Desperately Seeking Expert Opinions On This.

[strmrdr]

If you haven’t already sent it do not send them any more of your money.
If you decide to agree to pay anything send them a POSTAL money order one you buy at the post office and send it thru the post office registered mail signature required.
When you return the setting send it the same way.

why?
Well there is a nice law on the books that makes it a federal crime to use the US postal service in the commission of a crime.
The have there own law enforcement that handles it (postal inspectors) by doing everything thru them while it can take months for them to get things done you will get satisfaction.
The person will be given a choice 10-15 years in the fed pen or make it right with the victim and most people wont chance the 10-15 years.
This is why I pay for anything I buy over the net or mail order by postal money order.
When someone wont take postal money orders in payment it is time to look elsewhere.
If anyone asks you specifically not to use the post office run even faster.



Frankly at this point just turn it over to your credit card company them wanting you to have it resized is unreasonable.
They havent been strait with you from the start so its time to let the cc company deal with them.

 

[pqcollectibles]

Thanks, Strm, for bringing up the MO issue. I don't see why Jaded should have to pay again for shipping she's already paid for.

No one else has mentioned this. And, I don't want to be rude by any means here, but... IMHO,.... From Jaded's account Union Diamond was less than professional dealing with Jaded.

First Jaded says:

"And do you do know what happened to me next. Tony at Union Diamond had mounted the stone onto the ring which voided the return policy on the ring mounting from Oxford Diamond Company. Oxford's policy was that if the ring was altered in any way then they would not accept the return which is understandable. But before Union Diamond mounted my stone, I told Tony that I didn't have a problem returning the mounting if things didn't look right, but they mounted it regardless which voided out the return."

Jaded relied on Union Diamond's expertise as to whether the setting was appropriate. Jaded stated if the setting was not appropriate, she/he would simply return the setting for a refund. Union Diamond went ahead and set the diamond in an inappropriate set. Had the jewelers at Union acted per Jaded's request in the first place, Jaded could have simply returned the "unaltered" set.

Then to add insult to injury in the whole situation, Union Diamond offered an acceptable solution. Then retracted their offer:

"I have to say that Tony Rixom did talk to his partner, Scott Anderson about this problem. After a few days of thinking about my situation, yesterday Scott finally offered me a ring mounting from their company to be set in one of their mountings for free which they also said they would of course keep my old ring mounting that I purchased from Oxford Diamond. I thought that was great and I thought I told them so, but they changed their minds yesterday evening. Last night and today, via e-mail, Scott Anderson at Union Diamond said that the money that I had spent for my diamond would be returned to me with my altered ring."

Generally, when a problem with a Vendor is aired on the Forum, the Vendor responds quickly and usually resolves the situation. Good Old Gold and Dirt Cheap Diamonds have both recently had some setting issues. Both companies stepped up, addressed the issues and resolved the situations.

While Union Diamond apparently sold a very nice diamond, their customer service was obviously lacking. Where is Union Diamond?? Why haven't they respond to Jaded's post and situation??

 

[strmrdr]

I want to make it clear that I’m not a Lawyer and this is not legal advice consult an attorney licensed in your state for legal advice.
How ever I have been involved in the investigation of similar cases in another field.
The problem is that because they refunded her money union diamond is going to be hard to go after.
In most states in this type of case ie: no personnel injury you are limited to actual damages + court costs.
Because they refunded her money on the diamond the only case against them would be the setting.
Their defense will be that it is accepted industry practice that they aren’t responsible for damage to a customer supplied setting.
They would likely be able to get enough support from the industry to win on this account.

The misrepresentation of the setting is a stronger case.

As to why union diamond hasn’t came out and made their case I don’t know.
They certainly aren’t in the same class as GOG or DCD.
Serious consideration should be given to removing union diamond from the pricescope search engine.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 12/28/2003 1:40:42 PM Jaded Gem wrote:

Anyway, I have told myself with a lot of convincing after this experience that I may just be happy with a plain platinum wedding band. So I think, based on fears, I will just concede with not trying to put one together. Any thoughts? ----------------

I can surely understand why you want straigh-forward shopping more than diamonds by now... The whole story is fringing on ABSURD! I would let all this cool down a bit and well, try to get what I want! If you really want a simple band: I guess that is the nicest invention since the first ring

