Alicia G. Manenti, O.D., Inc.

Company responded via phone:The office of Alicia G M*** reached out to the consumer, Jennifer W***, today and has left a voicemail for her on her cell phone They would like to schedule a conference call between Jennifer W***, their office, and her insurance company to advocate a refund for the additional amount the consumer is requesting from the insurance company The consumer has been refunded everything that they can refunded at this time from the office of Alicia G M***Please call the office to set up a time for the conference call to try and bring this matter to a resolution

Company responded via phone:Consumer was a new progressive lens wearer and it may take up to two weeks to adjust to this type of lens. She did not like the progressive lens and was offered to go to a single vision lens. She did not accept this.   She just wanted to turn her lens in and receive...

a refund.  The company has tried to resolve this issue and has spoken with the consumer's insurance company.  A  refund check was issued for their part for  $193.04 on July 8, 2017.  The insurance company stated they do not refund surcharges so they cannot refund the $226 back to the consumer.  The company understands the consumer's frustration but they do not have  control over the insurance company's decision to issue a refund.  The consumer would have to take this up with her insurance company.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
This is just their latest excuse for not resolving the issue.  They offered the single lenses as a solution with the knowledge that my vision had not changed since my last visit and had not warranted getting a new set of glasses.  They "pushed" the transitions set of glasses on me with the sole purpose of "selling".  Up until the final call that the refund check was cut there was never any mention that the insurance company did not return "lab fees" as they called it. All conversations were regarding a full refund and not a partial.  This is unacceptable and their job is to continue to make any calls and arrangements necessary to get the entire refund amount back.  I have already made all their calls that they have requested which was over and above what the insurance company thought I should do at that time.[redacted] vision is still responsible for the remaining $226.
Regards,
Jennifer W[redacted]