Should I be upset about this diamond I JUST purchased?

[1stTimeRockHunter]

I was looking to buy a diamond from White Flash and was given a recommendation for a second stone that was similar but little more affordable. The rep said that either diamond would be a great choice.

The diamond I was considering:
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3195401.htm

The diamond she suggested:
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3172009.htm

After long thought I opted to go with her suggestion and paid by wire (yesterday). Today I come across a video on their YouTube page (that I had never been to before) with a video of my diamond in it. Showing a cloudy/milky stone, should I be upset about this? Being that it was her suggestion and never brought to my attention. Should the cloudiness be considered a non-factor? Any and all help is appreciated. Here is the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-sA8arpTW4&list=UUNT4iR5wjkFkI8DRn9cLW8A

 

[kenny]

I'd stop the sale if they haven't shipped yet, or return it if they have.

It is unfortunate they put this diamond into the inventory of their their second-teir brand Expert Selection.

An expert would not select an SI1 diamond with the following comment, "The clarity grad is based on clouds that are not shown." especially after seeing that video.
Diamonds with that note are sometimes cloudy diamonds, like this example.
It is particularly unfortunate they used it in a video of what to avoid in a diamond.

I doubt this would qualify as an ACA stone, and the video reveals this one is so cloudy that I'm surprised they let that into their Expert Selection category.

I love WF, but IMO this does not reflect well on WF's reputation.
I don't run WF, but if I did I'd sell this diamond off at whatever I could get for it to another business.

Of course, another way to look at is is you are getting a larger stone for a budget, but IMO the cloudiness is not something I could overlook.

 

[Cricketcat]

Yes. Call WF immediately. If it has already shipped, I would ask if they could have it routed back to them. Please keep us posted.

 

[JulieN]

Have them swap it for your original choice.

 

[AprilBaby]

Your original choice is a beauty!

 

[Dancing Fire]

Your original choice is a beauty!

Yup!

 

[Sunstorm]

Yes, most definitely swap it for your first pick, I am quite surprised they recommended the second stone to you that you ended up buying. Definitely stop the purchase if you still can or exchange it.

 

[1stTimeRockHunter]

Yes. Call WF immediately. If it has already shipped, I would ask if they could have it routed back to them. Please keep us posted.

Luckily it hasnt shipped, I was having them hold it until I picked my setting. I will def keep you posted! Hopefully this gets resolved.

Have them swap it for your original choice.

Im afraid that is what I may have to do. I have a bad tast in my mouth now, but have only heard good things about WF. Surprised this is going down this way.

Your original choice is a beauty!

Thanks! I guess I shouldve went with my gut

Yes, most definitely swap it for your first pick, I am quite surprised they recommended the second stone to you that you ended up buying. Definitely stop the purchase if you still can or exchange it.

I am now surprised too, Kenny said it best when he was suprised that this made it to their expert selection. Hopefully this is just a small mishap. I hope I can get this cleared up easily.

I'd stop the sale if they haven't shipped yet, or return it if they have.

It is unfortunate they put this diamond into the inventory of their their second-teir brand Expert Selection.

An expert would not select an SI1 diamond with the following comment, "The clarity grad is based on clouds that are not shown." especially after seeing that video.
Diamonds with that note are sometimes cloudy diamonds, like this example.
It is particularly unfortunate they used it in a video of what to avoid in a diamond.

I doubt this would qualify as an ACA stone, and the video reveals this one is so cloudy that I'm surprised they let that into their Expert Selection category.

I love WF, but IMO this does not reflect well on WF's reputation.
I don't run WF, but if I did I'd sell this diamond off at whatever I could get for it to another business.

Of course, another way to look at is is you are getting a larger stone for a budget, but IMO the cloudiness is not something I could overlook.

Kenny it sounds like we are on the exact same page, not knowing exactly what a cloud would look like, I was shocked when I realized the diamond in the video was the diamond I bought. I went from a high of all highs from knowing I had the diamond I wanted, to almost feeling taken advantage of. Something like this is what I feared in buying online. Im sure it was just an overlook/miscommunication, it just really sucks

I was told the reason it wasn't consider an ACA was "because it was .1% off for the crown", making it a great deal. No mention if it looking hazy like it does.

