A dilemma for PS vendors

[kenny]

This thread has absolutely nothing to do with any particular thread, vendor or customer.

What if a customer of a PS vendor damages a piece but claims (dishonestly) that it arrived from the vendor already damaged.
Let's say the PS vendor is absolutely certain that it went out in perfect condition.
Let's say the customer posts on PS that it arrived damaged, a lie, hoping the publicity results in a better outcome.
Let's say the package was NOT damage or tampered with.

In this hypothetical case it is the customer's word against the vendor's.

In your opinion should the vendor always just eat it and make the customer happy by replacing/repairing at no cost to the customer?
Or, when the vendor is certain it went out in perfect condition, should they insist the customer pays for the repair/replacement, even though they risk a bad review that will stay in the PS archive forever.

Should it become a public trial where both sides posts time-stamped pics and copies of correspondence, with the public weighing in on how it should be resolved?
I can see the potential for abuse by a dishonest customer who holds the reputation of the vendor as ransom to get a free repair/replacement when this is not a fair resolution.

Once again, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with any particular thread, vendor or customer.

 

[CharmyPoo]

Should it become a public trial where both sides posts time-stamped pics and copies of correspondence, with the public weighing in on how it should be resolved?

Sure .. we need some entertainment once in a while.

On a more serious note, I hope that people aren't so dishonest to lie. I also feel the members of PS are smart enough to figure out what is going on if it indeed happens.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

This thread has absolutely nothing to do with any particular thread, vendor or customer.

What if a customer of a PS vendor damages a piece but claims (dishonestly) that it arrived from the vendor damaged.
Let's say the PS vendor is absolutely certain that it went out in perfect condition.
Let's say the customer posts on PS that it arrived damaged, a lie, hoping the publicity results in a better outcome.

In this hypothetical case it is the customer's word against the vendor's.

In your opinion should the vendor always just eat it and make the customer happy by replacing/repairing at no cost to the customer?
Or, when the vendor is certain it went out in perfect condition, should they insist the customer pays for the repair/replacement, even though they risk a bad review that will stay in the PS archive forever.

Should it become a public trial where both sides posts time-stamped pics and copies of correspondence, with the public weighing in on how it should be resolved?
I can see the potential for abuse by a dishonest customer who holds the reputation of the vendor as ransom to get a free repair/replacement when this is not a fair resolution.

Once again, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with any particular thread, vendor or customer.

Its the cost of doing business as a PS vendor. This is what shipping insurance is all about.

 

[kenny]

Its the cost of doing business as a PS vendor. This is what shipping insurance is all about.

Thanks CCL; to address that I added this sentence to the OP:
"Let's say the package was NOT damage or tampered with."

This question is about when it is purely the vendor's word against the customer's.
Both are certain and adamant of their statement, so it is not logically possible that both are correct.

I would especially be interested to hear the perspective of vendors (PS or non-PS) on this subject.

 

[septsparkle]

I do think that their needs to be some evidence that the product was damaged/flawed/faulty upon receipt. This is fairly easy to prove if you open the box right away and take photos and send them via email to the the vendor *immediately*. It's pretty easy to verify the exact time of receipt of package/product, if the customer is emailing photos within an hour of delivery that the item has x,y,z flaws or problems, it's pretty concrete that the issue lies with the vendor. If days or weeks go by before contact is made with the vendor, that's when it gets suspicious in my mind. And, that's when it seems that it would be a judgment call on behalf of the vendor. However, if the vendor was contacted immediately upon receipt, I do feel they should fix the error/issue regardless of being a PS vendor or not.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Its the cost of doing business as a PS vendor. This is what shipping insurance is all about.

Thanks CCL; to address that I added this sentence to the OP:
"Let's say the package was NOT damage or tampered with."

This question is about when it is purely the vendor's word against the customer's.
Both are certain and adamant of their statement, so clearly it is not possible that both are correct.

The customer claims damage the vendor will ask for proof and will file a claim with the carrier and/or their insurance.
The claim by the customer is less credible if it isn't made shortly after receiving the package so this case is very rare to begin with.

Online buying advocates reccomend as a consumer to video tape opening packages and I think many vendors do this on returned merchandise but I doubt many consumers do this.

PS vendors highly value their reputations and trust so like I said before it is the cost of doing business as a PS vendor but its a rare occurrance.

 

[CharmyPoo]

Online buying advocates reccomend as a consumer to video tape opening packages and I think many vendors do this on returned merchandise but I doubt many consumers do this.

Great suggestion. I have heard it before but admit that I have never done it.

 

[septsparkle]

Online buying advocates reccomend as a consumer to video tape opening packages and I think many vendors do this on returned merchandise but I doubt many consumers do this.

Great suggestion. I have heard it before but admit that I have never done it.