If you will still be turning after any square step-cut diamond afterwards, wel, than that is another story.
So, admitting sometime in the medium-term future you will be looking for an asscher ring, there are two things I would note: one, why not have the seller of the diamond source the setting (either have them order the setting you like or buy it from them since some sellers would do both or either) and two: why not get a RA after all? It soundslike you really want a RA, and, believe it or not it does not have to be 10K... Look at this. That is just an example showing that RAs come in all sizes and prices. As an aside, yes, that store does make a living from expensive settings (that one is probably only somewhat less than half of the total price, I bet) but they would accomodate a holistic approach to ring-making (= getting the thing done for you) regardless of what setting you want.
Of course, this is just my 0.2. I hope all goes well with your refund to start with, and that you don't get to hate diamonds for good after all this

 

[pqcollectibles]

I agree with you, Strm. The misrepresentation issue is much easier to persue.

I just saw that Jaded "trusted" Union's judgement, and said if the ring is not appropriate for setting the stone, he/she would simply return it. Union went ahead and set the diamond voiding the "unaltered" return avenue for Jaded. Then Union offered an acceptable alternative to Jaded and withdrew their offer.

Just doesn't seem like good customer service or sound business practices to me. When DCD had the problem custom ring, the president of DCD came out and said "The problem is ours and we will fix it." GOG has had a couple issues with settings and a ring box recently and Jonathan stepped up and took care of everything for his customers. At GOG's expense!

"As to why union diamond hasn’t came out and made their case I don’t know."

That's what I wanted to know, Storm!

 

[aljdewey]

To those of you who are puzzled why Union Diamond hasn't responded: we need to keep in mind that the world is larger than PS. We aren't the ultimate board that vendors have to answer to. It could very well be that UD is not even aware this is a topic of discussion here. To ask why he's not responding assumes that he's even aware of this discussion.




Further, I think it's a bit harsh to be calling for any vendor's removal over *one* incident. We are all fallible, and at times we all handle things with less grace that we'd like to.




While I don't doubt the veracity of Jaded Gem's account, it's still important to recognize that we've only heard one side of this story.




Jaded, I'm truly sorry that you're having trouble with your ring. I think others have offered some sound advice for you, and I hope all works out for the best for you.

 

[Jaded Gem]

Hello, yes aljdewey is right. This is my side of the story. Maybe Union Diamond and Oxford Diamond Company have their side and they may or may not respond to this post. Maybe they feel their reputation is too great to even be affected by my experience. All I have to explain is what they have told me. In a nutshell, Union Diamond told me that they cannot be responsible for the quality or craftsmanship of a setting not sold by their company. Personally, I asked them about the setting more than a few times that was sold to me. They failed to reply so maybe I was asking too much and from their point, maybe I should have known the quality and craftsmanship of the ring on my own accord. And do you know what, I do blame myself for not knowing and for trying to get any information out of them. And Oxford Diamond Company pretty much said my jeweler was worthless for setting the diamond into the ring if they knew that it was the wrong or an inappropriate setting. They also said that it was altered when Union Diamond set it which voided out my return with them.
What do I do? Who do I believe? I was very hesitant to post anything about either company because I felt that it would shed negative light upon them and that was and still is not what I am trying to do. But then I felt that my feelings and experiences were justified because I felt that if I could save some other person from the painful experience that I went through then that would be better to know that I was trying to help somebody. And in retun, I have also been helped by all of your replies. Thank you for caring about me.
For awhile, I could not sleep for at least a whole week, I lost five pounds because I was too stressed to eat, and I just felt sad that some people are driven by profit and do not feel that it is their "responsibility" to notify others of what they know. Maybe all of this is my fault for not knowing what they knew, and I should not have expected them to tell me these things. Many times, I blamed myself for being ignorant, and I questioned why I even thought putting together a ring would be easy for me since now I know that it was not enough that I had educated myself through numerous books and websites and did the Pricescope recommended loose diamond verification.
I am sure that these people are good and have good intentions, but maybe this experience has been a fluke for all parties involved. I just posted this experience because I felt that I did everything that I thought I could do as a consumer trying to educate myself on diamonds and putting a ring together. Obviously, I was lacking knowledge in the mounting/setting area. Overall, my post is not to say these companies are bad because I am sure they have pleased customers before if they still exist in such a competitive marketplace. Educating oneself on the diamond ring process may not be the only factor of successful ring outcomes. Another factor of trust and dependency on others may be hard to come by such as in my experience, and I just wanted to inform others that this situation can happen to anyone no matter how much trust one has put forth in the jewelers. Sometimes, I believe that people do things not intentionally trying to hurt others, but maybe they feel it is easier not to give a full disclosure and it is more of a selfish ploy on their part. I am not perfect either and I guess I just had too many high expectations that these two companies could not meet. Maybe I should not have expected anybody to tell me anything and I should have known everything. That is why I am and will still be hesitant in the future to put together another ring because I know now that I cannot expect others to be honest with me.

