E-bay nightmare...any advice???

[Rhino]

Mara... you have (as usual) hit the nail on the head. Diamond4all... You are not a retailer yet the public is invited? You are by the very definition of the word a retailer. Anyone who sells to the public is a retailer. If you have sold this client a ring and they want their money back why do they need to show any proof of dissatisfaction? Even if the carat weigth is exactly what you state it is, the bottom line is this client is not happy with their purchase and they ahve acted in plenty of time to take recourse. If you have a return policy stating such simply honor your policy. No reason should have to be given by the consumer and no expenses should have to be paid for extra appraisals by you or her. If I walk into Best Buy and purchase an item... bring it home and I'm not happy with it I bring it back and return it. I don't need an appraisal, I don't need anyone elses opinion, I may even like the product but decide I can't afford to keep it at this moment. Bottom line is it's none of Best Buy's business why I want to return it. They have a return policy and I use it if I must for whatever reason I want. So should this client if you clearly state so in your policies.

 

[diamond4all]

Hi.
You guys are missing the point! and it is probably my fault for not spelling it out:
We have a "NO QUESTION ASKED RETURN POLICY" - she could have requested a refund FOR ANY REASON!!
Even if the reason is as simple as "It doesn't go well with my new shoes" - we have honored returns like this before - that is how you stay competitive in this business.
You just call in / email for a return authorization number!
The issue here is that based on the "Expert" report and in comparison to our stock and production documents (each stone above 0.50 carat is documented) these are not the specification we have on file for the ring in question.
We will go the extra mile for any and every customer - we have done that before - on and off eBay / Internet including refunding shipping costs BOTH ways.
BUT we can not afford to be scammed! The said report, grades and retail value are too off to be our ring. We have no idea nor control to what have happened between:
"Ring duly arrived at a friends in Boston (we now live in Dublin, Ireland) TO: "and he sent it to Martin Haske in Brookline to have it checked out. The GAL cert said value was $50k which we knew was grossly inflated, but if the basic information had checked out we would have been satisfied. Mr Haske was a great help and went through everything on the phone with my husband"....
You see how many hands have touched this ring?
Do we have to trust all these hands and friends blind?
Who is wrong? The "Expert" who issued these funny grades (G-H-I....) and weights?
Or maybe he (the "Expert") is RIGHT! and the customer is honest but the friend is the mystery link here..

THAT IS WHY WE ASKED FOR 2 more reports and to send it directly to GAL!

REMEMBER!

THEIR REFUSAL TO SEND THE RING / CERTIFICATION FOR VERIFICATION AT THE ORIGINAL ISSUER - RAISED OUR RED FLAGS!

But now that they have refused all the above - You must ask yourself (after all - you all wanted to crucify us!) are they really honestly don't know or they are in on the scam with the "Friend" or the "Expert"...

YOU ARE THE JURY! - Any reasonable doubt yet?

BTW: Our warrantee policy which is attached to every ring CLEARLY states that the warrantee and return policy is VOID the moment a jeweler touches the ring!
You have a life time warrantee on the ring and ONLY we can fix it (for free). The only other entity that can touch the ring and even disassemble it - is an independent gemological lab that DO NOT sell jewelry.
As I said: We had only very few issues like this with other customers and only 3 are open cases! Hundreds others (including people with the same exact ring!) are more than happy.
David

 

[diamond4all]

Hi.
You guys are missing the point! and it is probably my fault for not spelling it out:
We have a "NO QUESTION ASKED RETURN POLICY" - she could have requested a refund FOR ANY REASON!!
Even if the reason is as simple as "It doesn't go well with my new shoes" - we have honored returns like this before - that is how you stay competitive in this business.
You just call in / email for a return authorization number!
The issue here is that based on the "Expert" report and in comparison to our stock and production documents (each stone above 0.50 carat is documented) these are not the specification we have on file for the ring in question.
We will go the extra mile for any and every customer - we have done that before - on and off eBay / Internet including refunding shipping costs BOTH ways.
BUT we can not afford to be scammed! The said report, grades and retail value are too off to be our ring. We have no idea nor control to what have happened between:
"Ring duly arrived at a friends in Boston (we now live in Dublin, Ireland) TO: "and he sent it to Martin Haske in Brookline to have it checked out. The GAL cert said value was $50k which we knew was grossly inflated, but if the basic information had checked out we would have been satisfied. Mr Haske was a great help and went through everything on the phone with my husband"....
You see how many hands have touched this ring?
Do we have to trust all these hands and friends blind?
Who is wrong? The "Expert" who issued these funny grades (G-H-I....) and weights?
Or maybe he (the "Expert") is RIGHT! and the customer is honest but the friend is the mystery link here..

