2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemologist

[JSB0331]

I just joined pricescope and I have a very interesting and perplexing situation that involves multiple grading errors in my favor. I just bought a J VS2 triple excellent diamond from James Allen in the 2-3 ct range. I recently brought it to an internationally recognized Master Gemologist and Senior member of NAJA who is listed as a referal on Price Scope and who has over 30 years of experience as an independent appraiser who does not work for, nor is affiliated with any jewelry store or buying group. I found him to be incredibly professional and competent. I brought the diamond in to him already set in a basic, thin setting. I had the GIA cert in my hand but I did not tell him anything about the stone until after his appraisal as I was hoping that his results would at least match up with the J VS2 triple X grading on my certificate so I at least could confirm that I got what I paid for, although given James Allen's fantastic reputation I knew that I probably already did. What he revealed to me has now made me question the origins of the stone and/or the origins of the where, how, and who did the GIA grading.

The first thing that the appraiser did was to read my GIA laser inscription that was on the girdle. What he said to me is that in all his years of appraising he has never, ever seen a laser inscription so small and so faint. He usually needed a 20x loupe to read the inscription but he ultimately needed a 50x magnification to read the inscription which he read off to me as I had my GIA cert in my hand. The #'s matched.

Next, the appraiser compared my diamond (which again was already set) to his GIA cert. master set of diamonds in his office that ranged from D to M. He went from D to E to F to G to H. And then back to G. Even though he did not have the diamond loose for him to compare upside down with the other diamonds, he determined (again, without him knowing a thing about my stone) that the color was between a G and an H but closer to the G. I told him that it was graded as a J and he said that in all of his years he has never been so off on a color grading. He was scratching his head in amazement.

Next, the appraiser took almost 20 minutes to look at the clarity. He had very expensive, high powered scope equipment in his office so I did not doubt his ability to be able to judge this spot on. His determination was that, unless there was an imperfection near the prongs in the setting that he deemed the diamond to be a strong VVS1. In fact, he looked at the plotting on the GIA certificate and said, "these inclusions simply don't exist!" He looked again and again but didn't see what was plotted!

His final thoughts was that it was very rare, but possible that the GIA cert was incorrect to my favor and that I could send the diamond back to GIA to get recertified. I'm fine to leave well enough alone because he affirmed that I more than got what I paid for! This independant appraiser had nothing to gain by telling me what I wanted to hear. His resume was the most accomplished of any that I've seen on this sight.

So I'm now wondering what other expert appraisers who read this post might think about this particular situation. Wouldn't someone at James Allen had picked up on this if it was a true massive grading error? Something just doesn't seem right. I'm probably not going to take it to another appraiser because, quite frankly, I don't know of anyone else who would be as well qualified as this person was. At this point, I'm just fascinated by the mystery of what could be...

Any feedback would be most appreciated!

Thank you,
JSB

 

[kenny]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

I don't want to disparage a pro with a fine reputation, but I'll play the devil's advocate.
I wonder if there is come clarity characteristic that takes fancy equipment to detect that this appraiser does not have.
Knots, Twining wisps, Stresses in the stone, growth or graining lines?
Just guessing.

I'd also not put too much weight on a color grading of a set diamond.
Color is graded with diamonds loose, up side down and looking into the pavilion.

That said, I hope he/she was correct and you just got super lucky.
You can have a jeweler remove the diamond and you can personally send it to GIA for grading.
Of course they'll see their laser inscription and know what they graded it, and hopefully if they were wrong they'll admit it.

 

[Gypsy]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

I'd send it to the GIA for re-grading immediately. The inscription being faint and the clarity (which is graded face up) makes me wonder if something weird happened and diamonds were mixed up with one another somewhere.

 

[Christina...]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

I'm curious to hear what the experts have to say, but I think I would consider having the diamond unmounted and re-examined. If it still looks as though there is a disagreement with the grading, then I would resubmit the stone to GIA if for no other reason than, if you decide to sell the stone in the future, the GIA report will trump the appraisal, and if the stone truly were to turn out to be a G VVS1 then you will want to sell it as such.

 

[JSB0331]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Hi Kenny,

Most of the inclusions where around the perimeter of the table and not near the prongs so you could see it face up. The appraiser did say that unless there was a vertical inclusion of some sort he just deemed the plotting dead wrong. He had some very high tech equipment and he insisted that the inclusions just were not there.

And yes, I do know that the color grading does need to be done with the stone face down and looking into the pavillion and that a face up measure could be off. But he didn't see how he could be so off.

 

[kenny]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

I just checked Bluenile's huge inventory of virtual stones.