 

[kenny]

Kenny it sounds like we are on the exact same page, not knowing exactly what a cloud would look like, I was shocked when I realized the diamond in the video was the diamond I bought. I went from a high of all highs from knowing I had the diamond I wanted, to almost feeling taken advantage of. Something like this is what I feared in buying online. Im sure it was just an overlook/miscommunication, it just really sucks

I was told the reason it wasn't consider an ACA, was "because it was .1% off for the crown", making it a great deal. No mention if it looking hazy like it does.

IMO, they should have mentioned it.

I totally understand how you feel.
Again, I love WF because I bought an ACA from them, which is superb!!!, and have read this forum for 10 years and 99.9999% of customer transactions with WF goes smoothly and people love their diamonds, settings, service and price.
Every vendor rips a stinky a fart now and then.
Sorry you were in the room when this one got out.

Overall I'd still buy from WF and recommend them.
But they should certainly open a window. WHEW!

 

[marcy]

Your original pick looks like a real beauty. I would be pretty unhappy with the cloudiness of the other one.

 

[1stTimeRockHunter]

Kenny it sounds like we are on the exact same page, not knowing exactly what a cloud would look like, I was shocked when I realized the diamond in the video was the diamond I bought. I went from a high of all highs from knowing I had the diamond I wanted, to almost feeling taken advantage of. Something like this is what I feared in buying online. Im sure it was just an overlook/miscommunication, it just really sucks

I was told the reason it wasn't consider an ACA, was "because it was .1% off for the crown", making it a great deal. No mention if it looking hazy like it does.

IMO, they should have mentioned it.

I totally understand how you feel.
Again, I love WF because I bought an ACA from them, which is superb!!!, and have read this forum for 10 years and 99.9999% of customer transactions with WF goes smoothly and people love their diamonds, settings, service and price.
Every vendor rips a stinky a fart now and then.
Sorry you were in the room when this one got out.

Overall I'd still buy from WF and recommend them.
But they should certainly open a window. WHEW!

HAHA thanks Kenny, I needed that laugh. It is pretty smelly in here

Hopefully I cant stick with WF and feel happy with the purchase I end up making.

Your original pick looks like a real beauty. I would be pretty unhappy with the cloudiness of the other one.

Yeah I had my hopes up. Im partially thankful I caught it now before it was sent to me.

 

[leyhuong]

This is the first time I actually see a cloudy diamond rating SI1. It amazes me how bad SI1 could look if the diamond plot is so clean with a comment 'cloud is not shown' for a SI1.

Really unacceptable for the salesperson to advise you to go with the SI1 in this case. However, if there is a 'next time', you should ask them to make a short video like the one you shared with us earlier before you buy. The website right now has not changed the purchase status yet. I hope you stop them in time. Good luck.

 

[sarahb]

OP, do not fret or worry re your transaction w/ WF. They are superb when it comes to providing customer satisfaction & will do anything to make sure you get what you want. Many here who have purchased & even those who have not, can testify to the level of respect this company has on this forum, their quality product & treatment of their customers. This is but a small issue, & to me, the one time out of a 100 transactions, something didn't quite go right (re the recommendation). No worries here, you can rest easy.

 

[kmarla]

I was just researching cloudy diamonds and this recent link popped up. I think it may actually be referring to your diamond. I hope it's okay for me to attach it. I wish you all the best and echo the advice of the previous posters about exchanging the diamond for your first choice. All the best!!

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/[/URL]

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I was looking to buy a diamond from White Flash and was given a recommendation for a second stone that was similar but little more affordable. The rep said that either diamond would be a great choice.

The diamond I was considering:
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3195401.htm

The diamond she suggested:
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3172009.htm

After long thought I opted to go with her suggestion and paid by wire (yesterday). Today I come across a video on their YouTube page (that I had never been to before) with a video of my diamond in it. Showing a cloudy/milky stone, should I be upset about this? Being that it was her suggestion and never brought to my attention. Should the cloudiness be considered a non-factor? Any and all help is appreciated. Here is the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-sA8arpTW4&list=UUNT4iR5wjkFkI8DRn9cLW8A

1st TimeRockHunter,
I am truly sorry this happened to you. Rest assured we will take care of you.

This case does call up an issue that we need to deal with internally, and it will be my intention to make the necessary changes that this issue will not repeat itself.