THAT IS WHY WE ASKED FOR 2 more reports and to send it directly to GAL!

REMEMBER!

THEIR REFUSAL TO SEND THE RING / CERTIFICATION FOR VERIFICATION AT THE ORIGINAL ISSUER - RAISED OUR RED FLAGS!

But now that they have refused all the above - You must ask yourself (after all - you all wanted to crucify us!) are they really honestly don't know or they are in on the scam with the "Friend" or the "Expert"...

YOU ARE THE JURY! - Any reasonable doubt yet?

BTW: Our warrantee policy which is attached to every ring CLEARLY states that the warrantee and return policy is VOID the moment a jeweler touches the ring!
You have a life time warrantee on the ring and ONLY we can fix it (for free). The only other entity that can touch the ring and even disassemble it - is an independent gemological lab that DO NOT sell jewelry.
As I said: We had only very few issues like this with other customers and only 3 are open cases! Hundreds others (including people with the same exact ring!) are more than happy.
David

 

[Mara]

Honestly David...do you really think that someone interested in scamming you is going to come online to a forum like this, obviously distraught, and take the time to request help and/or advice on what next steps to take? Get a grip. How did you even find out that this poster had put their question here anyway? You just registered today!




The sale itself, all of $10k, probably does not represent that much to you in terms of revenue. Just take the ring back, cut your losses and move on. At this point is it really worth it to hassle and/or possibly go to court on this? Both parties feel wronged. Maybe in different ways they are.




Next time maybe you will enforce a positive feedback rule for eBay buyers, e.g. 10+ positive to bid on your auctions. That way trust will not be as much of an issue. Sounds like this has been a learning experience for everyone.

 

[strmrdr]

----------------
On 3/2/2004 1:38:27 AM Uncle Marty wrote:


Call Marty Haske.

----------------

I agree with uncle marty on that one.
He has seen the ring and I would be interested in hearing what he has to say about this whole mess.

He may be the best one to mediate this to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone involved.

 

[diamond4all]

Dear Mara.
Reading your remarkes it makes sense: They may be honestly posting their dissatisfaction on this forum. However, as I wrote on the pervious note:

BUT we can not afford to be scammed! The said report, grades and retail value are too off to be our ring. We have no idea nor control to what have happened between:
"Ring duly arrived at a friends in Boston (we now live in Dublin, Ireland) TO: "and he sent it to Martin Haske in Brookline to have it checked out. The GAL cert said value was $50k which we knew was grossly inflated, but if the basic information had checked out we would have been satisfied. Mr Haske was a great help and went through everything on the phone with my husband"....
You see how many hands have touched this ring?
Do we have to trust all these hands and friends blind?
Who is wrong? The "Expert" who issued these funny grades (G-H-I....) and weights?
Or maybe he (the "Expert") is RIGHT! and the customer is honest but the friend is the mystery link here..

THAT IS WHY WE ASKED FOR 2 more reports and to send it directly to GAL!

REMEMBER!

THEIR REFUSAL TO SEND THE RING / CERTIFICATION FOR VERIFICATION AT THE ORIGINAL ISSUER - RAISED OUR RED FLAGS!

