Appraisers Swapping Diamonds?

[diamondphil]

I recently took a diamond ring for appraisal to a reputable jewelry store that I completely trust (for lots of reasons).

Today I received the new appraisal in which the diamond cut was appraised as "fair" and the color was rated H. I told the jeweler that it had been custom-made by __, a very fancy local store that is still in business, and was sold as an "Ideal Cut" diamond, with which the current appraisal in no way agrees. The ring was purchased in 1983 and the only time it has been out of my possession before is when I had it appraised in 1986 at the SAME store of the jeweler who made it, for insurance purposes. I have the name of the gemologist who did the appraisal then, but doubt she would still be there.

The jeweler who did the new (2004) appraisal said that one of her clients had had her diamond appraised at the same place where my ring was made in 1982 and appraised in 1986, and noted afterward that the stone was NOT the one she had taken in. The store refused to do anything, but the customer's insurance company did pay to replace the stone with the original quality. I am suspecting that the same thing happened to me--but of course that would have been many years ago when they appraised their own ring.

So, my basic issue/question to the gemologists on this board: Does this diamond-swapping happen--often? Are there stories of unethical gemologists--or people with access to jewelry--who do this, even at reputable stores? AND Why would a customer "risk" having an appraisal done when each appraisal is an opportunity for someone to swap out a wonderful diamond with one that is not so good?

 

[oldminer]

What you describe is not a "likely" scenario, but one which "possibly" could have taken place. Most appraisers and most retail jewelers, just like the vast majority of the general public would never consider switching someone's diamond for any reason. There are a few bad apples in society and in the jewelry business. Trust is a difficult thing to create and takes years to earn. You cannot advertise how honest you are and really convince people of it. Just look at our political process, for example, and see what lack of integrity most of us see in a candidates that have dubious credentials saying "trust me, I'm the one for you"....

What you describe could have happened. It could also be that the original diamond was misrepresented in some way from the very beginning and you only discovered this when a different firm, appraiser, examined the item. There is not going to be an easy solution. I wish there was.

I am presently involved as an expert in such a case dating back to misrepresentation from 1965 that was only "discovered" in about 1999. With all that time delay, there are many questions that are not possible to answer. It is very unfortunate to feel you were cheated. I know that seems very real.

Is the diamond still pretty? Does it look to you like the original? You never noticed a change yourself? Do you think you could have missed such a change for so long a period of time? I don't doubt your assertion that the diamond may not be up to par, but is it possible that the diamond is the same one you always had? If that is the case, then at least the sentimental attachment to this stone will be left intact.

Best of luck...

 

[diamondphil]

David, thanks for your quick and sensitive reply.

The fact is that I have not worn the ring since 1988 (the end of the relationship) and it has "lived" in a safety deposit box since then. Also, the design of the ring is such that I never looked closely at the diamond, as I was confident that it was a very good diamond based on the original maker and his representation of the quality of the stone.

I think I'll donate the ring to a charity for them to resell. The ring has no sentimental value at this point, and--as a custom design--would not appeal to today's buyers nor to someone in my family to use/wear. IF the diamond were of the supposed original higher quality, then perhaps I would have the stone made into something I would use. But then again, my way of life (as a college prof) is not one that includes occasions for wearing diamonds, other than in the form of an engagement ring--and that is not in the cards.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Another possability, and one I often face, is that standards for cut quality have gone up and up.
The diamonds I sold as the best attainable cut 20 years ago do not hold a candle to the worst cut i sell today!

 

[Dancing Fire]

----------------
On 8/29/2004 2:15:49 AM Garry H (Cut Nut) wrote:

Another possability, and one I often face, is that standards for cut quality have gone up and up.
The diamonds I sold as the best attainable cut 20 years ago do not hold a candle to the worst cut i sell today!----------------

Cut Nut
Is it so obvious that today's ideal cut is that much better than 20 yrs ago ? do to high tech ? better skill cutters ? or other reasons ?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

All the above, but mostly better methods of QC and better polishing equipment - manufacturers is the title today. Most do not call themselves 'cutters' since most diamond as polished in very big well run processs controlled factories.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

A local gemologist-appraiser here in the Sarasota area appraised a diamond solitaire for a woman while she waited and watched.

A meticulous gemologist, he thoroughly examined and graphed the stone. It appraised as an H/SI1.

The lady took the ring and went home with the appraisal. Two hours later, the appraiser got a call from the woman, "You switched my diamond!".

The appraiser calmly told her that was impossible, as she sat and watched the whole process. "Yeah, I don't know how you did it, but I know you did!"

When asked why see thought this, she faxed him the original invoice for the diamond 20 years earlier. The invoice said it was G/VVS, and the woman maintained the ring had never been out of her sight since, so he must have somehow magically switched it while her attention was diverted.

The appraiser told her that the likely scenario was that the diamond was overgraded when it was sold to her. "No, this was a high integrity store, much bigger than your little operation, and very well known."

The appraiser was not able to calm her down, and next thing he knows two detectives knocked on his door, investigating the "switch". He produces a video tape which shows the woman sitting and watching him the whole time. They took the tape back to the department.