It is known that cloud based clarity grades in Si stones can sometimes result in loss of transparency. We screen for this in our A CUT ABOVE brand.

Our team will deal with this first thing in the morning and someone will be in touch with you tomorrow with a resolution that will be beneficial to you.

My sincere apologies for your distress. I certainly understand your feelings.

 

[Diamondbug]

Woohoo lets hear it for Whiteflash and their customer service!!

 

[Sunstorm]

I was absolutely sure that Bryan would offer his help and support being the cool guys he is.)

 

[1stTimeRockHunter]

OP, do not fret or worry re your transaction w/ WF. They are superb when it comes to providing customer satisfaction & will do anything to make sure you get what you want. Many here who have purchased & even those who have not, can testify to the level of respect this company has on this forum, their quality product & treatment of their customers. This is but a small issue, & to me, the one time out of a 100 transactions, something didn't quite go right (re the recommendation). No worries here, you can rest easy.

I have heard many of these great reviews which is what led me to go with them vs. a competitor I was considering. I am hopeful it will all work out.

I was just researching cloudy diamonds and this recent link popped up. I think it may actually be referring to your diamond. I hope it's okay for me to attach it. I wish you all the best and echo the advice of the previous posters about exchanging the diamond for your first choice. All the best!!

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/[/URL]

WOW that does look to be the diamond I purchased. In the pictures it looks just like it does in the video. I understand SI1 isn't the greatest clarity but am suprised how cloudy/hazy/milky the diamond looks. It also seems as if the buyer that started that thread was told the same thing I was told. He also mentions that he "did ask why the diamond had missed the ACA designation and was told that it was a near miss due to the crown angle...", I find it hard to believe if the crown angle was .1% different this would be consider and ACA diamond. Great find though!

I was looking to buy a diamond from White Flash and was given a recommendation for a second stone that was similar but little more affordable. The rep said that either diamond would be a great choice.

The diamond I was considering:
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3195401.htm

The diamond she suggested:
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3172009.htm

After long thought I opted to go with her suggestion and paid by wire (yesterday). Today I come across a video on their YouTube page (that I had never been to before) with a video of my diamond in it. Showing a cloudy/milky stone, should I be upset about this? Being that it was her suggestion and never brought to my attention. Should the cloudiness be considered a non-factor? Any and all help is appreciated. Here is the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-sA8arpTW4&list=UUNT4iR5wjkFkI8DRn9cLW8A

1st TimeRockHunter,
I am truly sorry this happened to you. Rest assured we will take care of you.

This case does call up an issue that we need to deal with internally, and it will be my intention to make the necessary changes that this issue will not repeat itself.

It is known that cloud based clarity grades in Si stones can sometimes result in loss of transparency. We screen for this in our A CUT ABOVE brand.

Our team will deal with this first thing in the morning and someone will be in touch with you tomorrow with a resolution that will be beneficial to you.

My sincere apologies for your distress. I certainly understand your feelings.

Hi Texas Leaguer, I have seen your informative posts throughout the forum but had no idea you were affiliated with WF. I appreciate your reassurance in being taken care of. Until now I had nothing negative to say about WF. The rep working with me has been informative and has made it known she wants my business (which I appreciate). I didn't realize that this diamond had haze and don't know how I would've known until told/seen pictures of it (or seeing the video on the YouTube page). Maybe I should take partial fault for not asking if the diamond was hazy? I have been looking for a different diamond than the one I picked. I would ideally like to stay with WF and look forward to working this out. Thanks again for reaching out, I will sleep a little easier tonight.

Woohoo lets hear it for Whiteflash and their customer service!!

Ill join in

I was absolutely sure that Bryan would offer his help and support being the cool guys he is.)

Im assuming Bryan is Texas Leaguer? It was nice that he reached out.

This is the first time I actually see a cloudy diamond rating SI1. It amazes me how bad SI1 could look if the diamond plot is so clean with a comment 'cloud is not shown' for a SI1.

Really unacceptable for the salesperson to advise you to go with the SI1 in this case. However, if there is a 'next time', you should ask them to make a short video like the one you shared with us earlier before you buy. The website right now has not changed the purchase status yet. I hope you stop them in time. Good luck.