How can you expect us to refund the money when all the red flags and flashing lights are telling us: too many hands and 4000 miles later - it is a totally different animal than we created with such dedication and love.
Please note again:
WE WERE READY TO REFUND THE MONEY LIKE WE DID FOR OTHER PEOPLE WHO AGREED TO SEND THE RING FOR VERIFICATION BACK TO G.A.L. OR PROVIDE US WITH EXTRA CERTIFICATES.
BUT THEY REFUSED.
CLOSE YOUR EYES. THINK ABOUT ALL THESE PEOPLE TOUCHING YOUR $10K RING - DAY AND NIGHT, THE PLACES IT HASE BEEN TRAVELED AND THE UNCERTAINTY YOU ARE FACING WHEN ASKED TO PAY BACK $10k WHILE RISKING TO GET BACK SOMETHING NOT EVEN CLOSE TO IT.
NOW: DON'T OPEN YOUR EYE YET!
THINK ABOUT ASKING THEM A SIMPLE REQUEST - VERIFICATION BY ISSUING 2 MORE CERTIFICATES (WHICH YOU WILL PAY FOR!!)- AND THEY REFUSED.
NOW OPEN YOUR EYES - AND JUDGE YOURSELF!

At this point:
We gave them our attorney information.
It's a free country!
They can go to him. To the authorities, to the media or use any other avenue.
We will defend our rights.

David

 

[chris-uk04]

YOU (diamond4all) talk about getting scammed, but there are some things that stand out to me as odd.

1. On the certificate, you say that one of the sidestones is 1.24 carats, yet it has dimensions of 6.1mm x 4.1mm. There is no mathematical way a round brilliant with those dimensions, even if it is the worst possible cut, can weigh 1.24 carats. I find that troubling.

2. If you are “worried you are getting an ole switcheroo” as you claim, you or the GAL should have inclusion plots to make sure you are getting the right diamond back. However, what if you have just made copies of certificates? You send the same ring to GAL to get appraised 3 times and then use the same appraisal in whatever you sell?

3. Now you have said that “warrantee policy which is attached to every ring CLEARLY states that the warrantee and return policy is VOID the moment a jeweler touches the ring!” – Why is that? So a ring one buys cannot be independently appraised? This certainly wasn't included in your guarantee which is listed on your bid page.

4. Why do you only do bank transfers? Is it so refunds are a lot harder to obtain when people find out that they have gotten junk and want a refund?

5. You sample certificates are nonsense too. If someone wants a different setting, that shouldn’t change the 4C’s of the diamonds. Either that is the 4C's of the three diamonds being sold or not. You try to pass of the certificate as what the people are getting. Either it is or it isn't. Selling as is exactly on the sample cert and the providing something inferior is fraud. Another note, why don’t you go to a more reputable appraisal than the GAL? That they appraise for Zales doesn’t carry much weight to non-idiots. This way you won’t have any disparity of claims.

 

[Uncle Marty]

Att: David of Diamond4all
Why mention you are a JEW.
Being a Jew does not give you any special rights in this country.
I too am a Jew and proud of my heritage but I never use my affiliation in correspondence.
Do you think it gives you a special badge to make disparaging remarks about the buyer and her well qualified appraiser. Marty Haske is above reproach.

What a load of double speak in your message on this chat room. You allude to maybe the buyer is a charlatan (look up the word) and wants to defraud you. And at the same time you suggest that people might change your diamond in a ring.
Then you make a remark about Mr. Haske being not qualified to identify the weight, clarity and color of your Diamonds and in the same breathe you claim that one has to be careful about switching Diamonds.


Why should anyone trust your choice of appraiser.
Since they are in your employ and paid by you are their findings really independent. I for one have never heard of your appraisal company. How about their names and qualifications. I would like to check them out since this fair lady is away from our shores.
You Mr. David, do not scare me with your claims and tactics.

To the unfortunate buyer of this possible under carated, over graded Diamond ring. I have been up all night thinking of how to help you out of your problem. I have known Marty Haske for years.
I suggest that you show him the diatribe (look it up) that Mr. David wrote about him on this informative chat room. Unfortunately you are too far away to see his blood pressure rise as he reads.

The suggestion by I believe is a lawyer is a good one and start documenting every comment inparticular writings and telephone calls. Hire Marty Haske as an expert witness. Do not expect anyone to work for free in your behalf. I can not talk for Marty but I would not expect him to deny you his expertise.

