Dilemma: Who do I have set the diamond?

[dhltal]

So here is my situation. Purchased my diamond from WhiteFlash: 1.637 I SI2. Purchased my ring setting from local jeweler (Roger''s Jeweler). It''s a HOF setting.

Who do I have do the setting? The ring is at the jeweler, but I have paid for it already. The diamond is in my possession as well. Should I have it done at the jeweler, who is fully insured, but lose the warranty on the diamond. Roger''s said they will warranty the setting and obviously not the diamond.

OR

Should I have it done at WhiteFlash, and ship my ring/diamond over night to them and have them ship it back. This way the diamond is still warranted, but I lose the warranty on the HOF setting.

The prices are roughly the same for setting the diamond ~$100-150.

Either way, I''m having the diamond ring insured afterwards, but I want to have it put together flawlessly.

I need your advice guys!

Thanks in advance.

 

[jaz464]

I would have WF do it. The diamond is worth more than the setting. And once they are both insured, if something happens, it will be your insurance company's responsibility to take care of it.

 

[dhltal]

Is it possible to have both insured separately prior to setting then having the ring insured together once it''s set?

 

[jaz464]

It can be hard to find someone to insure a loose diamond. I think Chubb might but I think there are restrictions.
I don''t know about insuring a semimount while a diamond is being set in it.

 

[neatfreak]

Well, I assume that the diamond is much more expensive than the setting right? So that seems pretty clear cut. Send it to WF who will insure the diamond. They also do soooo many more sales than a regular B&M so I would think they are pretty unlikely to mess it up.

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 6/5/2007 1:41:27 PM
Author: dhltal
Is it possible to have both insured separately prior to setting then having the ring insured together once it''s set?

Yes.

 

[kcoursolle]

I would have WF set the stone because the cost of potential damage is greater for the stone and not the setting. If a prong on the setting is damaged or something, these can be reshaped whereas a chipped girdle can be potential carat weight loss, polishing, recutting, etc.

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 6/5/2007 4:59:22 PM
Author: kcoursolle
I would have WF set the stone because the cost of potential damage is greater for the stone and not the setting. If a prong on the setting is damaged or something, these can be reshaped whereas a chipped girdle can be potential carat weight loss, polishing, recutting, etc.

Though this is logical to me, too...

a) the cake & eat it too approach of having it insured first should theoretically make which party does the work less important...
b) it would involve getting an appraiser involved, so they might want to weight in on who should set it....
c) Denverappraiser pretty consistently suggests having the ring guy do this regardless, for issues concerning how the two are put together, including the ring guy signing off on the diamond fitting properly, and other related issues

but that's if you believe what you read. Also, the particulars of who the diamond guy and who the ring guy is may come into play in the real world...to include that we don't know Rogers (but I think you'd like to develop an easy relationship for ring checking, etc.) and we do know as readers here of WF, as a reliable jeweler, so these are factors, too.