At 2.5 ct G VVS1 may be worth 3 times as much as a J VS2.
But you said your stone is 2 to 3 ct.
If it's near 3 ct much more $$$ is at stake.

I'd definitely have it removed from the setting and send it loose to the lab.
But this time I'd time send it to AGS, via a jeweler who is an AGS member since, unlike GIA, AGS will not deal with the public.
Unlike GIA, AGS would have no temptation to cover up GIA's grading booboo.

 

[JSB0331]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Kenny,

So what do you make of the very faint, super small GIA inscription that required a 50x scope to see? Could this diamond have different origins than GIA? And why wouldn't a gemologist at James Allen have picked up on this mistake if it is indeed a mistake?

-JSB

 

[Christina...]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

I just checked Bluenile's huge inventory of virtual stones.

At 2.5 ct it may be worth 3 times what you paid for it if truly is G VVS1 instead of J VS2.
But you said your stone is 2 to 3 ct.
If it's near 3 ct much more $$$ is at stake.

I'd definitely have it removed from the setting and send it loose to the lab.
But this time I'd time send it to AGS, via a jeweler who is an AGS member since, unlike GIA, AGS will not deal with the public.
Unlike GIA, AGS would have no temptation to cover up GIA's mistake.

After I posted I thought the same thing as Kenny, I would send the stone off to AGS for the same reasons he states.

edit: not to mention that it comes back as an AGS0 it would then carry a slight premium over a GIA EX too.

 

[Christina...]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Kenny,

So what do you make of the very faint, super small GIA inscription that required a 50x scope to see? Could this diamond have different origins than GIA? And why wouldn't a gemologist at James Allen have picked up on this mistake if it is indeed a mistake?

-JSB

I know that your question is for Kenny, but I'm wondering why the cutter didn't question the report. They have a very good idea of how the grading will come back and if they were expecting something close to G or VVS, then they would have questioned the grading as well.

 

[kenny]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Kenny,

So what do you make of the very faint, super small GIA inscription that required a 50x scope to see? Could this diamond have different origins than GIA? And why wouldn't a gemologist at James Allen have picked up on this mistake if it is indeed a mistake?

-JSB

When laser inscriptions are new they are dark.
I believe the darkness is literally burned material.
Over time that material goes away, and to see the laser inscription you have to hold the diamond at just the right angle with respect to the light source.

I do not know if a vendor's GG checks every diamond against the report; you'd think so.

Ask JA.

 

[JSB0331]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

The laser inscription was not dark. It was light and very faint. I have 20/10 vision and could see all of the other laser GIA inscriptions of stones that I looked at brick and mortar stores with a 20x loupe at just the right angle. When I looked at this inscription with a 20x loupe at just the right angle I couldn't even make out the #'s. Thanks for the time, Kenny!

 

[YoungPapa]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Hi folks,

As the vendor in question, I thought I would add a bit more information that could be helpful to JSB and the readers of the thread in general.

First, and as I've said before, we have a highly trained team of GIA Graduate Gemologists who inspect every diamond and engagement ring prior to shipment. While that process is not an attempt to grade a diamond, it does ensure to our satisfaction that the diamond matches the laboratory report and is in original and undamaged condition. That being the case, it is extremely unlikely that a mismatch of four grades in color and/or clarity could have gone unnoticed by our staff.

Second, we pride ourselves in our highly detailed magnified images and have an image for the diamond in question. In that image (which I will send to JSB), the diamond has a small needle under the table, exactly matching the GIA report. The other inclusions listed on the report are a scattering of tiny "clouds", which could be difficult to see even under magnification.

Finally, it is inplausable that an experienced diamond manufacturing company could (or would) accept such a massive mistake in both color and clarity grading. Diamond manufacturers are very keen on the quality of their goods BEFORE they send them to the labs, so it is difficult to imagine they would have accepted such a discrepancy.

With all of that said, I personally would find the curiousity too much to bear (were it my ring), so if JSB wanted to return the diamond to our offices we can carefully inspect the stone and provide our own assessment of quality. There would be no fee for that service and it would be a simple and cost-effective precursor to any additional grading reports.

All the best,

 

[Gypsy]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Okay well, since JA has so generously offered to have the diamond examined in house, I would do that.

Also I would NOT send it to AGS. Why? The original grading was done by GIA. If you send it to GIA and it comes back different, and it corroborates what the appraiser said, then you know that you can assume the original assessment was in error. By holding the lab constant you aren't introducing the variable of a new lab's possible grade generosity (and we have now seen a few instances were AGS and GIA dual certified stones are coming back with higher color grades by AGS) and you are getting to the heart of the issue: is the original lab report correct or incorrect. If you send it to AGS you do not get an answer to that question. Because if it comes back a higher color grade then it could simply be AGS error.

