Did I get ripped off? Is this Sapphire heated? [pics]

[nyyfan]

Hi everyone,

I recently bought a blue unheated sapphire from a very reputable jeweler (listed as a recommended vendor on this site). I bought this for an engagement ring for my fiance, and I am relatively new to this whole business.
So I brought it to a separate jeweler to make the band & get an appraisal from UGL to determine the updated price. Lo and behold, their appraisal said: "Treatment: Heated".

So I called the original jeweler back and they told me that it needed to be sent to GIA because they had a lab, while my appraiser made that assumption only from looking at a microscope.

I went back to the appraiser and they showed me pictures of the stone (attached).


In your opinion, does this look treated? Is it possible to tell from only a microscope?
Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

 

[chrono]

Hmm, looks like a discoid fracture from heat treatment, doesn't it?

 

[Arcadian]

If your appraiser has enough knowledge and/or equipment to identify heat treatment, then yes you should contact the original seller. It doesn't matter who it is, if they're on the approved list or not. You didn't get what you thought you were paying for, and, they should by all rights take it back if the stone is not as they described it.

As you haven't yet sent it to GIA or any other independent lab, you may still need to do that. But let the original seller know that you will be sending it back and explain why.

Sellers can make mistakes, they're human after all. As long as they are open to making it right, you should be fine.

 

[theredspinel]

And at the end of it all please let us know who it was for our FYI. I don't mean as a positive or negative review of them... I'd just like to know because I (possibly naively) always thought the recommended vendors here couldn't/wouldn't make those mistakes.

I for one take certain vendors solemn words when they say stuff like they have "100% faith in their suppliers/know their suppliers" etc.

So like I said, just for our FYI.

 

[nyyfan]

Thank you. I will try to update with the company name once I have clarification that it is, in fact, heated.

 

[nyyfan]

UPDATE:: The jeweler responded to my email:

I looked up the records on this sapphire, where it was mined/who we purchased the material from etc.
The sapphire you purchased actually had previously been to the GIA.
The stone weighed 1.54cts at that time.
After it had been certified, we decided it needed to be recut due to a natural concave type inclusion that was coming to the surface of the sapphire.
We then didn't send it back to GIA which; as you know takes so so long and we too feel frustrated about these extreme delays in working with them.
So I have attached a copy of the report from before the sapphire was recut, the sapphire is untreated.

The gemologists are right that a disc-type fracture inclusions around a crystal can look very much like an exploded/expansion from heating.
But this is not definitive; there is also likely a lot of fine rutile needles at high magnification in this sapphire; and other inclusions that don't have this characteristic disc.
It's common for sapphires to show stressed disc-looking inclusions as the crystal grows around the internal inclusion in the ground.
They are wrong.
I hope you get your money back from them if they charged you for incorrect information.

Thanks for contacting us about this. It feels good to know our reputation is still the best in the natural sapphire business.
Sincerely,
X

----

Any opinions/thoughts on the veracity of this response?

 

[deskjockey]

I think honestly the best way to answer definitively is to send it to the lab for more a more thorough look-over. Since the stone has been recut then the old certificate won't match up exactly, and I know for me wouldn't be 100% peace of mind.

If you really love the sapphire otherwise, maybe see if vendor would be willing to take it back post-testing if it comes back as treated, despite the amount of time it would take? I've never been involved in anything like this but I think that would be the way I'd go, and if the vendor is sure about it then he has nothing to lose. Personally the only reason potential heating would bother me is if I was charged more due to "natural" status and the difference in price was significant enough to merit the feeling of being ripped off.

 

[nyyfan]

Thank you.

Anyone have any advice on what the jeweler responded? I am new to this. Looking to see if what he said was a legitimate excuse.

 

[chrono]

Given that the sapphire was recut, it will need an updated GIA report anyway, so ask the jeweller to re-submit the sapphire to GIA.

 

[PrecisionGem]

Recutting wouldn't change an unheated stone into a heated one. But from your screen name, I would guess you are in in NYC? If so, I would certainly take it to AGL in NY over sending it to the GIA. The GIA despite there name is not always the best place for colored stones.

 

[chrono]

The AGL brief will also be less expensive.

 

[MollyMalone]

The AGL brief will also be less expensive.

Also, probably faster than GIA, where there is currently a nearly 7-week waiting period, at either of their US labs, for colored gem reports.

But has the vendor confirmed that they will extend their return-refund time period so as to allow for an independent lab assessment? Will they accept a return of the sapphire, which is no longer a loose stone & would have be removed from its current setting before returning it?