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?

I was playing devil's advocate for a while and technically the evidence wouldn't stand up in front of Judge Judy but for me the compelling thing is her asking to have the Facebook post removed.

Had she been genuine she would have known friends would see it and posted "Fi Ioved them so much I bought a pair" or wtte, her getting it quickly taken down says it all.

I would send her the screenshot and say hi Rachel, please send them back, everyone has seen this and knows you've got them. Don't embarrass yourself further

But you are just assuming that Rachel asked to have the post removed - we don’t know what happened to the post. The person who posted the pic could have removed it herself without being asked, or perhaps it’s still there and the person has simply changed her privacy settings or blocked OP and Jo the Stirrer. Don’t embarrass yourself by making assumptions then calling it proof. The only thing we know for sure is that OP can no longer see the post with the pic. We don’t know why.

@PreciousMahoney is not embarrassing herself anymore than you are. You are just being rude to everyone.

I’m not being rude, I’m disagreeing. That is allowed, isn’t it? Some people have been very rude to me on here, and unfortunately that has wound me up, but I am now attempting to remain respectful no matter the provocation. What no one seems to understand is that an accusation of theft is incredibly serious, and regardless of whether the police get involved something more than just circumstantial evidence is required. Or it would be for me to accuse a friend.

How quickly did she have them because it takes ages to get eyes tested and then made and then collected etc in specsavers . Usually at least 10 days IME..
she is obvs a liar but unless she knew the code etc and got to exactly the same shop they were unlikely to get them for her so quickly .

It is absolutely fine to disagree, but to tell people who don’t agree with you to stop embarrassing themselves or call them Karen is just rude. If you can’t see that then you have a serious problem.

Nah

Both things can be true

You can be disagreeing with me AND being rude

You may have noticed that I said the evidence wouldn't stack up in court, and that I was playing devil's advocate.

But......the post with the Fi glasses was taken down. Reading the other circumstances and taking in the preponderance of circumstantial evidence I've come to the opinion that she's snaffled them.

I'm not embarrassing myself and, yes you may disagree with my view, but you are rude.

Sorry I probably should have quoted this one rather than the last.

If people were rude to you that's a bummer.

I wasn't

So wind your neck in

I couldn't let it lie .. asking for proof of purchase on her bank statements to "clear the air" is good idea. Otherwise she doesn't get to be in the group and she's made a wrong move reputation wise too.

Ok, it gets confusing when there are a number of people commenting on the same post! I have already apologised twice for using a word I shouldn’t have used. But clearly that isn’t enough for some people - they won’t be happy until I go along with the mob. This has quickly become a witch hunt, but in many ways that’s what social media is. If it’s being rude to expose the gaping holes in the so called evidence then so be it. I know everyone is having a lovely time bitching about someone they never have or will meet, and I guess I may have spoilt that for some people. But unless the post is a fake these are real people’s lives we are talking about. These intolerant attitudes have an unfortunate tendency to spill over into real life too - because the mob sustains itself online people carry these inhumane attitudes into their offline lives. I don’t know why this one in particular got my attention, there are thousands like it.
Just one thought though - why did OP post on Mumsnet, rather than reddit or any of the others? If she has children wouldn’t she have mentioned them in her list of expenses? Or maybe she posted on here because Rachel has children and uses the site? That would perhaps explain why her career hasn’t gone as well as OPs, and why she had financial difficulties. But perhaps that’s something OP can clear up?

Ohh come on now, they don’t suit you anyway. Might as well give em back

Except OP doesn't get to decide who is in or out of the group. Other members may feel - as some do on this thread ( not me) - that it's all just a remarkable coincidence and OP is making a big deal out of nothing and can afford the cost of a new pair of glasses.

Make too much of a big deal of it in the group and OP would easily find herself removed.