Then another set of detectives showed up weeks later, going over the same thing. Then the woman sued him in civil court.

By the time I got involved as an expert witness, the appraiser told me that he had spent fifteen thousand dollars in defense costs. He told me the woman had offered to accept ten thousand dollars earlier, but he was too enraged to pay it.

When I examined the ring, the original documentation and the current appraisal, it was clear the diamond was the original stone, but had been overgraded by the seller. There was no sign of the diamond ever having been removed. Removal and resetting invariably leaves telltale tool marks. There was also several other indicators it was the same diamond.

So the appraiser was found innocent, after spending 15 thousand dollars and having his reputation besmirched for over a year by this lady and her vicious campaign against him (she even posted placards at major intersections all around town ("so & so stole my diamond!"). It was unbelievable.

There is now a heightened sense of awareness about diamond grading on the part of both jewelers and consumers which didn't exist 20-30 years. A multitude of diamonds used to be graded by "old timers" as "blue-white perfect" which today wouldn't grade out anywhere near that literal category (DEF/IF with fluorescence). Some jewelers would put the label "ideal make" on any diamond with a fine make.

I think the chances are far greater your diamond is the same, and has not been "switched". If it has been switched, it should not be a difficult job for a gemologist experienced in "forensic gemology" to determine so. It might be the fair thing to have this done, so an innocent is not smeared by inuendo when in actuality no physical crime has taken place.

Of course you then have the possibility of a "white collar" crime of misrepresentation, which may or may not have been deliberate, but simply the case of an untrained individual trying to assign gemological grading when selling a stone, instead of paying to have it graded by a laboratory or trained gemologist. This happens all the time.

 

[elmo]

----------------
On 8/29/2004 12:34:31 PM Richard Sherwood wrote:

By the time I got involved as an expert witness, the appraiser told me that he had spent fifteen thousand dollars in defense costs. He told me the woman had offered to accept ten thousand dollars earlier, but he was too enraged to pay it.


When I examined the ring, the original documentation and the current appraisal, it was clear the diamond was the original stone, but had been overgraded by the seller. There was no sign of the diamond ever having been removed. Removal and resetting invariably leaves telltale tool marks. There was also several other indicators it was the same diamond.


So the appraiser was found innocent, after spending 15 thousand dollars and having his reputation besmirched for over a year by this lady and her vicious campaign against him (she even posted placards at major intersections all around town ('so & so stole my diamond!'). It was unbelievable.
----------------

Wow.

Is insurance against this sort of thing available for jewelers and appraisers?

Did this guy file a countersuit for the damage to his reputation?

 

[Richard Sherwood]

-----------
Is insurance against this sort of thing available for jewelers and
appraisers?
-----------

Yes Elmo, but very few appraisers I know carry it. The need for it is so unlikely (kind of like getting struck by lightning) that a minority of appraisers lay out the money for out.

-----------
Did this guy file a countersuit for the damage to his reputation?
-----------

He thought about it, but after a little investigation he found out the lady had no resources whatsoever, except for the ring. Basically "judgement proof".

He said he just didn't have the energy to pursue it when he knew he probably wouldn't get anything in return for his efforts. He said he wanted to just put it behind him, so he wouldn't experience anymore emotional angst thinking about it. He also confided in me that he was a little afraid of "setting her off" again, because, as he said, "this lady is lunatic".

You ever run across somebody like that before? It's very difficult to defend yourself against them, much less prosecute them. Unless you're willing to go the distance (which requires tremendous emotional energy), it's better to leave them alone. Kind of like stirring up a wasp's nest for fun. It ain't.

 

[rms]

Rich/all,
That is a terribly sad story about your colleague. I tell you, for as many wonderful people there are in this world, there are some that are truly not so nice. In a way, I wish he would file a countersuit, but I agree with him that the time and anguish involved would be difficult to bear. I have an uncle who is an independent businessman and he cut a real estate deal with someone years ago. This guy then filed a lawsuit against my uncle years after buying it saying that the property was not what was expected. Even though my uncle didn't agree with his claim and had evidence to support the case, my uncle tried to settle with the guy multiple times rather than go to court and spend tons of money and energy. The guy refused and said he was going to rake my uncle over the coals. Finally my uncle and his lawyer brought them in for a deposition. After the deposition was done, this guy didn't have a leg to stand on and his lawyer was red with embarrassment. Who wins something like that in the end...NOBODY.

 

[fire&ice]

Wouldn't a simple solution be to examine the stone together with the client & find a flaw which could identify the stone upon return? Even have the client sign off on it?

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Yes! And remind me to do that everytime from now on, F&I. That is the best protection, but many appraisers (including myself) forget to do it.

I think from now on I'll take a "before & after" shot with my scope camera, showing them the same identifying characteristic.

Thanks!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

We had appraiser insurance but it just got silly expensive - we have 5 registered appraisers and they went from covering the buisness for a few hundred to covering each individual for thousands.