Mr. David should be shown the error of his ways.
We Jews do not use our higher authority as a crutch. I resent David using his Jewishness to prevent his crucifixation for his errors. Luckily for him the Romans and other Hebrews no longer resort to stoning.

To the unfortunate buyer of this ring. Contact all
publications possible over The Internet. They will love to have their readers know all about the once again possible fraud on the Internet. Afterall they advertise B&M stores in their publications and any bad information about the Internet sellers are good fodder for their readers.

Ask Marty Haske to call GIA for an appointment and ask Mr. David to attend the Grand unmasking.
And then publish their findings.

Surely Mr.David cannot find an error by the G.I.A. lab in NYC.

This all will take time but by this time the interest on your money will be accrueing. My a 25%
profit about the cost should be enough to pay Mr. Haske for his time. If not add your own money.
You can always pass the hat to interested e-Bay sellers and buyers.

In the future when you see a website promoting CZ Diamonds and giving them featured locations be wary.
Your big mistake was not by your loving husband to be buying the Diamond ring because he loves you and wants you to be happy and in turn make him happy to see your joy.

Next time ask a friend who bought a Diamond or genuine gemstone from a professional jeweler for a recommedation.

In summation : Do not ask for assistance from the FTC. You can file a report but they will not help you individually. If they have enough complaints against this company they might (yes might considering time and money available) start procedings against them but you will never see your money from this avenue. The FTC has no penalty for jewelers who do not follow their guidelines AND the sellers on e-Bay are aware of this. You can ask the JVC to assist you and it might work but more importantly I would think you would want to prevent
others from having the same problem. The JVC is noted to hide problems with jewelers under the rug, so no one finds out who are the bad guys.

Too bad, I joined them years ago, paid my dues and when i started asking too many questions I didn't like the answers.

I will not wish you Good Luck. Luck has nothing to do with your problem. You must perform the right action and teach those on e-Bay not to ask the almighty to save them.

Now I can go to sleep tonight.

One more thing. The person that suggested in this chat room that you might be a phoney should also be invited to attend the grand unmasking.

My love to you all. We are all G-ds children and we all err. The idea is not to err too often and certainly not to hurt our fellow man regardless of their religion, ethnic background, color of their skin, height, country of origin or any apparant differences from ours.

Uncle Marty of course

 

[phoenixgirl]

DublinGirl,

I don't envy you having to deal with someone who uses such misinformation and circular reasoning. If it's any consolation, no matter what the outcome of your dispute, this retailer is, ironically, giving itself negative press.

If you are able to leave a follow-up feedback message, you might want to say something like:

www.pricescope.com - search " chieshy " for story

Or maybe the whole link to this thread will fit.

That way anyone considering bidding on one of their items will see it if he or she bothers to check out their feedback. I certainly wouldn't buy from a vendor who reacted this way.

I once (stupidly) bought a pair of earrings off eBay -- purported to be H-I color but ended up being "O." When I left negative feedback (at which point the seller had the earrings back but would not give me my $ back), he responded by saying I was a "crybaby with buyer's remorse." I felt such vindication providing a link to the thread on DiamondTalk. I eventually got my money back, but I hope giving me the runaround for $250 was worth everyone who checks out his feedback having access to the details of correspondence . . . his condescendingly telling me that what I was paid was "awfully cheap" for "I" stones (oh, ok, then fraud is ok if you didn't make the reserve price high enough), his pretending to go on vacation, his hanging up on me, etc.

Anyway, I hope you can still resolve this peacefully, but at this point, if you're not going to get your money back anyway (which seems pretty obvious from what I could follow of the vendor's post), then hire that lawyer and file a claim.

The fact that they reposted the same auction means one of two things:

Either, they still have in their possession the original ring from the auction, the one with the stones of those odd proportions and exact carat weights, thus commiting fraud by sending you the wrong item, or

They use the same description for the same type of ring and do not hold themselves to the FTC standards for exact description, thus commiting fraud.

Again, so sorry you have to go through this, and let us know how we can help. Maybe we can all buy their stuff going for $4.99 and then, in the very unlikely event that we are unhappy with it, leave negative feedback. What do you think twenty negative feedbacks from established eBayers would do?