Absolutely. Truth is none of us know whether Rachel stole them or not, and we will probably never know unless Rachel suddenly decides to confess or prove they are hers. But in the meantime I personally think it’s better to give her, or indeed anyone, the benefit of the doubt. Imagine what will happen to OP if it turns out these accusations are wrong - she will certainly be out of the friend group then. I strongly suspect that if it turns out OP was wrong we will never know it as she will be too embarrassed to post the update.

Just a thought, as these are prescription glasses you're talking about, for a very specific prescription, if Rachel wears them, her eyes will adjust to requiring that prescription to be able to read (the human body is quite fascinating) so she might not have needed that prescription exactly when she took the glasses to begin with, but it's quite likely that she will require her own prescription which will match yours @FlexibleFi over time.

Well according to DestructoCat OP went suspiciously quiet when she didn't post for a few hours and also inferred that she was prettier than poor Rachel. Now she's not going to admit if she's wrong. And calls Jo stirrer Jo😄

But hates folk being accused of something.

That makes sense

Nah - call her out and get them back! The fact that she had no money for it is NOT your fault. Why should you lose out because she hasn’t done well enough to afford them?! It’s stealing!

I can't wait for the next episode..who will play Rachel, Jo & op. It's all a bit Eastenders.

Imagine what will happen to OP if it turns out these accusations are wrong - she will certainly be out of the friend group then

Except everyone thinks Rachel took them, so then I guess everyone will have egg on their faces and owe poor Rachel an apology when she produces a receipt.

Something OP mentioned in her description of Rachel. Maybe it was on one of her later posts. She has given us various details such as Rachel coming from a ‘challenging background’,(whatever that means) that her career since uni hasn’t been as successful as OPs, and that Rachel is going through a tough time right now. It seems that OP doesn’t have kids, which made me wonder why she chose to post here instead of Reddit or some other site. But OP has already lied to us - she says she never treats herself and the specs were an unusual splurge. But in the same breath she tells us that she bought a new dress and had her hair done for someone else’s wedding, and that she’s off on holiday soon. Of course I don’t begrudge anyone any of those things, but they def fall into the category of ‘treating’ oneself. No reason why she shouldn’t, but then don’t go presenting yourself as abstemious and on a tight budget when that obviously isn’t the case. Same reason I’m guessing she doesn’t have kids. Maybe I’m wrong and she has kids, and is much more well off than she says she says. Or maybe like me her kids are grown up, although she comes across as a young woman. But I wouldn’t have spent £300 on designer spex when my kids were young, for most of us any spare cash usually goes on the kids before anyone else gets a look in! Personally if a friend stole from me I think I would care more about the betrayal than the value of the item, but OP seems to see the cost of the spex as some kind of evidence that were stolen, and that she didn’t just leave them somewhere when she was pd! 😂 Everyone is frantically speculating about Rachel’s character, but we only have OP’s account so I am paying a bit more attention to what she is telling us about herself…

abstemious you say.... 🧐

I do love a good wind up! Carry on! 🤭🍿

Wow - and you were the one claiming you weren’t being rude a moment ago! We only have OPs version of events, so all any of us can do is go by what OP has said. And what OP has told us is that Jo is very keen to ‘help’ by inserting herself in a situation that, it would appear, has nothing whatsoever to do with her, and has generally encouraged OP to view the situation as theft. That’s why I called her a stirrer! Btw, being accused of being a stirrer, a bitch or even a bully is very different from being accused of theft. Theft is a criminal offence. Stirring not so much!

Happy to oblige! This is like the Mumsnet version of Twelve Angry Men 😂😂😂😂

Well, you did ask! Ok, as I am a newbie I was unaware that the site wasn’t just parents - it certainly advertises itself as such, and the majority of subject headings seem to refer to parenting in some way. As this has nothing to do with either it seemed odd, but as I said I’m new on here. The main reason that I haven’t been on here before is that my kids are grown up, and I was under the impression it was for parents of younger children! I will happily let it go, but what I won’t do is give in to bullying. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.