The eyeglasses are still rolling outof Great Glasses stores

Tag : prescription glasses


Fines are in the millions but the eyeglasses are still rolling outof Great Glasses stores across the province, including threelocations here in Toronto.

The ongoing court battle over the tiny optical empire has lastedyears and led to multi-million-dollar fines but it's not over yet.

Even when the Ontario Court of Appeal rules on an appeal against a$1-million fine slapped on Great Glasses owner Bruce Bergez, thecourt has yet to hear an appeal on the $16-million judgment againsthim.

But despite the battle, glasses are still being sold at the GreatGlasses stores, known for their 3-for-1 deals and "free eye tests."

Insurance companies, like Standard Life, continue to decline someclaims for glasses or contact lenses, citing the fact they "weredispensed by someone who was not authorized to do so under the(company's) policy."

"He's violating the legislation ... by not having an optometrist ora physician issuing the prescription," said Dr. Murray Turnour,regist rar of the College of Optometrists. "Because he doesn't haveprescriptions issued by an optometrist or a physician, he shouldnot or the stores should not be dispensing glasses or contactlenses.

"The public is not assured the examinations or the tests ... are infact meeting any particular standard of practice in theprofession."

Dr. Tournour explained his concern: "Individual members of thepublic may have an eye disease that will not be detected because ofthe very cursory type of testing. They may misunderstand the extentof the testing."

The college's primary purpose is to govern the practice ofoptometrists in Ontario, he said, but it also has a responsibilityto administer the legislation that guides them.

"It was in that context we felt Mr. Bergez and Great Glasses werein fact in contravention of that particular piece of legislation,"he said.

"Because the government wasn't moving on it we felt obliged toprotect the public by initiating the legal action in Hamilton. Theprosecution really fell on our shoulders."

The college launched an investigation in late 2001 but the casedidn't come to court until 2003.

Court heard employees of Great Glasses contravened the RegulatedHealth Professions Act by writing prescriptions and dispensingwithout a prescription of a physician or optometrist.

At that time, the judge ordered Bergez, his wife Joanne and theirchain of stores to comply with the RHPA. Specifically they had toensure non-optometrist employees stopped prescribing glasses forvision or eye problems, stopped dispensing glasses without aprescription and stopped allowing non-optician employees todispense any glasses other than simple magnifiers.

"The evidence we have we brought to the court ... indicated therewas no optometrist and no physician on the premises of any of thestores," Turnour said.

By 2006, the college was back in court asking for a contempt ofcourt order against Great Glasses for failing comply with thethree-year-old judgment.

"What has followed (since the 2003) judgment has been three yearsof investigative activity by the applicant and elaborate evasions,false statements and sham corporate structures by and from therespondent, Bruce Bergez," Justice David Crane wrote in a scathingjudgement.

"On the basis of the very extensive record before me I have nohesitation in concluding that (Bergez) created and operates thethree optical stores ... I also find that Mr. Bergez has, through asham structure, franchised a further 14 Great Glasses stores undera 'Franchise Agreement' that provides the franchisor with the rightto determine the manner and mode of businesses by each of thefranchisees."

Crane concluded Great Glasses hadn't changed the way it was doingbusiness since the 2003 judgment and had gone on to franchise thebusiness across the province.

Based on the income Ber gez's store received for dispensing eyewearwithout a prescription and the franchise royalty fees, Crane levieda $1-million fine against Bergez and a $50,000-a-day fine for everyday he failed to comply with the court orders.

BACK IN COURT

In 2007, the case was back in court with the College ofOptometrists again demanding Bergez comply with the judgementagainst his chain of stores. The judge found they had continued notto comply and ruled the $50,000-a-day fine was in effect from thedate of the previous judgment to October 2007. That totalled almost$16 million.

Both the $1-million and $16-million fine are being appealed.

The Court of Appeal heard Bergez's appeal of the $1-million finebut has not delivered a ruling. Officials from the College said thecourt must still hear the appeal of the $16-million fine.

Caroline MacIsaac-Power, registrar for the College of Opticians,said the glasses tycoon is flouting the system.

"We have some 24 stores out there that have no licenced opticiansin them and ... Great Glasses is providing eye examinations andthey have no optometrists registered at 24 locations acrossOntario," said MacIsaac-Power.

"The College of Opticians says very clearly dispensing is acontrolled act as legislation has set out. There's a risk of harmif you dispense and you don't have a licence."

Bergez didn't respond to an interview request but in 2006, he toldthe Sun the $1-million fine for dispensing eyewear without aprescription gave optometrists a monopoly.

Before the court battle began, Bergez was a registered optician ingood standing.

Since then, the college has suspended his licence, a decision hecan appeal.