u/AdAccomplished9671

The frustrating back-and-forth I experienced with Lenskart's customer service began when I tried to find out the lens material used in their most premium glasses, the Owndays Japan BLU+ iShield.

The conversation started simply enough. I reached out to find out the base material of the lenses, specifically asking whether they were made from CR-39 resin or polycarbonate.

The answer: The first agent, Mohd, confidently told me, "We use CR-39 only; we don't use polycarbonate."

The verification: Just to be absolutely sure, I asked him to reverify whether this also applied specifically to the premium Owndays Japan BLU+ iShield lenses. Mohd confirmed, "Yes, sure, in this also we have CR-39."

I knew they were not CR-39 because of the refractive index. CR-39 has a fixed refractive index of 1.50, whereas the Owndays Japan BLU+ iShield lenses have a refractive index ranging from 1.60 to 1.67.

In the same chat, I later initiated a new conversation to confirm the details and ask a follow-up question about how the UV protection is applied.

I connected with Piyush and asked two direct questions: What is the base material of the Owndays Japan BLU+ iShield lenses, and does the UV protection come from the material itself or from an added coating?

Piyush initially dodged the specifics, telling me that the material is "fiber" and sending a generic comparison chart.

The reason I pushed back on the claim that it was fiber was that I knew there are no prescription glasses made with a fiber lens material.

Pressing for details I refused to accept "fiber" as a technical answer. I reiterated my questions: Is the material resin, polycarbonate, or something else? And where does the UV protection come from?

The contradiction became apparent when Piyush stated the exact opposite of what Mohd had told me earlier. According to Piyush, the Owndays Japan BLU+ iShield lenses are made of polycarbonate, and their UV protection comes from an additional coating applied to the lens. This immediately raised concerns, as it directly conflicted with the information I had previously received. I challenged his response and pointed out that another Lenskart executive, Mohd, had explicitly told me that the lenses were made from CR-39. I also questioned the explanation regarding UV protection based on my own technical understanding. Polycarbonate lenses are inherently UV-resistant and typically block nearly 100% of UV radiation on their own. As a result, the claim that an additional UV coating is required for UV protection on a polycarbonate lens did not seem logical and only added to the confusion surrounding the product's actual specifications. 

While it is true that many brands apply additional coatings that may enhance UV protection or provide other benefits, I was fairly certain that this was not what Piyush was referring to. When I pointed this out and highlighted the contradiction in his explanation, the conversation took an unexpected turn. Rather than addressing my concerns or clarifying the discrepancy between his statement and the information provided earlier by Mohd, Piyush avoided the issue altogether. Instead of responding to what I believed was a valid and logically sound question, he abruptly transferred the chat to the automated customer support bot, leaving my queries unanswered.

After navigating the automated menus and making it clear that I had never consented to being transferred in the first place, I was eventually connected to Chirag Narang. Determined to avoid another round of contradictory answers, I explained the entire situation from the beginning, including the conflicting information I had received about the lens material, with one executive claiming it was CR-39 and another insisting it was polycarbonate. To eliminate any possibility of further confusion, I presented three clear, numbered questions covering the exact base material of the lenses, the source of their UV protection, and the specific level of UV protection they provide. I also informed him that if I did not receive a direct and consistent answer, I would be taking screenshots of the conversation and sharing my experience on social media.

Chirag's response only added to the frustration. Instead of addressing any of the specific questions I had carefully laid out, he replied with a generic list of benefits such as reduced eye strain, anti-glare properties, and visual comfort. When I pointed out that none of this answered what I had asked, he responded with yet another copy-pasted list of product features, mentioning things like blue light filtering and a refractive index range of 1.56 to 1.60. Once again, there was no answer to the actual questions regarding the lens material or the source of the UV protection.

At that point, I directly questioned whether Lenskart was seriously claiming that it did not know the base material of one of its most premium lens offerings. After several rounds of evasive responses, Chirag finally acknowledged the reality of the situation: the information regarding the material composition of these lenses was not available in their system.

What made the experience particularly frustrating was not simply the fact that they lacked the information. It was that, instead of admitting this from the outset, I was given three different and contradictory answers to the same question. One representative claimed the lenses were made of CR-39, another said they were polycarbonate, and yet another avoided the question entirely by relying on generic marketing material. Had they been transparent from the beginning and stated that they did not have access to the information, it would have saved everyone time. Instead, I was left with conflicting information and no reliable answer, despite trying to gather basic product details necessary to make an informed purchasing decision.

Chirag's only solution was to arrange a callback from a supervisor within 24 hours. When I tried to ask for a specific timeline for the call, the system abruptly cut me off and redirected me to an automated menu asking about my Lenskart Gold Membership.

I tried to obtain a basic technical specification for a premium product. Instead, I was met with confident misinformation, logical contradictions, bot transfers, irrelevant marketing copy-pasted responses, and, ultimately, an admission of complete ignorance from the customer service team. If an average customer who was unfamiliar with these technical details had contacted customer support, they would have been completely misled by the information provided.

https://preview.redd.it/tiv222v6mv7h1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9b20e06b990d2d3f515889704dbc1d5be0a07477

https://preview.redd.it/ekql6bv6mv7h1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5d88b4878956c5c0cd496c6211d694da857b9644

The frustrating back-and-forth I experienced with Lenskart's customer service began when I tried to find out the lens material used in their most premium glasses, the Owndays Japan BLU+ iShield.