I was torn between the two (also considering another SI1 before narrowing it down to the two). I like the savings with going with an SI1 but am shocked that a diamond like this would be a WF ACA like I was told. Maybe the rep simply overlooked it, but from it being sent back at least once already (as seen in the thread posted before^) I am surprised this wasn't brought up.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

The H stone is not an ACA, it's ES. The sales reps cannot possibly know every stone in inventory and remember every video. They have the same info you do and based on the numbers, that is why it didn't make ACA. All of that was true. That stone looks totally clear in the daylight images, so I would not be surprised for someone to buy it and be happy since rarely do we have spot lights shining on our rings! But certainly I personally would not look at an SI1 based on clouds not shown. Did you post it here for comments before buying? Because I think someone would have caught the clarity notation and warned you to check it out further.

Regardless, WF is great at customer service and I think the extra for VS2 and ACA is very worth it in my opinion!

 

[1stTimeRockHunter]

The H stone is not an ACA, it's ES. The sales reps cannot possibly know every stone in inventory and remember every video. They have the same info you do and based on the numbers, that is why it didn't make ACA. All of that was true. That stone looks totally clear in the daylight images, so I would not be surprised for someone to buy it and be happy since rarely do we have spot lights shining on our rings! But certainly I personally would not look at an SI1 based on clouds not shown. Did you post it here for comments before buying? Because I think someone would have caught the clarity notation and warned you to check it out further.

Regardless, WF is great at customer service and I think the extra for VS2 and ACA is very worth it in my opinion!

You are correct, the H stone is an ES not ACA. I was told it had missed being an ACA due to it crown angle being off .1%

I did make a thread asking for opinions on the stones, the only negative thing brought up about the stone is the fact that the crown angle was off:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/[/URL]

I am not here blaming the rep or anyone, including myself that it wasn't seen sooner. I am not sure what information the rep has at her disposal. I also can't say that the flaw (cloudiness) is only seen under spotlight. The diamond I purchased was set and Im assuming another PS'er received the diamond and was not happy with it:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/[/URL]

At this point I think you are right, if I do end up keeping my purchase with WF, I will have to choose and ACA diamond.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

The H stone is not an ACA, it's ES. The sales reps cannot possibly know every stone in inventory and remember every video. They have the same info you do and based on the numbers, that is why it didn't make ACA. All of that was true. That stone looks totally clear in the daylight images, so I would not be surprised for someone to buy it and be happy since rarely do we have spot lights shining on our rings! But certainly I personally would not look at an SI1 based on clouds not shown. Did you post it here for comments before buying? Because I think someone would have caught the clarity notation and warned you to check it out further.

Regardless, WF is great at customer service and I think the extra for VS2 and ACA is very worth it in my opinion!

You are correct, the H stone is an ES not ACA. I was told it had missed being an ACA due to it crown angle being off .1%

I did make a thread asking for opinions on the stones, the only negative thing brought up about the stone is the fact that the crown angle was off:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/[/URL]

I am not here blaming the rep or anyone, including myself that it wasn't seen sooner. I am not sure what information the rep has at her disposal. I also can't say that the flaw (cloudiness) is only seen under spotlight. The diamond I purchased was set and Im assuming another PS'er received the diamond and was not happy with it:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/[/URL]

At this point I think you are right, if I do end up keeping my purchase with WF, I will have to choose and ACA diamond.

1stTimeRockHunter,
I have already been in touch with the leadership team about this issue and there will be a nice resolution offered to you tomorrow.

Furthermore, I can report that there will be a change in our ES category inspections that will screen any stones that have a detectable transparency issue. In this respect the requirement will be the same for ES as it is for A CUT ABOVE going forward. Any diamonds that have this issue will be downgraded to Premium Select and there will be notes available in our system so that all consultants understand the reason for the stone being in that category when everything else may be within ACA or ES guidelines. Over the next few weeks we will be reviewing all of the Si diamonds in our ES category and any others found to have this property will be downgraded accordingly.

It is true that hard lighting accentuates this issue-the kind you see in some of the photography and videography that we do. We will add inspection in hard light to our gemological evaluations when a stone is suspected of having this issue.

We apologize again for the concern this has caused you, and we thank you in advance for allowing us to correct our mistake, and for giving us an opportunity improve as a company.

