GIA cert wrong vs. Martin fuller apprasial.

[bigsparkles]

I have been holding off on posting this for many reasons. 1, I wasn’t sure whether or not I wanted to keep the stone and second, I wanted to find another stone before I posted. But then I thought, well Pricescopers can help me find a new stone 
The story…
I bought a 3 carat J/Si1/med flour from James Allen over a month ago. I was very excited!!! As soon as I could get an appointment with Martin Fuller, an appraiser that was recommended from doing a search on Pricescope, I took the appt with excitment. So I went to appt with my bf bright and early… and here is what happened…
First thing that was alarming to Martin-- Martin thought it was the wrong stone that JA had shipped because the plotting from the GIA cert was sooo different than the actual stone. After 30 minutes into the appointment, we all realized there was a GIA laser inscription in the stone and we validated that it was in fact the stone that was on the cert. Martin said it was an SI2 in his opinion and that the GIA, though rare, he had never seen this, totally mismapped the stones inclusion. He said the mapping of inclusion is some what objective, but they were grossly wrong in mapping the inclusion. I bought the stone, based on the GIA cert, and of course with my eye would never have known the difference.
I then thought of the quality control at JA. I spoke with 2 GIA gemologists at JA and they never once mentioned that there were inclusions in the middle of the table or alerted me to any of the differences from the stone to the cert. I guess when you are spending 31K for a product you are not able to see in person; you have to really trust the vendor. I am not saying I distrust them, but I am weary of the fact that they spoke to me several times but never mentioned inclusions right in the table. After the appointment with Martin I called Jim Schultz from JA, and he hesitantly agreed to refund the appraisal fee, should I decide to keep it or return it.
I look at the stone, and I find it very beautiful but I have a different feeling towards it since I now know that it should be an SI2. I am also concern because I paid for an si1 stone but got an SI2 stone.
My budget is 30K
What would you guys do? I want honest opinions, Would you start your search over again?
I also took some pictures of the stone in an overcast day. Let me know if I am going crazy but do you see any haziness to the stone? I don’t know what I am really looking for, and to be honest the appointment with Martin was so focused on the misrepresentation of the plotting that we didn’t really talk about the fluorescence. I took these pics by the window which looks clearer but if I sit on the couch, by the window, there is some purple/blue haze? Is that an effect of the fluorescence? To be fair, Martin said, he has never seen this in his years of practice, so I believe this is very uncommon.

 

[ame]

Me personally, I would not only return it, I'd start over at another vendor. Even if I knew I had to pay more for the same elsewhere. I wouldn't be able to just accept that I overpaid for a lesser clarity stone and knowing full well what's there that is misrepresented on the report. It's no longer mind-clean.

The hesitance to refund the appraisal fee to confirm you got what you paid for bothers me a great deal, he should have immediately said "if you don't love it please return it, I will have your refund sent as soon as we receive it OR if you keep it Ill send you a refund for the amount of the appraisal right away." There should be zero hesitation, just bending over backwards and total embarrassment in his behavior and reaction, and I don't know how he behaved to you but your description makes me think he's trying to blow it off. And while I would not think Jim would be that way, it would really bother me if it turns out he was in this instance.

This is exactly why we always say on here to get an independent appraisal. It confirms you got what you actually bought.

 

[OcnGypZ]

Was this stone "in stock" at JA or did they call it in for you?

Can you post the two plots?

 

[Seashell12]

Sorry to hear that. I can imagine your disappointment.

I had the same experience. Thought my stone not so expensive than yours, but last Friday I went to appriser to evaluate my diamond and he said it's SI2 (in GIA report was SI1). Probably GIA is not so strict in now days as before.


But from your story, i understand that your stone is completely different that in GIA report?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

To be honest, we have read here many times that it is hard to get an eye clean SI1 at three carats. I really recommend going to below 3 carats and getting a VS2. I do find it troublesome that the gemologists at JA did not call attention to the clarity issues.

 

[CaprineSun]

Sorry this happened to you. I would be very disappointed as well. I, too, was very disappointed with my stone after an appraisal (although my circumstances are slightly different).

If you are still within the return period, I say return it and see if a well-cut stone of the specs you initially asked for is available-- with a return of the appraisal fee, as Ame mentioned.

That diamond is gorgeous, though. Very beautiful. I don't see a haziness.

 

[plummiecat]

I would definitely return the stone. The fact that the mapping of the inclusions on the cert is very different from the actual inclusions in the stone is very unsettling. It makes the entire GIA report suspect.