 

[Summer]

Jaded,

Sounds like this caused you plenty of grief!

I think it's great you can examine your actions to determine what you could have done differently. However, having said that, give yourself a break.

I think you're being much too hard on yourself. Even though you did your homework to be an informed consumer, you're not a "subject matter expert" in this area (most consumers aren't) and that's why you looked to the vendors you worked with for guidance, which is appropriate.


I agree working with the credit card co. re: the setting is the best route to take at this point. Hopefully this will work out for you. I just disputed something with AMEX (nothing to do with diamonds) and it was resolved to my satisfaction.

Good luck to you and I hope after this is resolved you can find someone you trust to work with. It can be done....hang in there!

 

[UnionDiamond]

Hello,

I was not aware of this post prior to today and after reading the post I felt that I must respond to a few of the points brought up by Jaded Gem.

Our first contact with her was in July of this year. We tried extremely hard to earn her business and researched multiple diamonds before she chose the particular one referenced in this post. She chose a ring from elsewhere and we set the diamond. I can honestly say that it looked awful! Firstly it was a 3/4 asscher set in a mounting that was set up for a 1ct round. We shipped it out and of course, she was not happy.

I had a conversation with her one Saturday morning and she was obviously distressed. At that time told her that we could not be responsible for a mounting that was not ours and one that was sent in by a customer to be set. We did not alter it, we just set it. I could only be responsible for my workmanship. My position at the time was, no matter how bad things look, the customer chose that ring and it was my job to set the stone. After I got off the telephone with her and thought about it, I wanted to make her happy and this is where the story changes somewhat.

I called her back after 5 minutes and left a message. I then called after an hour. When the telephone call was not returned I sent an email to her offering a resolution. In a previous conversation she had told me that she now wanted a "Lucida" type setting so I decided that I would try and make her happy by swapping her original setting for the "Lucida". I honestly thought that that was a good resolution. My mounting weighed a 10th of a gram heavier so it seemed like a fair thing to do after all of this. The thing is, I could not give her a platinum setting and return her original one. I think customer service is our number one priority but things must also be fair and equitable but she wanted the original returned also.

At this point I contacted her again with the only fair options as I could see them to resolve this. The first was to return her ring with a refund check. The second was to swap out her original mounting for the "Lucida" and scrap the original and the third was to go to arbitration. I was not willing to custom make another mounting with hand engraving.

That was on Saturday. On Sunday I wrote another email. I wrote and asked for her to please respond. She did respond and told me at that time that she was in fact avoiding any contact with me. I wrote back again with the only options I could offer which I still think were fair.

I did not hear back from her again so I made the decision on Monday afternoon that I would retip the prongs of the ring and send her the ring and a refund check since my emails were going unanswered.

We have learned several lessons here. We have had a policy change that we will no longer set our diamonds in to other people’s mountings. I would also like to see some kind of internet dealers association where we can set up an arbitration board to deal with situations like this. We are members of the CARE program but I still think an industry specific arbitration board would be a much better way to go. I also feel that it is a little unfair for someone to claim I “trashed” her ring. I did not trash it; I simple set a diamond in it. Did it look nice? No, but it was not trashed.

To Jaded Gem I can only say that I am sorry for this whole situation and I wished that we could have found some common ground to resolve this. I sincerely hope that you find a diamond and ring that you can be truly happy with and again please accept my apologies for the distress you have had.

I am also open to any advice on how you would think I could have resolved this in a better manner. Please take the time to post so we can improve on what we do and learn from it. That way we can be sure never to repeat it.