The only time we might have needed it in 28 years was when a very nice lady accused us of swapping her sapphire. She said the stone was better than hers (after we repolished it) and that we must have broken hers and replaced it with a better one. Amazingly the stone had exactly the same dimensions minus .1mm shallower depth compared to a prior appraisal

 

[blitz]

O&E insurance, via Jewelers Mutual for sunny California, premium $1,700.00.
And yes I am paying this. I'm in a litigation state and have had my share of scares. A women handed me her ring and I immediately put it under the scope, it was a CZ, told her and she replies "you switched my diamond". I responded that it had been less then 1 minute, with that she burst into tears, saying she knows it was her daugter...

I ask for any and all previous paper work to accompany the item: to make sure there is no condition change: damage etc, or if I disagree with previous opinion, we can discuss it face to face. I am preparing a new take-in sheet/invoice and plan on including the above statement. Besides the "switch scare" I get clients who say there is no previous report, then I issue my report and they say "the weight, color" don't match my GIA report. If it is in written form, on a document, it will be more difficult to "overlook"

 

[Richard Sherwood]

$1700 eh? Everytime I think about paying a premium like that, there's always another instrument I want more.

I enjoy your posts Jennifer. Nice to have you around!

 

[niceice]

----------------
On 8/30/2004 12:00:46 PM Richard Sherwood wrote:

Yes! And remind me to do that everytime from now on, F&I. That is the best protection, but many appraisers (including myself) forget to do it.

I think from now on I'll take a 'before & after' shot with my scope camera, showing them the same identifying characteristic.

Thanks!
----------------

Those before and after shots can save your tail! A few years ago we had a lady walk in to the store wanting some repair work on her ring, prongs and such... The ring was in a complete state of dis-repair, complete with some really faded antiquing (black colored wax like substance). As part of our normal take-in process we helped her find her inclusions "before" taking in the ring for repair. As part of our repair process, we removed the old faded antiquing from the ring (not to be confused with Patena - it's like old paint) and polished the ring and put on new antiquing. The woman took one look at her ring and flipped out to the point where she was accusing us not only of switching her diamond, but of switching the entire ring on her... She called her daughter who just happened to work for the D.A.'s office and needless to say that her daughter was a bit hot when she showed up. Thankfully we had those "before" photographs and we were able to bring them up and show both the client and her daughter the primary inclusions within her diamond and explain that the reason why the diamond looked so much different than what her mother was used to seeing was because it was "clean" - an interesting concept in itself - and that we had restored the antique finish on the ring so that it looked new. And with that the Mother suddenly looks at her ring and says "Oh yea, this does look an awful lot like my ring looked when I first got it" and that was that... Ugh! People...

 

[jesrush]

This is another reason why I love lower clarity stones... they're so much easier (esp for joe-schmo with a loupe) to identify/verify! Todd you were right--learning your stones inclusions is infinitely more helpful than laser inscriptions, gemex, and the like...

-J

 

[NanStacy]

Hi, Jennifer,
For a long time I have put a couple of restrictions on my take-in document--1. if melee falls out upon cleaning, the client is responsible for the re-setting fee (not my fault if the dirt was holding in the stone) and 2. if they want me to consider documents submitted after the appraisal is finished, the clock is still ticking fee-wise.

When I first set up my web site, I tried to lay out all the things I wanted my clients to know about the appraisal process, and how to prepare the jewelry and their supporting documents before coming in. When people understand, they are very cooperative, and most of them come in very organized--some amazingly so.

If you go to my website at www.jewelry-appraisal.com, look under "Appraisal Info" then "Preparing for Your Appraisal." Maybe it will give you some ideas--or you are welcome to link to it!

But still, it is scary that some clients have been so sensitized by TV exposes and urban legends that they seem to think stones can be magically "switched" with almost identical ones, right before their eyes! I think the best defense is to build a rapport between the appraiser and the client, but that isn't going to protect us from those clients who are a card or two short of a full deck!

 

[ahmuse]

Hello,

I am in some serious need of a person who can help me out. I have been royally screwed in EVERY way possible about my center stone. I have paid an excess of 800 for it. I am fuming upset and I'd really love to talk to someone about how I can best approach the situation so that I can benefit the most from it and walk away happy and with the problem resolved. Please contact me.
Anyone with a speciality in litigation, documentation (especially, sigh, EGL) would be greatly appreciated.

contact me via:
[email protected]

 

[Richard Sherwood]

-----------
I have been royally screwed in EVERY way possible about my center stone.
-----------

Hi JTucker. Why don't you post the particulars of your situation? You might find some of the responses regarding your situation helpful in determining if you indeed got screwed, and how bad if so.

Sometimes it's not as bad as you initially fear, and can be worked out without lawyers. With the sum involved, you're probably much better off taking a non-litigous approach.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

If you do post your situation, it might be more effective if you do so as a "New Topic" posting, with the subject heading referring specifically to your dilemna.

 

[Blueman33]

Perhaps you can get the stone recut?

If you are really going to give it to charity, why don't you stash it, then find someone who doesn't have many bucks to get a ring (perhaps on this board) and out-of-the blue.......help them out?

Be nice,
Blueman