 

[cmaha33]

I purchased a diamond from Blue Nile in January based on a clarity grading of IF from GIA. One of the trusted Pricescope appraisers looked at it last week and said it is actually a VVS2, in his opinion. Although I like the stone, I no longer love it as I once did, especially since I paid for an IF, and not a VVS2. Unfortunately, I am past the return period, so I will have to trade it in and take a loss when I find another stone

 

[MissStepcut]

I purchased a diamond from Blue Nile in January based on a clarity grading of IF from GIA. One of the trusted Pricescope appraisers looked at it last week and said it is actually a VVS2, in his opinion. Although I like the stone, I no longer love it as I once did, especially since I paid for an IF, and not a VVS2. Unfortunately, I am past the return period, so I will have to trade it in and take a loss when I find another stone

Slight threadjack, but before you go get another IF diamond, remember that IFs are only flawless under 10x magnification. So when you're buying an IF diamond, it's not absolutely flawless, it just doesn't have any flaws visible at 10x.

 

[cmaha33]

"Slight threadjack, but before you go get another IF diamond, remember that IFs are only flawless under 10x magnification. So when you're buying an IF diamond, it's not absolutely flawless, it just doesn't have any flaws visible at 10x. "

Miss Stepcut,

Yes, that is what I am hoping....I realize that clarity is determined under 10x, and the Pricescope appraiser did state in the appraisals for my two side diamonds that the exam was performed under 40x. I am going to call him next week to see what magnification he used for the major stone. Thank you for confirming my suspicion about how he arrived at his conclusion about the clarity.

 

[kelpie]

I've used Martin and would rely on his opinion.

 

[Seashell12]

Does standard exist for clarity? I thought it based on opinion a few people.

 

[Karl_K]

A one grade difference in considered a difference in opinion between 2 graders and is accepted in the industry.
The JA gemologists likely didn't have the report in front of them.
They likely pulled the stone, noted the answers to your questions and returned it to its place in the safe.
A full exam is unlikely.

Someone above mentioned that they doubted the entire report because the plot was not accurate.
I feel the same way.

To the person that bought the fl and the appraiser rated it a vvs2 have you contacted bluenile?
You may have recourse under your states consumer protection laws and or credit card if you used one if they do not take it back. How long has it been?
They may require a second opinion, I would use Dave Atlas for this.
He is experienced in this area. Just make sure the appraiser is being paid by you and working for you.
While Dave is going to be honest and call it like it is no matter what there is a conflict of interest that could be a problem in court if you want to use him as an expert witness.

 

[MissGotRocks]

Is the stone eyeclean to you in normal viewing? I'm confused about the under the table inclusions - could you see them before or is it that you now know they are there? Can you see them now? Did Martin see these inclusions at 10x magnification? Seems a bit confusing to me. I'd need more clarification I think before I threw in the towel on the stone. The clarity grade is assigned at the 10x magnification level. Hard to say what you might see there at 30x - know what I mean? And nothing against Martin Fuller - he is a highly regarded appraiser - I just don't think this all reads as clear as it could be.

If the inclusions are eye visible, then I'd be inclined to return the stone too. If not, well, you have a GIA cert that assigns the SI1 clarity grade and if you ever upgraded, JA would have to credit you for a SI1 stone. The biggest question is whether or not you are happy with the stone.

 

[MissStepcut]

Does standard exist for clarity? I thought it based on opinion a few people.

That's definitely the tricky part. Clarity is, IMO, even more subjective than color. My diamond came back from a respected appraiser with a higher clarity grade than GIA. Of course, consumers are going to be more upset in the inverse situation, but I don't think it really means anyone was wrong or lied... except in OP's case, where the plot is apparently wrong. Sounds like a mix-up even.

edit: pre-empted by Karl

 

[Karl_K]

"Slight threadjack, but before you go get another IF diamond, remember that IFs are only flawless under 10x magnification. So when you're buying an IF diamond, it's not absolutely flawless, it just doesn't have any flaws visible at 10x. "

Miss Stepcut,

Yes, that is what I am hoping....I realize that clarity is determined under 10x, and the Pricescope appraiser did state in the appraisals for my two side diamonds that the exam was performed under 40x. I am going to call him next week to see what magnification he used for the major stone. Thank you for confirming my suspicion about how he arrived at his conclusion about the clarity.

It is common to use higher power to find and inclusions then back off to a lower power to see if it is still visible when grading diamonds of higher(some do so for all) clarity.

 

[cmaha33]

Hi, Karl_K. I purchased the diamond from Blue Nile in January via another jeweler because it was a trade-up; so, I would have to go through the jeweler, who in turn, would have to contact Blue Nile. And, coincidentally, my appraiser is indeed Dave Atlas, so I will have to wait and see what he says next week .