Scott Anderson

 

[Jaded Gem]

Hello Everybody,

I'd like to thank everybody who gave me advice and this included: giangi, hest88, valerie101, icelady, sxn675, strmrdr, pqcollectibles, aljdewey, and summer. Thank you for all your replies on my situation. Now, I would like to reply to Mr. Scott Anderson at Union Diamond. I agree but I also disagree about how he presented himself and his company. Here are my responses to his statements.

Here were some of his replies in some quotes "". "Our first contact with her was in July of this year. We tried extremely hard to earn her business and researched multiple diamonds before she chose the particular one referenced in this post." No, they did not research multiple diamonds for me. I did the research on my own, and I told them which ones I were interested in. I requested and I was only given the Sarin data on that one diamond I was most interested in. In the meantime, I had asked about a few other Asschers, but Tony said that I had picked a nice Asscher already and that I did not need to consider others. I had received an e-mail from Mr. Tony Rixom on Tuesday, November 18, 2003 describing his company and their services. I don't think July and November are anywhere close in months, but hey this is my side of the story. Maybe I called in sometime in July to get more information about the company and their policies, but I can assure you that the "research" or the working relationship did not start until this past Novemer 2003. My thoughts of them or their statements have gone down many notches as you will see with my reply.

Mr. Scott Anderson, continues on by saying, "She chose a ring from elsewhere and we set the diamond. I can honestly say that it looked awful!" Why didn't you tell me this before? Did I not ask you about how it would look, if it was the right setting, and that I had time to send the mounting back unaltered for a full refund or exchange? I told you and your company all of this, and now you are just incriminating yourself and your company by this statement. Mr. Scott Anderson says, "Firstly it was a 3/4 asscher set in a mounting that was set up for a 1ct round. We shipped it out and of course, she was not happy." Hmm, who has a website that says, "Your Trusted Online Diamond Source." I am so angry right now because I trusted you and your company, and I did ask you many questions about the mounting. You ignored me and you did not tell me that "it was a 3/4 asscher set in a mounting that was set up for a 1ct round," but instead you set the diamond in anyway knowing it looked "awful." Looks like you have just refuted your own "trustworthiness."

The only time you told or revealed any of this information to me was when I called, after receiving the diamond already set into the setting, and said, "Hey, what happened, didn't I tell you about the circular basket intrusion and I asked what could be done with it. I wanted you to tell me that I was right and that it was the wrong setting, but why did you set the diamond in without consulting me first? Didn't you ask for me to send it to you so that you could look at it, and so you would tell me if there would be any possible problems? Why did you set it?" Instead, Union Diamond disclosed what they knew was wrong with the mounting after they set it, they did not care to disclose this information to me before when I asked, and they only decided to disclose the information to me after I said again that it did not look right and asked why the second or third time. Hello, should it be my responsibility to ask a second or third time? I asked before they set it, and they chose not to tell me.

Mr. Tony Rixom and Mr. Scott Anderson, the owners of Union Diamond, blamed the other company for the mounting and then proceeded to tell me that it was "cast," "the platinum was porous," "it was like sticking a square peg in a circular hole," and that it was not "their responsibility to tell me any of these things because it was the mounting company's fault for selling me the falsely advertised ring," and that in a nutshell that I was partially to blame for not reading more on mountings and I had trusted them to give me their opinion(s).

Scott further says, "I had a conversation with her one Saturday morning and she was obviously distressed. At that time told her that we could not be responsible for a mounting that was not ours and one that was sent in by a customer to be set. We did not alter it, we just set it. I could only be responsible for my workmanship. My position at the time was, no matter how bad things look, the customer chose that ring and it was my job to set the stone. After I got off the telephone with her and thought about it, I wanted to make her happy and this is where the story changes somewhat." He never wanted to make me happy. I think it was guilt on his part to try to rectify his past mistake of not informing me when I asked and relied on their expertise on the mounting. They probably wanted to close out the sale. I think it is quite obvious that the sale was what they were interested in the most. It was not my happiness that mattered, but it was the sale. If it was my happiness with the ring then why did they ignore my past questions on the mounting, and why set it with their knowledge of wrong setting and other factors involved? I was always willing to send the mounting back to Oxford Diamond Company and I let Union Diamond know that? Would you protect a customer who obviously was lied to by somebody else by giving a full disclosure? And this customer, me, had asked. Well by Mr. Scott Anderson's replies, it seems that Union Diamond choose to be "an accomplice" in this falsity. Once they were not protected by the other company's false claims, they themselves started to make a disclosure pointing all fingers at the company that sold me the mounting. Hmm...is that how they do business?