 

[phoenixgirl]

I just noticed that Diamonds4all sent me both of his/her double-posts via PM, ya know, cause posting each one twice wasn't enough. Well, at least you've got 'em frantic!

My brother is an attorney for the government with the CFTC. He prosecutes people who do this sort of thing with commodities and futures. Yes, people like this do get their just desserts from time to time! I'll ask him about your situation. If, as Diamonds4all mentioned, they have three disputes going on at once, then there is cause to suspect that this is a regular thing.

 

[AGBF]

diamond4all wrote:

"BTW: Our warrantee (sic) policy which is attached to every ring CLEARLY states that the warrantee (sic) and return policy is VOID the moment a jeweler touches the ring!"

You have no way of knowing whether a ring you sell is touched by a jeweler unless the customer volunteers the information. This clause is probably illegal. All dublingirl had to do was say nothing and send you the ring. Supposedly. OK. Let's see how honest you are. You said we were the jury. We just brought back our verdict. (Did I mention I am the foreman?) You're guilty. Return her money. Case closed.

 

[mhtv]

reading all the double talk and nonsense from diamond4all, it is clear that the Op's fears are true.

the return policy states return for any reason, but the seller excludes returning because the item is misrepresented???? because the buyer had it appraised?? the seller claims it is ok to return the item for NO reason, but not ok to return it for a GOOD reason????

btw, it is certainly proper to give a three grade range when appraising MOUNTED diamonds. the GIA use to advise using a 3 grade range for grading mounted goods. but this is irrelevant, since the policy allows a return for ANY reason, or even NO reason, but the seller refuses to honor this policy.

as for fears that the same diamonds may not be returned, obviously if the same item is not reurned, a refund is not due. but this is the case with ANY return, and the seller knows this before deciding to go in the business of selling online. either you have a return policy or you don't. but if you suck in buyers by having a return policy, and then you don't honor it. you are a scam. and even if you DON"T have a return policy, you must give a refund if the item is misrepresented. and giving a refund in the event of misrepresentation is the LEAST a seller could suffer for misrepreentation, as criminal charges are also a real possibility.

the buyer went thru the expense and effort of getting an appraisal before requesting a refund even though the return policy indicates that this is not even necessary to get a refund. yet the seller will not honor the stated return policy, and may also have misrepresented the item. that's the facts. and except for the misrepresentation, the seller acknowledges these facts, yet still refuses to act in accordance with the facts...that is, to make the refund with no further hassle, PERIOD.

 

[dublingirl]

Good morning everyone!
Well, this has grown legs! A couple of things stand out here. Firstly, we have had no contact WHATSOEVER with David "diamond4all". We have been trying to deal with the actual seller on e-bay whose auction it was. David's company manufactured the ring and "chieshy" is one of their selling agents on e-bay. We have had no communication with this man either directly or through the seller or through our square trade mediator. In fact, the Square Trade mediator informed us yesterday, that he would close down meditaion today because he had had no response from the seller despite repeated e-mails to her.
This is the first time we have seen any information coming from him or his company. We have certainly not refused to either send the ring back or contact his attorney. Our e-bay seller told us in an e-mail " I strongly recommend not to send the ring back until we come into a favorable conclusion". When my husband spoke to the seller by phone last friday she said that RTS were requesting that WE pay for another two appraisals. We have heard nothing from her since, despite repeated requests for communication from her.
Since the ring left the manufacturers it has been touched by just one person...Martin Haske. It remained it the package it was sent in and was forwarded as such. The implication that "many hands" have tampered with it is disgraceful. The ring is in a safe place in the US, not here in Ireland. And we are left speechless by the suggestion that the independent appraiser (not a jeweler) we chose to do a report for us is not anything other than 100% bona fide. I wonder has David even bothered to read to the bottom of our report to where Mr Haske's qualifications are noted.
Maybe, just maybe, this is all a matter of miscommunication between us, the e-bay seller and the manufacturer. But if, as David says, I could have returned the ring for refund if it didn't match my nailpolish, then why wasn't that offered? Maybe RTS should get in touch with our e-bay seller and ask her to relay this to us via the mediation or e-mail. We would be happy to sort this out quickly.
Thank you everyone for your suggestions, ideas and support. I will get in touch with the seller and David offline to try to sort this out rather than continuing in a public forum. I will let you know what happens,
caireann

