My optometrist is withholding information from me...

[mac_gurl]

I had quite a fight with my optometrist, trying to get my prescription. He told me that I shouldn't be buying them online, and that if problems occur, that I couldnt' return them. I have had the same type of contacts for nearly 12 years, and have never had problems. I rarely use them (only for swimming and the odd day that I feel like it) but they are nice to have. He then tried to inform me that he could give me a years supply for the same price as online. I refused, since I only needed a couple of months, and then he finally gave them to me. It was a huge deal, since they charge almost double per box! Keep at it, and they should give it to you.

Another tip, is to call the receptionist, and if you ask, they will often fax it to you, if you need it.

[Tower]

Originally Posted by onetwo_threefour

Actually you are dead wrong. As a lawyer, if my signature and seal goes on a document, presumptively I have given legal advice as to the nature and effect of that document. To do so is not a trivial undertaking. In my last post I should have said 'a minimum of $500' because it could well be more.

When you go to a notary who is also a lawyer it is also important to inform the lawyer that you do not want the legal advice and just want a public seal. It's not dead wrong as for an example I do not want a lawyers council.

Notaries can only be held liable for actions they take while performing the notary function. For example, although notaries are responsible for attesting to the validity of a signature, they are not responsible for the validity of the document. It is not considered malpractice for a notary to attest to a signature on a document that he or she knows is invalid.

GUARANTEES ACKNOWLEDGMENT ACT

4(1) The notary public, after being satisfied by examination of the person entering into the obligation that the person is aware of the contents of the guarantee and understands it, shall issue a certificate under the notary public’s hand and seal of office in the prescribed form.

NOTARIES PUBLIC ACT
Powers and rights of a notary public

6(1) A notary public may, during pleasure,

(a) administer oaths and take affidavits, affirmations and declarations attested by the notary public’s signature and seal,

(b) draw, pass, keep and issue deeds, contracts, charter parties and other mercantile transactions in Alberta,

(c) attest all commercial instruments that are brought before the notary public for public protestation,

(d) exercise all the other powers that customarily pertain to the office of notary public, and

(e) demand, receive, and have all the rights, profits and emoluments rightfully appertaining and belonging to the calling of notary public.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the appointment of a notary public may be made so that the powers of the notary public are limited to the following:

(a) administering oaths and taking affidavits, affirmations and declarations attested by the notary public’s signature and seal;

(b) attesting all commercial instruments that are brought before the notary public for public protestation;

(c) issuing certificates under the Guarantees Acknowledgment Act;

(d) certifying copies of documents as being true copies.

(3) When a notary public administers oaths or takes affidavits, affirmations or declarations within Alberta for use within Alberta it is not necessary to their validity that the notary public affix the notary public’s seal to them.

Again notaries attest to the authenticity of a signature and not the contents of the document.

Start with this:

On this date, the ___________, a man, appearing in his true character, who identified himself as **** *** ******* appeared before me,
______________________________________, a notary public residing in the CITY OF CALGARY in the PROVINCE OF ALBERTA, and attested to the truth of this legal document with his oath and autograph. And has not attained any legal advise by the Notary.
_________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC


To deny service is unlawful, however, a notary can charge what ever they want as a notary fee, but can not force law as a lawyer if the PERSON is not asking for it. Both are public office and as such must act correctly and separately. Just because you can do both does not mean it is needed nor wanted at the same time. So as a PERSON I ask the notary "Notary please witness this document to make it public."

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by Tower

Blah blah blah

Something tells me I shouldn't bother replying but...

The Guarantees Acknowledgement Act has no application to this discussion. It's a short piece of pain in the ass legislation that applies to guarantees only. If you get a loan from the bank for your business but they insist on you personally guaranteeing that loan, then you need to appear before a Notary and get a certificate issued under that act. The Notary, or in many cases the lawyer, must be of the opinion that the person signing the guarantee understands it. Guarantees are often accompanied by half a dozen pages of dense type that rarely coincides with what the person was told by the bank. Many times the person was told that they need to sign the guarantee in case the company can't meet its obligations when really the terms of the guarantee specify that the lender can go after the individual's assets without exhausting all remedies against the company.

Explaining all of this to an experienced and savvy business person is a pain in the ass because they probably get it and see the whole process as a giant inconvenience. Explaining it to an unsophisticated person who doesn't have a lot of business experience is even more of a pain in the ass for obvious reasons. If something goes south with this loan arrangement, especially if the lender is suddenly seeking to enforce the guarantee against the individual, there is a fantastic chance that part of the defence is going to be that the person did not understand the nature of his act by entering into the guarantee. And why not: lawyers have insurance, they have deep pockets.

