lenses are defective and not
> > > > >> because you wnat to return them. The scam appears to be to state that
> > > > >> 50% is max refund and then produce poor lenses which will be returned
> > > > >> so the company makes 50% on bad lenses and gets the frame/lenses back
> > > > >> to reuse (at least the frame).
>
> > > > >> Progressive online SCAM!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Check us out at the oft-updated http://www.glassyeyes.com!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"GlassyEyes" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/glassyeyes?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