 

[Nicrez]

Good Luck Dublin Girl! I hope this is all amicably resolved, but sadly, they sound like theyr are not quite as honest as they have posted. Seriously, I would try to speak to "David" and his people if you get no further response from the E-Bay seller. Then again, bad pres like Fox Five News is always another option...

 

[Mara]

DublinGirl...hang tight!!




Also Seven on your Side is a similar setup to Fox Five sounds like...they will investigate on your behalf and then air their findings on national television.

From what I have seen, involving a company like that usually gets the seller/vendor so freaked out at the bad press, they are more than willing to cooperate.




The bottom line is that you are unhappy with your purchase. You should get your money back. For the seller to implicate that you have somehow done something wrong to me is ridiculous. As the seller and an ADULT, stop pointing fingers, just honor your policy.




Lastly as was mentioned, if DG had not even come to this forum and posted her saga, no one would have known that a friend had the package. So how would the seller even have known unless she told them (obviously the wrong scenario since the seller is paranoid!!). I would think that postings such as this may be inadmissible in court anyway, so who's around to testify for the seller that she said that in the first place?

 

[valeria101]

This could all be a case of faulty communication: customer not having imagined that the seller could interpret his appraisal as an attempt to "taper" with the merchandise... etc. Is it?


No, Pricescope is not consumers' police by definition... And this whole story is to much of a mess already

Is there any way you, Diamonds4all could conceivably identify whether this is your ring in it's original state, even if it was shipped with the wrong papers (pairing the ring with the paper can be wrong in theory, I guess) or otherwise prove it is not ? Just curious.. DO your ring carry some kind of mark, or recognizable maker's sign ? I know it is hard to identify whether the setting has been altered to change stones.. etc, but not impossible in ALL case. I really hope it does not get to such technical investigation, though... Not to mention that such dispute (customer's "this is a scam, the merchandise was misrepresented" versus seller's "no way to say whether the ring was not tapered with") would be all but impossible to solve "virtually" and by no means Pricescope's call (as I think I know it).

Usually, the use of a return policy does not reach such heights of intricacy. Too bad it did now...

 

[Uncle Marty]

Dublin Girl et al,
I would like to see a copy of the grading certificate and appraisal Marty Haske sent you.

Please publish it for all to see.

Apparently David from Diamonds4all and the e-Bay seller is one and the same company. That is why he answered on this chat room, the way he did.

There is no wonder that some people think of Diamond sellers as being lower than worms. At least worms prepare the soil for plantings.

Uncle Marty of course

 

[Trinity]

I was thinking about buying off of e-bay, but not after reading this.
Also, the sellers that won't return the money will actually lose much more money than they realize. People who read posts and negative reviews like this seller received will not buy. In return, the seller will lose much more than the amount they are refusing to give back.

 

[Jennifer5973]

Mara said it best--she's not happy with the ring, so give her the %$#@! money back. That's the policy--honor it.

I can't evene BEGIN to comment on the reference to being a Jew. Part Jew and part Catholic, I find the whole manipulation of religion in a forum about diamonds utterly repugnant.

May we all wake up tomorrow with better priorities.

 

[pqcollectibles]

Diamond4All said:
"Our rings are appraised by one of the top five gemological labs in the industry. Their clientele include the Home Shopping Network and Zales."

WOW!!

I am VERY impressed!! We all know those Vendors are top notch and sell only the best quality!!!

Diamond4All said:
"We sold hundreds of rings with less than 0.5% dispute rate."

Gee,.... Could it be that 99.5% of your buyers are not knowledgeable about diamonds or saavy enought to get a 2nd opinion like DubinGirl did????