So for all of this pain in the ass and all of the potential liability, I can understand why many lawyers are reluctant to take on the role of a notary especially for things like Guarantees. And the kicker? According to s. 6 of the Guarantees Acknowledgement Act the maximum fee for issuing the certificate is $5. I know many lawyers who will charge $5 for the certificate but a lot more for the accompanying legal advice but I'm not sure that would stand up if ever challenged.

I notarized a lot of things as an articling student that I really wish I wouldn't have...

[Tower]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Something tells me I shouldn't bother replying but...
Dances around everything else Tower brought up...

That he understands it. This has two meanings.

One is plain English. to perceive the meaning of; grasp the idea of; comprehend.

The other one has more legal meaning - I stand under this or under-stand.

Anything else is just an offer from a LAWYER to contract. It can be a scary offer but it's still only an offer that can be refused.

A notary just witnesses the autograph/signature. The Notary is not liable for anything else. If the PERSON is not who he says he is and the notary still seals it... He is now in big trouble. That is it and all. To think it's bigger is not a notary's job. Anyway... I'll need to visit articling students... Have some fun!

[onetwo_threefour]

I love it when a non-lawyer explains my legal obligations as a lawyer and notary to me. As part of your laundry list of legislation you're bringing up, you may want to review the Legal Profession Act, and the Rules of of the Law Society and Code of Professional Conduct as to what obligations a lawyer has.

If you actually read the Notary Public Act sections you referenced in you post, you will see that it doesn't cover what troutman mentioned. Where does it say that a Notary can 'make (a will) a public record', to put it in your words?

If a client comes to me with a will that is already signed and asks me to make a copy and certify that it is a true copy, that I will do. If that same person comes to me and asks me to affix my seal to their signature, no dice. You can put all the crap you want in a letter to the client about not having given legal advice, but as a lawyer, when that document is presented to you and you are asked to 'notarize' the signature of the testator, you'd be crazy to do it as a notary without giving an opinion.

Once again Tower, you don't get to define what the law is, the legal system does that (as I've told you before). You don't get to decide what a Notary is liable for or is not liable for and your opinion in that regard carries no weight whatsoever.

6(1) A notary public may, during pleasure,

(a) administer oaths and take affidavits, affirmations and declarations attested by the notary public’s signature and seal, (not a will)

(b) draw, pass, keep and issue deeds, contracts, charter parties and other mercantile transactions in Alberta, (not a will)

(c) attest all commercial instruments that are brought before the notary public for public protestation, (not a will)

(d) exercise all the other powers that customarily pertain to the office of notary public, and (you'd have to prove to me that this means that a notary public customarily has the power to certify the signature on a will without giving any legal advice as to its effect... good luck with that)

(e) demand, receive, and have all the rights, profits and emoluments rightfully appertaining and belonging to the calling of notary public. (has nothing to do with wills)

By the way, this crap about understand vs. stand under, and stand under being a more legal concept is such utter crap I don't even know how to reply. You seem to be just making s*** up now. I've never even heard that kind of nonsense from the other nutters that make this kind of thing their life's work. Does it actually make sense to you when you write gibberish like that?

[Tower]

Originally Posted by onetwo_threefour

I love it when a non-lawyer explains my legal obligations as a lawyer and notary to me. As part of your laundry list of legislation you're bringing up, you may want to review the Legal Profession Act, and the Rules of of the Law Society and Code of Professional Conduct as to what obligations a lawyer has.

If you actually read the Notary Public Act sections you referenced in you post, you will see that it doesn't cover what troutman mentioned. Where does it say that a Notary can 'make (a will) a public record', to put it in your words?

If a client comes to me with a will that is already signed and asks me to make a copy and certify that it is a true copy, that I will do. If that same person comes to me and asks me to affix my seal to their signature, no dice. You can put all the crap you want in a letter to the client about not having given legal advice, but as a lawyer, when that document is presented to you and you are asked to 'notarize' the signature of the testator, you'd be crazy to do it as a notary without giving an opinion.

Once again Tower, you don't get to define what the law is, the legal system does that (as I've told you before). You don't get to decide what a Notary is liable for or is not liable for and your opinion in that regard carries no weight whatsoever.





By the way, this crap about understand vs. stand under, and stand under being a more legal concept is such utter crap I don't even know how to reply. You seem to be just making s*** up now. I've never even heard that kind of nonsense from the other nutters that make this kind of thing their life's work. Does it actually make sense to you when you write gibberish like that?

Does not the Blacks Law Dictonary, Oxford Law Dictionary and others define LAW for everyone within the LAW society?

What if you are not a part of the LAW society? hmmmm If I am not a part of LAW society who makes up these rules then therefore I am not to understand them.