 

[1stTimeRockHunter]

The H stone is not an ACA, it's ES. The sales reps cannot possibly know every stone in inventory and remember every video. They have the same info you do and based on the numbers, that is why it didn't make ACA. All of that was true. That stone looks totally clear in the daylight images, so I would not be surprised for someone to buy it and be happy since rarely do we have spot lights shining on our rings! But certainly I personally would not look at an SI1 based on clouds not shown. Did you post it here for comments before buying? Because I think someone would have caught the clarity notation and warned you to check it out further.

Regardless, WF is great at customer service and I think the extra for VS2 and ACA is very worth it in my opinion!

You are correct, the H stone is an ES not ACA. I was told it had missed being an ACA due to it crown angle being off .1%

I did make a thread asking for opinions on the stones, the only negative thing brought up about the stone is the fact that the crown angle was off:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/[/URL]

I am not here blaming the rep or anyone, including myself that it wasn't seen sooner. I am not sure what information the rep has at her disposal. I also can't say that the flaw (cloudiness) is only seen under spotlight. The diamond I purchased was set and Im assuming another PS'er received the diamond and was not happy with it:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/[/URL]

At this point I think you are right, if I do end up keeping my purchase with WF, I will have to choose and ACA diamond.

1stTimeRockHunter,
I have already been in touch with the leadership team about this issue and there will be a nice resolution offered to you tomorrow.

Furthermore, I can report that there will be a change in our ES category inspections that will screen any stones that have a detectable transparency issue. In this respect the requirement will be the same for ES as it is for A CUT ABOVE going forward. Any diamonds that have this issue will be downgraded to Premium Select and there will be notes available in our system so that all consultants understand the reason for the stone being in that category when everything else may be within ACA or ES guidelines. Over the next few weeks we will be reviewing all of the Si diamonds in our ES category and any others found to have this property will be downgraded accordingly.

It is true that hard lighting accentuates this issue-the kind you see in some of the photography and videography that we do. We will add inspection in hard light to our gemological evaluations when a stone is suspected of having this issue.

We apologize again for the concern this has caused you, and we thank you in advance for allowing us to correct our mistake, and for giving us an opportunity improve as a company.

TL,
I appreciate your urgency regarding this issue bud don't want you to feel like this issue has to be resolved today. I look forward to hearing from them tomorrow.

The change is great news! I'm sure it will be a good amount of work to go through all of the SI1 diamonds but will definitely improve customer experience. I'm sure the consultants would also love to know these issues to be able to make the best recommendation possible. Thanks again for the communication.

 

[LLJsmom]

The H stone is not an ACA, it's ES. The sales reps cannot possibly know every stone in inventory and remember every video. They have the same info you do and based on the numbers, that is why it didn't make ACA. All of that was true. That stone looks totally clear in the daylight images, so I would not be surprised for someone to buy it and be happy since rarely do we have spot lights shining on our rings! But certainly I personally would not look at an SI1 based on clouds not shown. Did you post it here for comments before buying? Because I think someone would have caught the clarity notation and warned you to check it out further.

Regardless, WF is great at customer service and I think the extra for VS2 and ACA is very worth it in my opinion!

You are correct, the H stone is an ES not ACA. I was told it had missed being an ACA due to it crown angle being off .1%

I did make a thread asking for opinions on the stones, the only negative thing brought up about the stone is the fact that the crown angle was off:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/[/URL]

I am not here blaming the rep or anyone, including myself that it wasn't seen sooner. I am not sure what information the rep has at her disposal. I also can't say that the flaw (cloudiness) is only seen under spotlight. The diamond I purchased was set and Im assuming another PS'er received the diamond and was not happy with it:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/[/URL]

At this point I think you are right, if I do end up keeping my purchase with WF, I will have to choose and ACA diamond.

1stTimeRockHunter,
I have already been in touch with the leadership team about this issue and there will be a nice resolution offered to you tomorrow.

Furthermore, I can report that there will be a change in our ES category inspections that will screen any stones that have a detectable transparency issue. In this respect the requirement will be the same for ES as it is for A CUT ABOVE going forward. Any diamonds that have this issue will be downgraded to Premium Select and there will be notes available in our system so that all consultants understand the reason for the stone being in that category when everything else may be within ACA or ES guidelines. Over the next few weeks we will be reviewing all of the Si diamonds in our ES category and any others found to have this property will be downgraded accordingly.