Diamond4All said:
"We have a "NO QUESTION ASKED RETURN POLICY" - she could have requested a refund FOR ANY REASON!!
Even if the reason is as simple as "It doesn't go well with my new shoes" - we have honored returns like this before - that is how you stay competitive in this business.
You just call in / email for a return authorization number!"

Ok,.... So DublinGirl could have returned the ring because it didn't match her new shoes, but she can't return the ring because she doesn't feel it represents a good value for the price paid???

You brought your counter argument to the wrong place, Bub! As the pic of YOUR Cert below shows, the side diamonds are clearly NOT approximately 1.25 carat weight. Most Newbies here can tell you, a 1.25 carat weight Round Brilliant diamond measures about 7mm in diameter. I know. I'm wearing a TRUE 1.25 carat weight diamond. 7.03mm avg diameter by 4.26mm total depth.

Give it up!! Return the money and take back the ring!!

 

[diamond4all]

People.
It was an experience to review all the opinions on this educated chat room. your support of a fellow consumer is moving, important and appreciated. As working for a jewelry manufacturer I may be a seller during the day but also a consumer after hours. I also buy on line many items from consumer electronics to stamps and hope there was such a chat room everywhere.
As for our case: I spoke this morning with both the husband and wife and agree that they will send it to GAL for evaluation and we will take it from there.
I now have a better idea: EBay has just started a new program (it's running a pilot program which is planed to DOMINATE the mainstream of jewelry sales on eBay this summer) that will eliminate such disputes and arguments regarding ring origin and the affects it has on accepting it as a legitimate return. To learn about the program please go to: http://pages.eBay.com/apj/index.html It's too late for this transaction but at least they gave their seal of aproval to one gem lab which they trust - IGI ( why not to GAL and Marty Haske as well? isn't it against fair trade? but that's a different issue)

Now,
I am pleading for your help - please suggest a solution for us to determined that the ring shipped back to us was not tempered with / changed by any one of the party/s involved?

I think that since eBay have decided that IGI is the best way to go - I am now asking for the ring to be sent to IGI (instead of GAL) for evaluation.
I officially declare that If the ring appraisal will match the GAL certificate. or that of Marty Haske (after all he is highly regarded by this chat room community) - A refund will be issue.
If it will match the GAL: Than it is our ring without any doubt and the customer is entitle to return it under our "No Question Asked" return policy.
If it will match the one of Marty Haske than I know Marty Haske got the ring he is describing in his appraisal and the missing link is not Marty Haske ( Who is highly regarded by this chat room community) nor the consumer (who I agree didn't "play" with the ring) but the "friend" or someone else. We will than investigate and go after that missing link..but will not hurt the customer of ours.

Thanks
David

 

[pqcollectibles]

Have the ring sent to Dave Atlas or Rich Sherwood. Both are Independent Appraisers. You can find either by clicking the Appraisers link at the top of the page. Dave Atlas is located in Pennsylvania and Rich Sherwood is located in Florida. Both have excellent credentials, as does Martin Haske, who is also a Price Scope approved Independent Appraiser.

For your convenience, here are links to their WebSites:

Rich Sherwood, http://www.sarasotagemlab.com/

and Dave Atlas, http://www.gemappraisers.com/.

Or choose any of the other Price Scope approved INDEPENDENT APPRAISERS.

 

[Uncle Marty]

Mr. David,

Why make this lady in Ireland go thru all these hoops?

JUST RETURN HER MONEY !!!!

You will pay for the additional appraisal from I.G.I plus the 25 % additionally if it found you misrepresented.

We are waiting to read your response.


Uncle Marty of course

 

[EdSkinner]

To diamonds4all. A "no questions asked" return policy, to me means, no questions asked. So why are you asking questions? You won't take credit cards or wait for a personal check to clear. Just deal in cash. It is charlatans like you that give a black eye to the entire industry. Give her her money back. From what I have read here you wouldn't know your own product if it bit you in the bum. So you have no argument as to who has seen the ring.

 

[chris-uk04]

You've still ducked a questioned from myself regarding the side stones on the certificate. How does a 1.24 carat have a diameter of 6.1 mm?

May I remind you of your guarantee?