Just happened to get myself a handy little Kodak Zi8 camera...might start using this suggestion for larger purchases from now on. GREAT idea!

 

[yssie]

I always video tape myself opening valuable packages. It may not hold up in court, but what vendor is going to argue with a film?

I also inspect it immediately upon opening and take/email pictures (for the timestamp) if I see any issues.


Better safe than sorry.

 

[septsparkle]

I always video tape myself opening valuable packages. It may not hold up in court, but what vendor is going to argue with a film?

I also inspect it immediately upon opening and take/email pictures (for the timestamp) if I see any issues.


Better safe than sorry.

Totally agree! Always better safe than sorry. I have never done the video taping, but always take pictures/email pictures for the timestamp if there is an issue as well. The video tape idea though is pretty hard for a vendor to argue with!

 

[Dreamer_D]

When situations have come up like this in the past it seems like the vendor will examine the piece when it is returned and sometimes based on that attempt to determine whether the damage is from the setting/manufacture or from user wear. I don't know how valid those assessments are, but I have seen them referenced in posts about this type of stuff before.

I think that issues should be taken up with the vendors first in private, and if a resolution is not easily reached, then the consumer should use PS to help his/her cause.

 

[kenny]

I think that issues should be taken up with the vendors first in private, and if a resolution is not easily reached, then the consumer should use PS to help his/her cause.

Absolutely! I totally agree.
I feel everyone should be honest.

But this thread is about a vendor dilemma that I'm sure must come up- a dishonest customer using the Internet to pressure a vendor to repair/replace/refund something they damaged or was late returning, etc.

I guess this comes down to, "Is the customer always right, even when the retailer knows he's wrong?"

I remember the legend of Nordstrum and the returned tires.
Supposedly a guy returned snow tires to Nordstrum and they refunded his $25. (Must have been long ago.)
Now Nordstrum never sold tires, but they have a Customer is always right policy.
Nordstrum has probably made a bagillion dollars from this legend - all for $25.
You can't buy PR and advertising that powerful.

Snopes indicates the story may in fact be true.
http://www.snopes.com/business/consumer/nordstrom.asp

 

[septsparkle]

Off topic...but Nordstrom really does take anything back. I was in line behind a woman who was returning a pair of WELL WORN shoes she purchased over a year prior and told them she just changed her mind about them..No receipt or anything. She changed her mind after wearing holes in the soles. LOL. They gave her the refund. I couldn't believe it!

 

[Regular Guy]

Kenny, there may be no such thing as a purely theoretical query

Alternately, there is a law against yelling fire in a movie theatre.

 

[kenny]

Kenny, there may be no such thing as a purely theoretical query

Alternately, there is a law against yelling fire in a movie theatre.

Huh?

I think this is a very legitimate issue for discussion on a diamond forum.

"Fire in a movie theater?" Huh?

 

[Karl_K]

It has happened in the past a few times.
If they cant come to terms to sort it out, often one of the appraisers usually Dave Atlas but Richard S. has and Neil may have also, steps forward or is hired to help resolve it as an mediator/expert who examines the piece and determines what most likely happened.

 

[MrsChil]

This thread has absolutely nothing to do with any particular thread, vendor or customer.

What if a customer of a PS vendor damages a piece but claims (dishonestly) that it arrived from the vendor already damaged.
Let's say the PS vendor is absolutely certain that it went out in perfect condition.
Let's say the customer posts on PS that it arrived damaged, a lie, hoping the publicity results in a better outcome.
Let's say the package was NOT damage or tampered with.

In this hypothetical case it is the customer's word against the vendor's.

In your opinion should the vendor always just eat it and make the customer happy by replacing/repairing at no cost to the customer?
Or, when the vendor is certain it went out in perfect condition, should they insist the customer pays for the repair/replacement, even though they risk a bad review that will stay in the PS archive forever.

Should it become a public trial where both sides posts time-stamped pics and copies of correspondence, with the public weighing in on how it should be resolved?
I can see the potential for abuse by a dishonest customer who holds the reputation of the vendor as ransom to get a free repair/replacement when this is not a fair resolution.

Once again, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with any particular thread, vendor or customer.

There is always potential for abuse by customers, however since these particluar vendors are getting some of their business based on reviews on this forum I think it shouldn't be taboo to talk about when things don't go "perfectly". What would be the point if all that was allowed to be discussed on here is fluff. Just like at a B&M store, whoever has the proof shall prevail. If neither side has proof then I would have to say the ball should go to the consumer who shelled out hundreds or thousands of dollars for their bling. We are all smart people and if a valued PS vendor gets 1 bad review out of 100 then we can take that into consideration when trying to decide what vendor to use. Just my .02

Edited to add: Or like Karl K. said above, have it evaluated by an appraiser to determine possible cause and mediated to come to a mutual agreement.