This is all moot as a Notary is easy to find and a lawyer is not needed.

One thing I do know is that the Lawyer will spend all of a persons money to prove the Lawyer is right.

[HotHotHeat]

[onetwo_threefour]

Originally Posted by fotze

That picture would be more accurate if the down arrow was pointing to a gigantic pool of boring juice.

Ha! True enough, as much fun as I'm having, I'm sure nobody else cares. As far as the thread goes, I think you provided the relevant info and everything else is redundant or off topic. I've pretty much said my piece on this craziness that Tower has come up with so I think the thread should probably die.

I would assume at this point that everyone can see the lunacy in Tower's posts and I'll leave it at that.

[Shazam]

Just walk into your optometrist's office like you can't see because you don't have your lenses in, bump into a chair or desk, start crying and then tell the receptionist "I can't afford your expensive lenses!"

Also, can we change Tower's description to "Official CP Whargabler?"

[pepper24]

My wife is an optometrist and I told her this story. In her practice she doesn't get involved with the eyewear end leaving that to her opticians and it's up to the customer if they want to buy from her or go elsewhere. A good eye doctor cannot expect all patients to also buy eyewear from her and it's in her best interest to seperate her job and the eyewear portion to avoid this type of conflict. She has no problem if her patients go elsewhere and the majority stick with her. The minority go elsewhere and most end up coming back due to issues. She even has a few customers that aren't patients (see another optometrist) but buy eyewear from her. Business is good even being on maternity leave and in a recession!

She does see where the eye clinic is coming from as they put in the time and effort but again they shouldn't expect that all patients will also buy eyewear from them. Her advice is that since you've already paid the fitting fee, buy a few months of contacts from this eye clinic to find out the brand then buy after that online, buyer beware. After that switch to another optometrist if you still have a bitter taste in your mouth. She doesn't think it's worth the hassle to fight with these guys.

[troutman]

Then you are NOT doing your proper job as a Notary to make it public record which is all they want you to do.

Wills don't have to be notarized at all. They only need to be executed in the presence of two witnesses. When someone brings a home-made will to a lawyer they are basically saying I don't want to pay your legal fee for drafting the document, but I want your signature on the document to somehow legitimize it (for nothing).

The only point I was trying to make, is businesses are trying to make a profit, so when people make their own wills, or order their own contact lenses, you can understand why we may not be happy to see you.

[Tower]

Originally Posted by troutman

Then you are NOT doing your proper job as a Notary to make it public record which is all they want you to do.

Wills don't have to be notarized at all. They only need to be executed in the presence of two witnesses. When someone brings a home-made will to a lawyer they are basically saying I don't want to pay your legal fee for drafting the document, but I want your signature on the document to somehow legitimize it (for nothing).

The only point I was trying to make, is businesses are trying to make a profit, so when people make their own wills, or order their own contact lenses, you can understand why we may not be happy to see you.

LOL well! - That's honest and I can respect that.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Tower

LOL well! - That's honest and I can respect that.

We also have ethical duties, and have to be very careful that it does not appear we have given advice when he have not. It's not a good use of time, to cover our ass that way over a notarized document.

[jeremywilhelm]

Does anyone else picture Johnny Cash typing away at a computer when troutman posts?

[RW99]

Originally Posted by troutman

The only point I was trying to make, is businesses are trying to make a profit, so when people make their own wills, or order their own contact lenses, you can understand why we may not be happy to see you.

I wouldn't put the two in the same category. People can do their wills without a lawyer. But people cant get prescriptions without an Optometrist.

I really think that Optometrists and glasses/lenses need to be separated. It's like going to get a drug prescription from a doctor and them trying to force you to buy drugs from them and not your favorite pharmacy. Plus there is a possible conflict of interest if they are trying to push a certain brand.

[Shazam]

Gee, I've never had a problem getting my prescription from my optometrist, for either glasses or contact lenses.

[fredr123]

http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abca/doc...09abca201.html

At the risk of resurrecting the previous off-topic discussion about notaries, the above decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal was recently released and showed up in my feed reader this afternoon. A few interesting passages are reproduced below:

[3] Commencing in August of 2006 the appellant composed a series of documents which he proceeded to serve on the defendants. These documents are not recognizable as any legitimate or conventional commercial or legal document. The following extracts from an eight page document described as an “Admission of Facts - Non-negotiable” are representative of them (AR pp. E57-64):