It is true that hard lighting accentuates this issue-the kind you see in some of the photography and videography that we do. We will add inspection in hard light to our gemological evaluations when a stone is suspected of having this issue.

We apologize again for the concern this has caused you, and we thank you in advance for allowing us to correct our mistake, and for giving us an opportunity improve as a company.

TexasLeaguer, you are graciousness and professionalism itself. I am so impressed by your integrity and commitment to excellence. It is apparent to me why whiteflash exhibits the excellent customer service I had the pleasure to receive when this tone and expectation is exemplified and set at the highest levels. People/companies make mistakes often times inadvertently. But that you take this opportunity to make changes to improve the company as a whole, speaks volumes. I feel fortunate to have found WF through PS.

 

[AprilBaby]

That's pretty impressive!

 

[marcy]

TexasLeaguer, I am impressed you take the time during off hours to check on issues for your customers. I am more impressed you are willing to re-evaluate your ES Si diamonds so another customer won't end up with this same issue when purchasing an ES diamond from Whiteflash. I have bought 4 pieces from Whiteflash now and had excellent customer service each time. Your beautiful diamonds and jewelry will draw customers but taking care of your customers like this will keep them coming back.

Marcy

 

[Texas Leaguer]

The H stone is not an ACA, it's ES. The sales reps cannot possibly know every stone in inventory and remember every video. They have the same info you do and based on the numbers, that is why it didn't make ACA. All of that was true. That stone looks totally clear in the daylight images, so I would not be surprised for someone to buy it and be happy since rarely do we have spot lights shining on our rings! But certainly I personally would not look at an SI1 based on clouds not shown. Did you post it here for comments before buying? Because I think someone would have caught the clarity notation and warned you to check it out further.

Regardless, WF is great at customer service and I think the extra for VS2 and ACA is very worth it in my opinion!

You are correct, the H stone is an ES not ACA. I was told it had missed being an ACA due to it crown angle being off .1%

I did make a thread asking for opinions on the stones, the only negative thing brought up about the stone is the fact that the crown angle was off:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/[/URL]

I am not here blaming the rep or anyone, including myself that it wasn't seen sooner. I am not sure what information the rep has at her disposal. I also can't say that the flaw (cloudiness) is only seen under spotlight. The diamond I purchased was set and Im assuming another PS'er received the diamond and was not happy with it:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/[/URL]

At this point I think you are right, if I do end up keeping my purchase with WF, I will have to choose and ACA diamond.

1stTimeRockHunter,
I have already been in touch with the leadership team about this issue and there will be a nice resolution offered to you tomorrow.

Furthermore, I can report that there will be a change in our ES category inspections that will screen any stones that have a detectable transparency issue. In this respect the requirement will be the same for ES as it is for A CUT ABOVE going forward. Any diamonds that have this issue will be downgraded to Premium Select and there will be notes available in our system so that all consultants understand the reason for the stone being in that category when everything else may be within ACA or ES guidelines. Over the next few weeks we will be reviewing all of the Si diamonds in our ES category and any others found to have this property will be downgraded accordingly.

It is true that hard lighting accentuates this issue-the kind you see in some of the photography and videography that we do. We will add inspection in hard light to our gemological evaluations when a stone is suspected of having this issue.

We apologize again for the concern this has caused you, and we thank you in advance for allowing us to correct our mistake, and for giving us an opportunity improve as a company.

TL,
I appreciate your urgency regarding this issue bud don't want you to feel like this issue has to be resolved today. I look forward to hearing from them tomorrow.

The change is great news! I'm sure it will be a good amount of work to go through all of the SI1 diamonds but will definitely improve customer experience. I'm sure the consultants would also love to know these issues to be able to make the best recommendation possible. Thanks again for the communication.

Yes, we have 89 Si diamonds in stock in the Expert Selection category so it will take some time to work through them. Although I don't expect to find more than one or two that have a similar issue, it is important to do the sweep so that we can be sure. And as you point out, another important part of the fix is to make sure the consultants understand the precise reasons for any downgrades. Although they all work out of our offices and can look at the stones for themselves, they also spend some hours telecommuting. And although they can always ask for a stone to be pulled for examination, they should have this information upfront so they can make the best recommendations.