It's like giving someone a prescription drug or an operation that they don't need, but hey it keeps the hospital and the doctors in business. Isn't that ethically wrong?

Scott then says, "I called her back after 5 minutes and left a message. I then called after an hour." No, after I talked to Scott, my husband and I had lunch at home and we were around the house for a couple of hours before we left in our efforts to forget about the situation and to get some fresh air outside. He did not call me back after 5 minutes, but yes he did leave a message on our voicemail when we were out. When we returned home, my husband called Scott back to talk to him, and Scott did not mention anything new, but that he had wanted to talk to me. Again, would you want to talk to somebody who said you were "silly and rediculous" to expect them to try to rectify the situation. In the previous conversation, I said if Union Diamond was my company and if I were them that I would let them keep my setting for one that was also a cathedral type setting. I never asked for any engravings or anything else, but that I would like the Asscher or square emerald to be put in the correct setting for once. Do you know what their response was? Both Scott and Tony told me that it was my fault for not educating myself on mountings and that I could not expect them to replace my mounting with one of theirs even though they set it knowing full well that it was the wrong setting. I had to be charged for their basic Lucida type setting. I already said that they could keep my setting, and they still wanted to charge me for a comparison setting that they sold. Now if you were in my shoes, would you want to talk to them? No, I didn't want to talk to them anymore because they wanted to charge me for another setting when they dropped the ball in the first place. They had their chance to tell me what was wrong with the previous setting. I would have returned that setting and bought their Lucida type setting from them, but they set the diamond in which altered the prongs and voided my return with the other company. I was not happy with their service, and I did not expect Union Diamond to do anything at that point. So their so called "efforts" was just a facade. Did you really try, Mr. Anderson?

Scott continues to say, "When the telephone call was not returned I sent an email to her offering a resolution. In a previous conversation she had told me that she now wanted a "Lucida" type setting so I decided that I would try and make her happy by swapping her original setting for the "Lucida". I honestly thought that that was a good resolution. My mounting weighed a 10th of a gram heavier so it seemed like a fair thing to do after all of this. The thing is, I could not give her a platinum setting and return her original one. I think customer service is our number one priority but things must also be fair and equitable but she wanted the original returned also." That is a bold faced lie. I never wanted the original returned to me. I told them that they could keep the original when they said that they wanted it so that they could "melt it down for scrap value" which of course they would keep. I can't believe he is willing to make such a bold face lie on this forum. I guess he feels no shame, and I guess that is how he represents Union Diamond.

Scott continues to say, "At this point I contacted her again with the only fair options as I could see them to resolve this. The first was to return her ring with a refund check. The second was to swap out her original mounting for the "Lucida" and scrap the original and the third was to go to arbitration. I was not willing to custom make another mounting with hand engraving." Hello, he only contacted me once with that offer which I accepted saying that I was fine with his offer as long as the Lucida type setting was right for this Asscher type stone. I never asked for any type of custom make nor did I ever ask for any type of hand engravings to be done. Why is he bringing up stuff that I never asked for? He decided at the last moment that he and his company did not want to do the right thing. That is the fact.

Scott continues to say, "That was on Saturday. On Sunday I wrote another email. I wrote and asked for her to please respond. She did respond and told me at that time that she was in fact avoiding any contact with me. I wrote back again with the only options I could offer which I still think were fair." I avoided contact with him because he had not offered the replacement with the Lucida option till much later on Sunday via e-mail. He never left a voice message explaining his alternative option to me. He just sent that e-mail on Sunday, and I did not check e-mail or was I at home much for that day or that weekend since I was still trying to forget about this whole experience. From my understanding for the whole weekend, was that he had wanted to charge me for the Lucida type setting. However, I received or opened up his e-mail on Monday, and I saw that he had changed his mind. I agreed to everything he said except that I wanted him to feel that it was the right and respectable thing for him and his company to do what he had said. I guess in one day, he changed his mind again, and rescinded the offer. He told me that the FedEx package was just sent out, but due to the holiday season and FedEx being so busy, I wasn't able to receive the package with the mounting and check until next Monday. He had a whole week to recall the package and do the right thing. He choose not to recall.