"If for some reason you are not fully satisfied or the diamond does not match the grading report, return the merchandise without question asked and your money will be refunded in full less shipping and handling"

Now is this refund case be any different than any other diamond jewelery you sell? You have this satisfaction guarantee but you have no way of telling if you would EVER get the right diamond back. Do you claim tampering every time someone wants to return their jewelry? I don't see how you wouldn't because there is nothing to prevent you from doing the same thing. Your satisfaction guarantee is a complete sham. Where's the inclusion plots for the sidestones? What kind of Quality Assurance Plan do you have?

Stop trying to weasel around and honor your refund policy.

 

[fire&ice]

For pete's sake, I've never heard so much double talk in all my days. Just return the women's money. It's that simple. All this subterfudge about IGI GAL is just run around.

You keep saying that soooooo many people have touched the stone. Just one person, Marty Haske, who BTW has tons of creditials after his name, has touched the stone. Also, this is not a "chatroom" as you keep refering to it. This is a diamond education forum. We don't chat. We study diamonds. We put our money where our mouth is.

Geez, I often take the side of the vendor. I know there exist two sides. I don't see two side here. Your customer is unhappy & wants to return the ring under your umbrella of no questions asked policy. Instead of you honoring your policy, you point the heavy handed finger of fraud at *your* customer. You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[Nicrez]

Diamonds4all: If a person is not allowed to have anyone else "touch" the ring, as you say or the return is voided, how can the buyer then determine that YOU did not send them an article which does not match the certificate?




Basically you say that if you want it appraised, send it back to the same people who gave YOU the grading on the stone in the first place, because if it IS inflated, it will be inflated again, and then it will match and the buyer will agree it's the same as on the website. At what point is the buyer allowed to have the stone actually VERIFIED by an INDEPENDANT appraiser to determine that YOU didn't switch the stones? What it THEIR reassurance.




Sir, I have to say that if you truly are concerned with this, use the inclusion plots on your records of the "sold" stone and the inclusion plots from an independant appraiser to determine if the stones are indeed the same. I find you will see they are, and THEN you will have to put your policy where your mouth is!




No more talk. Just resolve this at your expense, and if they are NOT happy with the purchase you MUST keep your word and honor the policy. my suggestion, you ask your lawyer to write up a better policy for you in the future to prevent this from happening, or invest in a fingerprinting system for all your diamonds sold. Quick and easy.

 

[jcard71]

David from Diamonds4all YOU ARE A LOOOOOOSER!

Man, would I love to meet you in person!!!

 

[adamasgem]

Dear Mr Katz..

1) I have left a message for your attorney to call me such that we may discuss the issue of LIBEL..
and such that he can draw up a financial settlement and a release for me to sign..

2) I have requested of my client that they send the ring, not to an "appraiser" of your choosing,
but to the Jeweler's Vigilance Commitee attorney, in New York City

At which time they will probably have the ring evaluated by the JVC's independent appraiser, and the side stones removed for weighing.. I DO NOT doubt that they will NOT match the 1.24 and 1.25 carat weights as sold, nor will they be graded as SI1's.

At which time, I again, do not doubt that the NYS Attorney General will undoubtedly get involved

3) I also suggest strongly that your 25% guarantee on Ebay item 2683501312 also be honored, per my valuation and your over 200% limitation on Ebay.

4) I also suggest STRONGLY, that your" inflated appraisal lab" look into New York City ordanances
requiring a missing statement on the "appraisal" you supplied at the time of sale..

5) I would also suggest that you discuss with your attorney, whether or not your knowingly inflated appraisals, used to induce a sale, could be considered as expressed warranties under the UCC or NYS stautes.. and subject you to trebel damages for consumer fraud..

Very Truly Yours

Martin D. Haske GG (GIA), NGJA, ISA Appraisal Trained, BS/MS(MIT)

 

[adamasgem]

----------------
On 3/2/2004 11:58:44 PM diamond4all wrote:

People.


I think that since eBay have decided that IGI is the best way to go - I am now asking for the ring to be sent to IGI (instead of GAL) for evaluation.


Thanks

David


----------------

The Fox guarding the chicken coop ...