The conversation started simply enough. I reached out to find out the base material of the lenses, specifically asking whether they were made from CR-39 resin or polycarbonate.

The answer: The first agent, Mohd, confidently told me, "We use CR-39 only; we don't use polycarbonate."

The verification: Just to be absolutely sure, I asked him to reverify whether this also applied specifically to the premium Owndays Japan BLU+ iShield lenses. Mohd confirmed, "Yes, sure, in this also we have CR-39."

I knew they were not CR-39 because of the refractive index. CR-39 has a fixed refractive index of 1.50, whereas the Owndays Japan BLU+ iShield lenses have a refractive index ranging from 1.60 to 1.67.

In the same chat, I later initiated a new conversation to confirm the details and ask a follow-up question about how the UV protection is applied.

I connected with Piyush and asked two direct questions: What is the base material of the Owndays Japan BLU+ iShield lenses, and does the UV protection come from the material itself or from an added coating?

Piyush initially dodged the specifics, telling me that the material is "fiber" and sending a generic comparison chart.

The reason I pushed back on the claim that it was fiber was that I knew there are no prescription glasses made with a fiber lens material.

Pressing for details I refused to accept "fiber" as a technical answer. I reiterated my questions: Is the material resin, polycarbonate, or something else? And where does the UV protection come from?

The contradiction became apparent when Piyush stated the exact opposite of what Mohd had told me earlier. According to Piyush, the Owndays Japan BLU+ iShield lenses are made of polycarbonate, and their UV protection comes from an additional coating applied to the lens. This immediately raised concerns, as it directly conflicted with the information I had previously received. I challenged his response and pointed out that another Lenskart executive, Mohd, had explicitly told me that the lenses were made from CR-39. I also questioned the explanation regarding UV protection based on my own technical understanding. Polycarbonate lenses are inherently UV-resistant and typically block nearly 100% of UV radiation on their own. As a result, the claim that an additional UV coating is required for UV protection on a polycarbonate lens did not seem logical and only added to the confusion surrounding the product's actual specifications. 

While it is true that many brands apply additional coatings that may enhance UV protection or provide other benefits, I was fairly certain that this was not what Piyush was referring to. When I pointed this out and highlighted the contradiction in his explanation, the conversation took an unexpected turn. Rather than addressing my concerns or clarifying the discrepancy between his statement and the information provided earlier by Mohd, Piyush avoided the issue altogether. Instead of responding to what I believed was a valid and logically sound question, he abruptly transferred the chat to the automated customer support bot, leaving my queries unanswered.

After navigating the automated menus and making it clear that I had never consented to being transferred in the first place, I was eventually connected to Chirag Narang. Determined to avoid another round of contradictory answers, I explained the entire situation from the beginning, including the conflicting information I had received about the lens material, with one executive claiming it was CR-39 and another insisting it was polycarbonate. To eliminate any possibility of further confusion, I presented three clear, numbered questions covering the exact base material of the lenses, the source of their UV protection, and the specific level of UV protection they provide. I also informed him that if I did not receive a direct and consistent answer, I would be taking screenshots of the conversation and sharing my experience on social media.

Chirag's response only added to the frustration. Instead of addressing any of the specific questions I had carefully laid out, he replied with a generic list of benefits such as reduced eye strain, anti-glare properties, and visual comfort. When I pointed out that none of this answered what I had asked, he responded with yet another copy-pasted list of product features, mentioning things like blue light filtering and a refractive index range of 1.56 to 1.60. Once again, there was no answer to the actual questions regarding the lens material or the source of the UV protection.

At that point, I directly questioned whether Lenskart was seriously claiming that it did not know the base material of one of its most premium lens offerings. After several rounds of evasive responses, Chirag finally acknowledged the reality of the situation: the information regarding the material composition of these lenses was not available in their system.

What made the experience particularly frustrating was not simply the fact that they lacked the information. It was that, instead of admitting this from the outset, I was given three different and contradictory answers to the same question. One representative claimed the lenses were made of CR-39, another said they were polycarbonate, and yet another avoided the question entirely by relying on generic marketing material. Had they been transparent from the beginning and stated that they did not have access to the information, it would have saved everyone time. Instead, I was left with conflicting information and no reliable answer, despite trying to gather basic product details necessary to make an informed purchasing decision.

Chirag's only solution was to arrange a callback from a supervisor within 24 hours. When I tried to ask for a specific timeline for the call, the system abruptly cut me off and redirected me to an automated menu asking about my Lenskart Gold Membership.

I tried to obtain a basic technical specification for a premium product. Instead, I was met with confident misinformation, logical contradictions, bot transfers, irrelevant marketing copy-pasted responses, and, ultimately, an admission of complete ignorance from the customer service team. If an average customer who was unfamiliar with these technical details had contacted customer support, they would have been completely misled by the information provided.

https://preview.redd.it/tiv222v6mv7h1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9b20e06b990d2d3f515889704dbc1d5be0a07477

https://preview.redd.it/ekql6bv6mv7h1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5d88b4878956c5c0cd496c6211d694da857b9644