To want my glasses back?

[FlexibleFi]

More of a WWYD than an AIBU.

I went to a wedding June. I and three other friends from university days (14 years since we graduated) were invited and booked an AirBnB for a long weekend. We don't see a lot of each other but we have a WA group and message every few weeks. It was a lovely opportunity to catch up.

After years of being really hard up, I had a significant job change this year and for the first time splashed out on a few special things — including a rather fancy pair of designer glasses instead of Specsavers basics. The glasses are for reading and computer work, I don't need them for ordinary things. They're quite a mild prescription. All three friends at the AirBnB tried my posh spex on. One, I'll call her Rachel, commented that we must have the same prescription because she could read perfectly with them. She joshed me for spending so much money on them. A couple of times over the weekend, when I'd left them sitting by my phone or book, she'd borrow them to read something without asking.

We had a great busy and boozy weekend and when I got home I couldn't find my glasses anywhere, so I messaged the group to ask if anyone had picked them up accidentally. All said no. I messaged the AirBnB owner to ask if they'd been left there. No. Searched the car, searched everywhere. No sign of them. I'm not someone who often loses things.

Then this Sunday Joanne, one of the others in the wedding group sent a screenshot from FB of Rachel reading a menu in a restaurant while wearing a pair of glasses that look just like mine. Joanne commented 'Well now we know where Fi's glasses went, LOL' on FB. By the time I managed to get onto FB (ancient account I rarely check) the image had gone — but I had the screenshot.

I messaged Rachel, sent her the screenshot and said it looked as if she'd found my glasses, could she post them back to me please. She's replied saying they're her glasses: she liked them so much that she's bought a pair exactly like mine. I don't believe it and neither does Joanne. Rachel's recently split from her long-term partner and she talked a lot while we were away of how difficult she's finding things financially at the moment.

They were £300. I could claim on travel insurance (I have annual travel insurance) or on my household contents, but then I'll have to pay more for premiums for the next few years.

Joanne has said she'll get involved if necessary but I don't want to ruin memories of a lovely weekend. I can't immediately afford to replace the spex with the same (I have a holiday booked and that will eat up my budget for the next month or two) so I'll have to order a pair of cheap prescription readers on the internet. WWYD?

No, I give up trying to explain to that particular person why there is no ‘compelling’ proof. I also responded to apologise for the Karen remark which was unfair of me. But I am not trolling. I don’t know whether Rachel took the glasses or not, none of us do. But nothing OP has said has made me think she did, quite the opposite. I also think there are ways to handle these things, and going on social media isn’t one of them. To publicly accuse a friend of theft without proof is, I think, cruel.

Claim in insurance and put it down to experience. This girl is a thief, sack her off and tell the rest of the friendship group you’d rather not docialuse with someone with sticky fingers.

She said "Inferred" which means she is interpreting the "facts" given by OP, but perhaps you didn't see that. Seems that quite a few of us need to get our eyes tested.

We should all go together. Make a day out of it. 🥸😂

And all come out with the same specs as OP, despite our colouring. We could all post on MN instagram (is there such a thing?)

😂😂 if there isn’t then I’m sure they will set one up just for this spec-tacle!

She said ‘inferred’ but fwiw she meant ‘implied’. The writer implies, the reader infers.

I may be a tad over invested here, but do you have the appetite to file a small claims court action? Honestly, this might piss me off at this point to file a police report and then a court action. She's have to reply to both. It's theft, afterall unless she can peove otherwise. You have your screenshot.

I think theft is criminal not civil. Small claims doesn't go through the police and I think you can't do both at the same time or indeed file for theft through small claims at all

@godmum56 I hear you, but I do think it is worth investigating. Small claims has for discretion to hear all civil actions which this could fall into: a dispute between parties. Concurrent police report helps the case, but may force Rachel to give up the glasses unless she shows a receipt. It's worth looking into, imo.

So fucking patronising.

& fwiw so fucking correct.

O levels actually.

Unfortunately, lazy posters don't bother reading updates.

I hope you get your glasses back.

You sound nice. Reported.

@FlexibleFi had Jo managed to get in touch with Rachel? Any progress.
I hope you get your glasses back.

Great idea!

I don't think it was rude @MillyNair the poster simply pointed out the difference.
You are very highly strung. What's up?

OP you need to get some self respect and stick up for yourself here

Who cares about rocking the boat, anyone who cares more about her feelings than yours are not your friend

It doesn't matter if they are £30 or £300, she has stolen from you! Someone who is supposed to be a friend.

Call her a fucking tramp and threaten to report to the police.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

It might be how you communicate in real life but you quite simply can’t make personal attacks with ableist slurs on MN. @quantumbutterfly wasn’t even the person who provided the vocab correction - that was me, and I was correcting the person you quoted.

I hope your day improves.

She does have proof, circumstantial evidence is proof. It might not hit the threshhold of proof for a criminal prosecution where there can be no reasonable doubt, (although it's not unheard of for something like this to be tested and she would be required to provide a receipt/bank statement/details of the optician) but she could win a civil case where it's a measure of liklihood.

I bet Judge Judy would not look at Rachel with rose tinted glasses.