 

[Karl_K]

Hi, Karl_K. I purchased the diamond from Blue Nile in January via another jeweler because it was a trade-up; so, I would have to go through the jeweler, who in turn, would have to contact Blue Nile. And, coincidentally, my appraiser is indeed Dave Atlas, so I will have to wait and see what he says next week .

That sounds like a mess, I am confident Dave can guide you through it.
I would listen to him if it was mine.

 

[bigsparkles]

There are a few things I've learned:
1) GIA can be wrong--You cant always rely on the cert to buy a stone. One of the downfalls of buying from the internet.
2) You cant always rely on the Vendors in-house gemologist
3) Always get your stone independently appraised.

I will post the GIA cert with the plotting from Martin Fuller so you can see the difference.

 

[bigsparkles]

A part of a note from Martin Fuller

 

[bigsparkles]

I also want to note on the GIA cert:Comments: Additional clouds are not shown.

When I spoke with Jim Schultz, he said, that comment covers the other inclusions that are not mapped. That seems unfair to consumers, that GIA can do that.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I also want to note on the GIA cert:Comments: Additional clouds are not shown.

When I spoke with Jim Schultz, he said, that comment covers the other inclusions that are not mapped. That seems unfair to consumers, that GIA can do that.

my wife's 3ct SI1 have the same comment.i guess they don't want a ugly looking GIA map.

 

[MissGotRocks]

A part of a note from Martin Fuller

Is Martin's picture taken at 10x magnification?

 

[fabulousfindk]

"I no longer love it as I once did, especially since I paid for an IF, and not a VVS2."

With ALL due respect, really, I will never understand this sentiment!

I know JA has an awesome return policy, and the perhaps the QA process is not as stringent as when they're inspecting a stone in a setting they created.

But I don't think that an appraiser not agreeing with a GIA certificate is terribly uncommon, and it doesn't necessarily imply foul play or an attempt to mislead you by the vendor at all.

If you love it in person, who cares what the numbers are? I guarantee you, no one will ever ask you the diamond's clarity grade when you're showing it off in the ring.

On the other hand, I do understand that when you're spending a large chunk of hard-earned $$ on something, you want the best quality you can get. But take your time and decide whether you really like it or not, regardless of what the lab cert does or does not say.

 

[atp223]

How does it look to your eyes? It looks really pretty in the pictures! I think 31k for a 3 ct stone (if eye clean/not hazy) seems like a great deal. It lookee very white in those pics!

If you like it besides the discrepancy, maybe you can see if JA would refund your money as far as the dif btwn si1 and si2 pricing, or maybe they can send it back to the GIA lab for you to have it re-graded...and if it comes back different, THEN JA can give you a partial refund. Just some thoughts, if you objectively like the appearance of the stone...

 

[bigsparkles]

Thanks atp223, I actually asked JA, if they would sent it off to GIA to get it re-certified and they said that it will most likely not happen because 1) its not their stone -- the cutter would have to send it off, and Jim said the cutter would def. not do it 2) someone will most likely buy it as it is, w/o the recertification.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

My opinion changes a little now knowing the GIA cert said additional clouds not shown. That is a red flag that indicates everything is not plotted on the inclusion map. An appraiser can be wrong, too. Their opinion doesn't necessarily mean more than the gemologist at GIA. This is subjective, and as Karl said, it is accepted that grading can differ by one level and still be acceptable.

So I do think it boils down to whether you loved the stone before the appraisal. If so, then I'd just keep it and insure with the sales receipt and GIA report.

 

[Amys Bling]

My opinion changes a little now knowing the GIA cert said additional clouds not shown. That is a red flag that indicates everything is not plotted on the inclusion map. An appraiser can be wrong, too. Their opinion doesn't necessarily mean more than the gemologist at GIA. This is subjective, and as Karl said, it is accepted that grading can differ by one level and still be acceptable.

So I do think it boils down to whether you loved the stone before the appraisal. If so, then I'd just keep it and insure with the sales receipt and GIA report.

Great insight

 

[Karl_K]

I also want to note on the GIA cert:Comments: Additional clouds are not shown.

When I spoke with Jim Schultz, he said, that comment covers the other inclusions that are not mapped. That seems unfair to consumers, that GIA can do that.

Did Martin find all the inclusions that are plotted? and what does he say about the additional clouds not shown?
The inclusions he found do not look like clouds to me but there may be more that don't show in the photo.
Do they to him?

 

[Gypsy]

My opinion changes a little now knowing the GIA cert said additional clouds not shown. That is a red flag that indicates everything is not plotted on the inclusion map. An appraiser can be wrong, too. Their opinion doesn't necessarily mean more than the gemologist at GIA. This is subjective, and as Karl said, it is accepted that grading can differ by one level and still be acceptable.

I agree.