By sending it to AGS you are forum shopping.
By sending it back to GIA you are confirming the appraisal.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Kenny,

So what do you make of the very faint, super small GIA inscription that required a 50x scope to see? Could this diamond have different origins than GIA? And why wouldn't a gemologist at James Allen have picked up on this mistake if it is indeed a mistake?

-JSB

I can comment on this aspect:
We have diamonds inscribed with our logo- and it's done by GIA.
Compared to stones we had inscribed 6 months ago- and prior- stones done over the past few days have an inscription that's about 1/2 the size of what we were getting 6 months back. Incredibly difficult to read- actually impossible at 10x- you need to go to 30x to see detail.
We're going to ask GIA about this.
It could be said that the more microscopic the inscription the better for security.....but security is really not the main gold of the inscription.

With regards to plots, and using them to identify a stone that's already set: I'm a bit shocked a trained appraiser would feel capable to grading a stone that's already set to such a high degree of accuracy
It's really impossible to declare a stone VVS1 or VVS2 when it's set. No matter how many years one has been doing it.
Color is also nearly impossible to accurately grade in a set diamond.

 

[Christina...]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Gypsy: Excellent points regarding resubmitting the stone. I was focusing primarily on the idea that GIA may be less likely to adjust (admit) to grading errors of their own, whereas AGS would not be faced with the same conflict. But I think that you make excellent points in regards to the grading differences already seen between the two labs.

RD: you mentioned that security is not the main goal of inscription, what is the main goal? Is it to identify that the diamond has previously been graded?

 

[decodelighted]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Was the appraiser over 40? Methinks his/her eyesight is going! I don't know WHAT I'd do in your shoes. Look forward to other's advice. If you send it back to James Allen and they found out there really had been an error in your favor ... would they "let" you keep this "better" stone -- or try to replace it w/one of the specs you thought you were getting. Yipes!

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Christina: Although there are some advantages regarding identification, you really can't depend on the inscription as a "last word".
The reasons a laser inscription is not specifically for security:
1) it can be removed fairly easily- especially the new teeeny weenie versions.
2) it can be replicated by others possessing the equipment.
in the hugely unlikely event a stolen diamond that has a GIA report was recovered- a trained gemologist will use measurements, and physical characteristics to match the stone to the GIA report- even if it has the inscription.
The main advantage I can see is for a consumer that may have the diamond out of their possession to have it set, or work done on an exiting ring. So they feel sure they get back the same stone they gave to the company. But many companies that accept consumers diamonds for setting require the GIA report or a copy of it.
Picking a reliable, trustworthy dealer/jeweler/setter/ etc is the main protection in that regard.

Personally, I think it's a great feature- for other reasons.
Mainly to allow consumers to a degree of surety above a stone with no laser inscription, however slight the advantage might be. And I think it's very cool.

 

[Christina...]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Christina: Although there are some advantages regarding identification, you really can't depend on the inscription as a "last word".
The reasons a laser inscription is not specifically for security:
1) it can be removed fairly easily- especially the new teeeny weenie versions.
2) it can be replicated by others possessing the equipment.
in the hugely unlikely event a stolen diamond that has a GIA report was recovered- a trained gemologist will use measurements, and physical characteristics to match the stone to the GIA report- even if it has the inscription.
The main advantage I can see is for a consumer that may have the diamond out of their possession to have it set, or work done on an exiting ring. So they feel sure they get back the same stone they gave to the company. But many companies that accept consumers diamonds for setting require the GIA report or a copy of it.
Picking a reliable, trustworthy dealer/jeweler/setter/ etc is the main protection in that regard.

Personally, I think it's a great feature- for other reasons.
Mainly to allow consumers to a degree of surety above a stone with no laser inscription, however slight the advantage might be. And I think it's very cool.

Thanks RD. I was disappointed when my first diamond over a ct didn't include an inscription, but rather the clarity plot. Recently I purchased another stone over 1ct and it included both the plot and the inscription. It appears that GIA is inscribing larger stones on a regular basis now. I like having the security of both the plot diagram and the inscription, and like you, I think it's really cool.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

I was thinking exactly what David said...you can't judge color when the diamond is set. And as Jim said, there is no way the original manufacturer of that stone would have allowed it to be sold with that grading if they believed it to be several grades higher. There almost is no reason to have an independent appraisal done on a diamond that is set unless you just need an insurance valuation. And JA probably provides that with the purchase.

 

[2023]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

The difference between G and J is quite significant. Most consumers would be able to see the difference in a D to G set diamond and a G to J set diamond, especially at 2+ carats. Is it that difficult to believe an appraiser couldnt pick that up?