 

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

I think...the options for said vendor are:

1) Keep protesting, he said/she said, and deal with the possible negative publicity from said PS thread (and you know there will always be people who will doubt, despite many other threads reporting perfect experiences); or

2) Just concede this transaction as a loss, preserve the reputation of the company, despite the dishonesty of the buyer, and hope that the many many honest customers will make up for occasionally dealing with an honest one.

This is a sucky situation for the vendor, because they lose either way, but unfortunately, a dishonest buyer can get away with a lot by breaking the rules as long as the vendor is following the rules, y'know?

If I were the vendor, I would wish serious bad juju on the buyer though.

 

[yssie]

I'm sure it depends on the scale of the transaction as well - a vendor is understandably going to be much more proactive about protecting their interests in a 20k transaction than a 2k one


I certainly hope this doesn't often happen

 

[Imdanny]

I do think that their needs to be some evidence that the product was damaged/flawed/faulty upon receipt. This is fairly easy to prove if you open the box right away and take photos and send them via email to the the vendor *immediately*. It's pretty easy to verify the exact time of receipt of package/product, if the customer is emailing photos within an hour of delivery that the item has x,y,z flaws or problems, it's pretty concrete that the issue lies with the vendor. If days or weeks go by before contact is made with the vendor, that's when it gets suspicious in my mind. And, that's when it seems that it would be a judgment call on behalf of the vendor. However, if the vendor was contacted immediately upon receipt, I do feel they should fix the error/issue regardless of being a PS vendor or not.

Well said.

 

[stci]

I always video tape myself opening valuable packages. It may not hold up in court, but what vendor is going to argue with a film?

I also inspect it immediately upon opening and take/email pictures (for the timestamp) if I see any issues.


Better safe than sorry.

Ho yessss! Another great idea from our Yssie! I will do that for all my next purchase! Thank you Sweety!

 

[YoungPapa]

Kenny,

Unless you put the diamond into the Fedex box with your own hand, you can never be absolutely sure of anything.

We've had our share of customers call us about this type of issue and our response is always the same: Send us back the item and we'll give you a full refund. It doesn't matter if we know the client did the damage (and there have been cases where we were sure that was the case) - it just isn't worth the fight. While I would like to say our policy is altruistic, the cost of taking back the item is generally less than the cost of the bad press, not to mention the fact that we would likely lose the money anyway to a credit card chargeback.

I can also tell you from a practical standpoint that the scenario you've described is very, very uncommon. I can only think of a couple of instances that a client called us and said their diamond arrived damaged. A much more common occurrence is someone who states that their ring is damaged, scratched, dented, or something along those lines. We've taken back rings that seriously looked like they were run over by a train, only to have the client tell us they did nothing unusual to the item. Once again we just shake our head, give a refund and move on.

While the advice to videotape and/or photograph your purchase as you remove it from the Fedex box has merit, I think making sure you're working with a vendor that has the financial strength to take their lumps is also important. Ten years and 10,000 customers ago my policies were not as lenient as they are today.

 

[septsparkle]

James Allen Schultz" data-source="" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

Kenny,

Unless you put the diamond into the Fedex box with your own hand, you can never be absolutely sure of anything.

We've had our share of customers call us about this type of issue and our response is always the same: Send us back the item and we'll give you a full refund. It doesn't matter if we know the client did the damage (and there have been cases where we were sure that was the case) - it just isn't worth the fight. While I would like to say our policy is altruistic, the cost of taking back the item is generally less than the cost of the bad press, not to mention the fact that we would likely lose the money anyway to a credit card chargeback.

I can also tell you from a practical standpoint that the scenario you've described is very, very uncommon. I can only think of a couple of instances that a client called us and said their diamond arrived damaged. A much more common occurrence is someone who states that their ring is damaged, scratched, dented, or something along those lines. We've taken back rings that seriously looked like they were run over by a train, only to have the client tell us they did nothing unusual to the item. Once again we just shake our head, give a refund and move on.

While the advice to videotape and/or photograph your purchase as you remove it from the Fedex box has merit, I think making sure you're working with a vendor that has the financial strength to take their lumps is also important. Ten years and 10,000 customers ago my policies were not as lenient as they are today.

Very well stated. Thank you for posting!

 

[Maisie]

I wonder if its a risk you take selling high value items on the internet. Not everyone is honest unfortunately.

 

[MrsChil]

I do think that their needs to be some evidence that the product was damaged/flawed/faulty upon receipt. This is fairly easy to prove if you open the box right away and take photos and send them via email to the the vendor *immediately*. It's pretty easy to verify the exact time of receipt of package/product, if the customer is emailing photos within an hour of delivery that the item has x,y,z flaws or problems, it's pretty concrete that the issue lies with the vendor. If days or weeks go by before contact is made with the vendor, that's when it gets suspicious in my mind. And, that's when it seems that it would be a judgment call on behalf of the vendor. However, if the vendor was contacted immediately upon receipt, I do feel they should fix the error/issue regardless of being a PS vendor or not.