Thanks again for your patience and your understanding comments.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

The H stone is not an ACA, it's ES. The sales reps cannot possibly know every stone in inventory and remember every video. They have the same info you do and based on the numbers, that is why it didn't make ACA. All of that was true. That stone looks totally clear in the daylight images, so I would not be surprised for someone to buy it and be happy since rarely do we have spot lights shining on our rings! But certainly I personally would not look at an SI1 based on clouds not shown. Did you post it here for comments before buying? Because I think someone would have caught the clarity notation and warned you to check it out further.

Regardless, WF is great at customer service and I think the extra for VS2 and ACA is very worth it in my opinion!

You are correct, the H stone is an ES not ACA. I was told it had missed being an ACA due to it crown angle being off .1%

I did make a thread asking for opinions on the stones, the only negative thing brought up about the stone is the fact that the crown angle was off:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-pick-the-stone-i-buy-tomorrow.207461/[/URL]

I am not here blaming the rep or anyone, including myself that it wasn't seen sooner. I am not sure what information the rep has at her disposal. I also can't say that the flaw (cloudiness) is only seen under spotlight. The diamond I purchased was set and Im assuming another PS'er received the diamond and was not happy with it:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-is-hazy-milky-no-fluorescence-am-i-crazy.206282/[/URL]

At this point I think you are right, if I do end up keeping my purchase with WF, I will have to choose and ACA diamond.

1stTimeRockHunter,
I have already been in touch with the leadership team about this issue and there will be a nice resolution offered to you tomorrow.

Furthermore, I can report that there will be a change in our ES category inspections that will screen any stones that have a detectable transparency issue. In this respect the requirement will be the same for ES as it is for A CUT ABOVE going forward. Any diamonds that have this issue will be downgraded to Premium Select and there will be notes available in our system so that all consultants understand the reason for the stone being in that category when everything else may be within ACA or ES guidelines. Over the next few weeks we will be reviewing all of the Si diamonds in our ES category and any others found to have this property will be downgraded accordingly.

It is true that hard lighting accentuates this issue-the kind you see in some of the photography and videography that we do. We will add inspection in hard light to our gemological evaluations when a stone is suspected of having this issue.

We apologize again for the concern this has caused you, and we thank you in advance for allowing us to correct our mistake, and for giving us an opportunity improve as a company.

TexasLeaguer, you are graciousness and professionalism itself. I am so impressed by your integrity and commitment to excellence. It is apparent to me why whiteflash exhibits the excellent customer service I had the pleasure to receive when this tone and expectation is exemplified and set at the highest levels. People/companies make mistakes often times inadvertently. But that you take this opportunity to make changes to improve the company as a whole, speaks volumes. I feel fortunate to have found WF through PS.

LLJsMom,
I am humbled by your comments and frankly a little bit embarrassed to receive such praise given the circumstances!

To Kenny, DiamondSeeker, OVI, DiamondBug, Marcy, Sarahb,AprilBaby, et al, thank you for your supportive comments as well. While WF has always been devoted to making sure we did everything in our power to give our customers a brilliant experience, we have not always succeeded in doing that. It's convenient to argue that no company can get it right 100% of the time, but we decided a couple of years ago to make an all-in commitment to the customer experience, quality control and constant improvement. We codified our Core Values approach to running our business, and we committed to and achieved ISO9000 certification. That one-two punch makes us very sensitive to any non-conformities (to use an ISO term) and gives us specific steps to evaluate, document and correct problems that inevitably arise in running a business. Using this approach most problems are caught BEFORE they impact the customer. Because this is very much a team commitment and every one of our employees is involved in the process, when a customer is impacted by an error on our part, we all take it very personally.

We will make this right for 1stTimeRockHunter and our goal is to move forward as an improved company as a result. Thank you all.

 

[canvasback]

I must say, having personally dealt with Bryan, Becca, and a couple people on the custom production team at WF, I am continually impressed. I am joyed that not a single customer falls through the cracks, and that every effort is made to make the buying experience wonderful. Not only do they offer a world-class product in their signature stone, I would say their customer service is "A Cut Above" as well. Good job Whiteflash!