As for inscriptions, I was of the understanding that GIA diamonds under 1 carat had 'GIA ####' etched into the girdle, but for over 1 carats you can have inscriptions on request or laser inscribe whatever you want, even your name, for about 50 dollars.

 

[Phoenix]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Hmmm....this is interesting but then I'd agree with the others that appraising a diamond already set would not give you a fair result, and the consequent colour grading can vary as much as 3 grades in my personal experience.

I wouldn't bother to send the stone back to GIA as it already has an inscription. GIA would most likely look up the inscription number and give you the same grading again. I had a diamond graded by GIA which I sent back to GIA (cuz I disagreed and still disagree with their colour grading - mind you all this from a consumer's point of view, I am not in the trade); and it came back to me with *exactly* the same colour and grading.

If I were you, I'd take up Jim Schultz's offer to have his staff look over the diamond for you. I'd trust them not to keep the diamond or charge you more if it did turn out to be a few grades higher in colour and/ or clarity.

 

[denverappraiser]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

I'd take JA up on the offer of a recheck with their staff. I agree, this much of a discrepancy seems unlikely to be a lab error because of the number of skilled hands it's passed through before you got it but I would want to get to the bottom of it if it was mine. If you decide it's in your best interest to get a recheck at the lab, have JA do it. They are well connected both with the lab and with people to pull and reset the stone (GIA will only examine unmounted stones). GIA is not the easiest place to do business so it's good to be fairly confident before you submit things to them.

 

[Modified Brilliant]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

I agree with Neil. JA's offer to re-examine the diamond shows concern for you (the consumer). A vendor or owner stepping in to post a reply here is very admirable...it shows strong business values and ethics.

I, for one will be interested in finding out the results.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Would either of you appraisers care to comment on the ethics/feasibility of issuing a grade of VVS1 on a diamond they do not have the ability to examine loose?

 

[Modified Brilliant]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

David,

With regards to ethics and feasibilty....before any of us jump to conclusions, I think it's best that JA take a second look.

But to answer your question:

If you want to know my personal stance on clarity grading regarding a mounted diamond set in prongs or in any way obscured..

I would not grade a diamond VVS if not loose. I would first explain limitations to the client. I may "feel" that it "could be" a VVS but could not with certainty be able to say that it is in fact VVS. I always explain how it's extremely difficult to know if an inclusion is hiding under a prong. That just makes sense to me. Again, this is my position and other appraisers may not agree.

 

[Gypsy]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

And Jeff, that might be just what this appraiser did.

In my experience people don't hear qualifying words like "it appears to be" or "it might be" and "I can't say with certainty because it is set and an inclusion could be hidden by a prong". They hear what they want to hear. Then they come on here and tell us that "this person said this"... when that person did not, in fact say that-- it's just what they thought they heard.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Thanks Jeff- this really does deserve it's own thread.

Suffice it to say, I'm in total agreement with you.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

And Jeff, that might be just what this appraiser did.

In my experience people don't hear qualifying words like "it appears to be" or "it might be" and "I can't say with certainty because it is set and an inclusion could be hidden by a prong". They hear what they want to hear. Then they come on here and tell us that "this person said this"... when that person did not, in fact say that-- it's just what they thought they heard.

This is very true Gypsy....however it seems this appraiser made a point of going all the way to VVS1

 

[JSB0331]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Many thanks to all who have commented on this site (and to James Allen for personally reaching out to me, which is not a surprise given the amazing customer service that I've received during the buying process at his company). My biggest concern was the origins of the ultra small GIA lasered # mark. But having read some replies from people in the trade, I now know that some GIA cert stones are inscribed this way.

As I said in my original post, as long as I have at least what I paid for (and maybe a lot more) I'm not going to go through the time and effort to have the diamond removed from the setting and re-evaluated. If all goes according to plan, the diamond itself will eventually become a family heirloom anyway.

Having this piece of mind, the most important thing now is that a high quality diamond ring will be on the finger of my very-soon-to-be fiancee. And from the little that I've observed on Pricescope, securing a positive industry buying experience is what this community is all about.

 

[yssie]

Re: 2.3 GIA Cert appraised 4 grades higher by Master Gemolog

Was the appraiser over 40? Methinks his/her eyesight is going!

Then it'd be easier to see those pesky inclusions


Like others my first questions were what happened to the people earlier down the assembly line who were probably screaming bloody murder, and why an experienced reputed appraiser would risk specifying a precise colour or clarity w/ a set stone - they give ranges for a reason!

I urge you to consider JA's offer - it's very generous, and I'm very curious