Well said.

I AGREE!!!! Well said SS! (I must have missed reading this one before I posted

 

[kenny]

Thank you for responding Mr. Schultz.

 

[Todd Gray]

I have to say, I don't think that I've ever heard of a situation like this arising within the PS venue of vendors, but most of us to photograph jewelry items prior to sending them out (1) because it is part of the documentation and appraisal process; and (2) because it does provide a record of the condition of the item prior to it being shipped. Most of the vendors I know also video tape the packing and receiving process...

Most jewelry items can be repaired when damaged and I think the most intelligent approach would be to assist the customer with shipping the item back to determine the extent of the damage. In most cases, I think the vendor would repair the item as a show of good faith, but it is likely that a lot will depend on the attitude of the customer.

A short time ago we received a Tacori ring from an online customer who was not one of our customers to begin with... They had purchased the Tacori ring from a brick and mortar chain store and as near as I could tell, they had dropped the ring down the garbage disposal and given it a really good spin. The condition of the ring was tragic. They contacted us because they had been asked by the retailer to leave and never come back - I imagine that there had been quite a scene, but I don't know the details.

Anyway, we agreed to send the ring to Tacori to determine whether the ring could be repaired and what the restoration costs would be. A short time later, we received the ring restored to original condition by Tacori without charge. The customer was thrilled, we looked like heroes even though we hadn't done anything more than be willing to act as an intermediary and ship the item to Tacori. Tacori looked awesome for stepping up and taking care of the restoration.

For the record, as a vendor my preference would be for somebody to call up and say "I'm so upset, I slammed my hand in the car door today and smashed my ring" as opposed to "I just don't know what happened, I never wear my ring while doing anything physical"... You're more apt to get your ring repaired without charge with Approach #1

 

[Rockdiamond]

Great points made by Jim and Todd.
One of the great things about PS is that it's not only advertisers on PS who are subject to scrutiny.
Anyone can come post about a problem with any jeweler.

We've come to the same realization as Jim- it's better to simply refund, or repair, regardless of fault in almost all situations.
The good will created is incalculable. Even for the people working in customer service- there's a different attitude people have when they know the right thing will be done.


I think the dilemma, for business with a strong conscience, is what to do if someone makes a public complaint that has no basis in reality.
That's a very tough one......

 

[bgray]

James Allen Schultz" data-source="" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

Kenny,

Unless you put the diamond into the Fedex box with your own hand, you can never be absolutely sure of anything.

We've had our share of customers call us about this type of issue and our response is always the same: Send us back the item and we'll give you a full refund. It doesn't matter if we know the client did the damage (and there have been cases where we were sure that was the case) - it just isn't worth the fight. While I would like to say our policy is altruistic, the cost of taking back the item is generally less than the cost of the bad press, not to mention the fact that we would likely lose the money anyway to a credit card chargeback.

I can also tell you from a practical standpoint that the scenario you've described is very, very uncommon. I can only think of a couple of instances that a client called us and said their diamond arrived damaged. A much more common occurrence is someone who states that their ring is damaged, scratched, dented, or something along those lines. We've taken back rings that seriously looked like they were run over by a train, only to have the client tell us they did nothing unusual to the item. Once again we just shake our head, give a refund and move on.

While the advice to videotape and/or photograph your purchase as you remove it from the Fedex box has merit, I think making sure you're working with a vendor that has the financial strength to take their lumps is also important. Ten years and 10,000 customers ago my policies were not as lenient as they are today.

 

[septsparkle]

James Allen Schultz" data-source="" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

Kenny,

Unless you put the diamond into the Fedex box with your own hand, you can never be absolutely sure of anything.

We've had our share of customers call us about this type of issue and our response is always the same: Send us back the item and we'll give you a full refund. It doesn't matter if we know the client did the damage (and there have been cases where we were sure that was the case) - it just isn't worth the fight. While I would like to say our policy is altruistic, the cost of taking back the item is generally less than the cost of the bad press, not to mention the fact that we would likely lose the money anyway to a credit card chargeback.

I can also tell you from a practical standpoint that the scenario you've described is very, very uncommon. I can only think of a couple of instances that a client called us and said their diamond arrived damaged. A much more common occurrence is someone who states that their ring is damaged, scratched, dented, or something along those lines. We've taken back rings that seriously looked like they were run over by a train, only to have the client tell us they did nothing unusual to the item. Once again we just shake our head, give a refund and move on.

While the advice to videotape and/or photograph your purchase as you remove it from the Fedex box has merit, I think making sure you're working with a vendor that has the financial strength to take their lumps is also important. Ten years and 10,000 customers ago my policies were not as lenient as they are today.

???