Admission of Facts

Non-negotiable

Comes now I, who am called: Leon-Steve: Papadopoulos, a freeholder and sovereign natural man with standing in the common law and all other jurisdictions by special visitation, an unincorporated bank, a non-lawyer, a non-attorney and a non-member of the BAR, over the age of twenty one years, a Real Party in Interest who is NOT acting in persona and who expressly reserves all rights and defenses, thereby prohibiting statutory jurisdiction. I am unschooled in law making a special visitation under the supplemental rules of Admiralty, Rule E(8), a restricted appearance, without granting jurisdiction, and provide notice of the enunciation of principles as stated in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, wherein the court has directed that for those who are unschooled in law, you shall look to the substance of these presents rather than in the form. I am the Power of Attorney in fact and the only authorized representative for LEON PAPADOPOULOS. I do declare that the preceding and following statements are true, correct, complete and certain under penalty of perjury.
...
The appellant persuaded a Notary Public to notarize this and others of the documents, thereby lending them an aura of legitimacy that they do not deserve. Alberta Justice eventually advised the lay notaries not to continue to notarize these obviously irregular documents.

[4] The documents were sent by registered mail to the defendants, and duly signed for by the addressees. The appellant’s approach appears to have been that if the defendants did not reply by affidavit to the documents served on them, they would be deemed at law to admit not only the total amount of his legitimate claim, but the extravagant sum of $49 million mentioned in the documents. The root of this approach appears to be a distorted view of the Bills of Exchange Act. It is, however, apparent that the documents do not even slightly resemble genuine bills of exchange. Furthermore, signing for the registered mail that contained the documents does not amount to an “acceptance” of any legitimate bill of exchange that might be in the envelope. “Acceptance” in the Bills of Exchange Act is a technical term, and is not the same as acknowledging physical receipt of the envelope. The law does not recognize the ability of one person to foist liability on another if they do not reply to a unilateral communication within an arbitrarily set time limit.


[10] The appellant took the position that the purpose of the trial was really to enforce or compromise the “agreement” he had tried to foist on the defendants:

Now, I have no desire to liquidate them and enforce the entire default upon them. I want to settle. And I have a judgment against them in the order of $49.9 million. And I don't want to enforce that entire judgment against them. I want to settle with them.

God requires of his mankind a tithe of 10 percent. I'm in a position where I'm willing to take the example that God has put forth and settle for 10 percent. Is that not fair? (AR p. 74, l. 21-9)

The appellant put great stock in the fact that his unconventional documents had been notarized by a Notary Public, but the involvement of the notary could not give these legally ineffective documents any force of law. The trial judge bluntly warned the appellant that he would lose if he called no evidence. (AR p. 86, l. 35-6) The trial judge adjourned the trial overnight to allow the appellant to reflect on his position and to take advice. In the morning, the appellant’s position was unchanged, and the trial judge granted the defendants’ applications for non-suit, and dismissed both claims.

Emphasis mine. Point being, I suppose, that at least Alberta Justice takes the position that notarizing a document gives it an air of apparent legitimacy and not any and every document ought to be notarized.

[malcolmk14]

Originally Posted by Tower

....

I've actually just spent twenty minutes trying to figure out what you're like in real life.

Wow.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

So I've been back and forth to my eye clinic the past couple weeks to get fitted for my first pair of contacts. The upfront cost for the fitting was $60. It included a lesson on how they work and a 'trial' pair, aka, one pair of month long lenses. Today I went back for my follow up appointment and got the OK from the doctor that these were the right contacts for my eyes. All is fine. Now my plan was to find out which contacts these in fact were (they never told me during my initial appointment) so that I can place my order from clearlycontacts.ca, as they are much, much cheaper than these eye clinics. I am then informed that they 'don't give out that information'. Hello and welcome to WTF land.

Can they do this? As a patient, do I not have the right to know this information?

I don't wear contacts and know what their packaging is like, etc so I dont' know for sure if this would work but...
1) Tell your optometrist he's right and you're ready to buy a 3 months supply.
2) He puts the boxes on the table proceeds with getting receipt ready.
3) You take note of the specs from the boxes.
4) Leave without paying or taking the contacts.
5) ???
6) Profit!

If you don't want to be a big jerk about it you could even go through the act of "forgetting" your pin number on your debit card so the transaction can't go through.

[Tower]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

I've actually just spent twenty minutes trying to figure out what you're like in real life.

Wow.

Large, like 6'3" with a massive gut to match my massive scruffy beard that's turning white. It would look nicer if all this food wasn't stuck in it.

I ride a 1972 Harley even through the winter because I can. And I like to beat up old ladies in the park after 2 am... Why? Because it's past 2 am and old ladies shouldn't be outside!

My Ride... I will run you over with it if you're in my way.


Oh and I live in a garden of weed that pollinates paranoia.

Or I'm your everyday kinda guy that has had his fill of BS from Government and Law Society BS factories.