So Scott says, "I did not hear back from her again so I made the decision on Monday afternoon that I would retip the prongs of the ring and send her the ring and a refund check since my emails were going unanswered." He made the offer on Sunday via e-mail, I didn't check my e-mails until Monday, and I said yes to his offer on that same Monday. He had a week to do a FedEx recall, and the fact is that he choose not to recall it. He was done with this whole tranaction, and he told me that himself. That was the customer service that I got from the owner of Union Diamond, and that was the best he could do.

Scott continues to say, "We have learned several lessons here. We have had a policy change that we will no longer set our diamonds in to other people’s mountings. I would also like to see some kind of internet dealers association where we can set up an arbitration board to deal with situations like this. We are members of the CARE program but I still think an industry specific arbitration board would be a much better way to go. I also feel that it is a little unfair for someone to claim I “trashed” her ring. I did not trash it; I simple set a diamond in it. Did it look nice? No, but it was not trashed." Yes, you have his own words here, and you can come up with your own assessments of him and his company. Trusty, reliable, or dependable?

Come on Scott, why don't I just cut myself and let you rub salt in my open wound. Are you really sorry. Your response, "To Jaded Gem I can only say that I am sorry for this whole situation and I wished that we could have found some common ground to resolve this." We did find a common ground, but you rescinded your offer remember? Scott's words, "I sincerely hope that you find a diamond and ring that you can be truly happy with and again please accept my apologies for the distress you have had." I don't think you will ever ever be as sorry as me, and you could have done your FedEx recall remember? But I guess it was not the right thing for you or your company to do that.

You also say, "I am also open to any advice on how you would think I could have resolved this in a better manner. Please take the time to post so we can improve on what we do and learn from it. That way we can be sure never to repeat it." To Mr. Scott Anderson, since you weren't going to do a recall and place the Asscher type stone in your Lucida type setting, I still thanked you for all your help, time, and patience with our transaction. The only thing I had asked for at that point was to document those claims that you made about the ring to be typed up or e-mailed to me so that I could get my money back for the misadvertised ring mounting via a Visa credit card claim. You never replied to me with those same remarks typed up or e-mailed to me stating "wrong setting, porous platinum, cast and not hand engraved," etc. Instead you ignored my e-mails and I have proof of it. Is that your best customer service for a deal gone sour? You are not sorry nor will you ever be as sorry as me. Why lie or pretend to be sorry? I don't wish bad karma until you. I have learned that there are people that I cannot trust, depend on, or rely upon like you and your company. Thank you for showing me that. I also did not appreciate some of the little lies that you told in your response. In the future and going forward, I hope that you would acquire the decency to be honest with your next customer whether they ask or not for your "jeweler's expertise." I guess I should not have asked or have placed any type of expection for you or your company to be on my side or make a full disclosure on a faulty item. That is quite high an expectation for you or your company to uphold. What is that old adage, "Honesty is the best policy?" I would hope you would give that old adage a thought not only for your own good and prosperity but for your company as well. Good luck Mr. Scott Anderson, Mr. Tony Rixom, and Union Diamond Corporation. I wish you well.

To everyone else, thank you for your advice. Since Union Diamond nor any of their representatives tried to help me get a refund on the ring, I had to go pay an appraiser to appraise the mounting and give a written disclosure as evidence to my credit card company that there was some type of fraud from the mounting company. Again Union Diamond did not help me with this process, but they did a lot of finger pointing. They had offered help in an e-mail that they sent me, but again no help was actually given. I'm sure their actions or lack of actions speak louder than my mere words. After talking to the caring people on this forum, I contacted my Visa credit card company, sent back the mounting, and I received a refund on the ring minus shipping today with a credit after much arbitration. Thank you to all of you, except Union Diamond, for helping me get that credit. God Bless and Thanks.

Sincerely,
Jaded Gem

 

[strmrdr]

Jaded Gem glad you got your refund :}
What have you decided to do about getting a ring? im curious so being a lil nosey. lol

As far as Scott goes not to get into a he says she says but his own words paint a bleak picture.
My question is if the setting looked that bad with that diamond why did you set it?
If it was as bad as you both say it is then it should have been obvious that it wasn’t going to work before you set it.
Even if she hadn’t asked you to make sure it was going to work before setting it don’t you owe it to your customers to let them know before setting the diamond?
Your in the business and should know that often settings cant be returned once a stone is set in them.

I just can’t seem to figure out why you mounted it in the first place??

The offer to replace stuff I can give the benefit of doubt due to miscommunication.
But it still doesn’t look good on your part.

An independent arbitration board doesn’t sound too bad but an industry one is bogus.
A consumer would likely get as fair treatment there as they do in most of the rest of the industry, which is to say not very fair at all.

 

[Jaded Gem]

THANK YOU strmrdr! It's about time that somebody, besides me, sees the frustration that I went through. Yes, I think we can both agree that Mr. Scott Anderson's words and actions were a little or a lot questionable. I was very pissed off at reading some of the lies or "misunderstandings."

They could have always kept my ring as collateral for messing up and not disclosing on the setting. Well, we could at least draw the conclusion that if I ever ever try to put or dare put a ring together that they would not be contacted. They talked to me throughout the sale. They never stood by their words of how they felt sorry that I was frauded out of a mounting. Their words of standing by me were mere words, and they did not stand by me like the people on Pricescope. When I asked them for a written disclosure on the mounting so that I could somehow get a refund, Union Diamond never replied because there was no sale on their part. I was not suprised that I did not hear back from them. From the ring transaction, their lack of action or sympathy came as no suprise.

 

[Jaded Gem]

Everytime I think about Mr. Scott Anderson's "sincere apology" post, I feel as if I was slapped in the face again and again. It stings and hurts to think about how nonchalant he was in his efforts to "apologize" and provide decent "customer service." I still can't believe that he really thought that he did the "best that he could do." I would really hate to see his worst type of customer service if he's already giving himself and his company all the credit in the world for "the best or highest marks for customer satisfaction." I guess I was not a "sale" for him or his company, and he nor his company cared to tell me that I was frauded until I caught them red-handed as an accomplice. Looking at the number of people who have read my post, I think I can safely assume that others will feel a little "jaded" as well by his responses. What burns me the most is that I told them that I did not know if I was sold the wrong setting and that it did not look right (but still unsure since I was no jewelry expert), they told me to send in the setting for them to look at and they would reply, they never called me back to confirm the wrong setting, but they set it in anyway.

As you can see from Mr. Scott Anderson's post that he never felt the need to educate me nor was it his or Union Diamond's responsibility to inform me whether I had asked or not. Well I did ask questions, Union Diamond said that they would get back to me, but then I guess they ignored me because I never got a response from them. Then to further add insult to injury, Union Diamond says that the other company "sold me out." Looks like Union Diamond also "sold me out" as well...and suprisingly, he feels no guilt or compassion. I hope other readers of my post know that this is not the customer service that they would want nor do they deserve. And I'm sure no matter how much pain I feel over this ordeal that at least Union Diamond has posted their "side," and that they have shown their own "integrity" or "lack of integrity" of their firm coming straight from the owner's mouth. So I guess in essence, in Scott's own words, maybe he did more harm to himself and to his company by his own words of admission and that will prove to be a self incriminating slap to his own face.

 

[strmrdr]

Jaded Gem,
Yea the whole situation sucks and it is perfectly understandable to be ticked off.

I dont know what to say to make you feel better because unfortunatly his type of service is far more common in the industry than it should be.
He reminds me of more than a few people at local b&m's Iv had the displeasure of meeting.

That said there are some gems in the business Micheal E, Rhino and crew, whiteflash's crew , Richard Sherwood, and many more here.

 

[Jaded Gem]

Yeah strmrdr, I guess I could channel this anger into something more productive like working on some New Year's resolution that is common with a lot of people...like working out at the gym. Maybe I can get the anger out in a ten mile plus run, but if that's not enough then I'll need to go try for twenty. I'll add in the hills to combat the frustration I have felt over this ordeal. Maybe, this anger or frustration will fade away, but everytime I think of Scott's response from Union Diamond, I feel very much hurt that I trusted him and his company. And yes, I feel burned.

You're probably right that this type of service happens more often than one would like or expect. I guess it is the nature of some who ruins things for others. At least I posted my experience and like I said before, I really thank everyone for being so supportive. I don't think I would have gotten my money back from the altered ring, but at least I got that refund. And yeah, I learned not to deal with Union Diamond again.