Swap-A-Roo = Not for You?

[maplefemme]

This is really getting beyond ridiculous everyone. Really. As I've clearly stated since the beginning, this was a final sale purchase not contingent upon a 3rd party appraisal.

That being said, when MF initially emailed with the results of the GIA report she asked if we would consider allowing her to trade the stone for a different one (she didn't ask for a refund, the subject of a refund never came up). She asked for a different stone and we told her yes. We also told her that, though the sale wasn't contingent on an appraisal and was a final layaway sale, we would do anything it took to find a resolution they were both happy with. Again, there was no request for a refund. Her SO then emailed us to say he's not interested in a different stone and would like a credit back for the grading discrepancy and we agreed, reducing the price of the stone in accordance with the GIA report. Again, he did not ask for a refund. We complied with his request and adjusted the price to what all parties felt was fair for a near 3ct, GIA S/T colored diamond.

At no point along the way did either MF or her SO request a refund, or express to us that a refund was their preferred resolution.

Though it was a final sale, we were willing to look at and consider all options.

Now, it seems the consensus is that, as a vendor we should have insisted upon refunding their money even though they didn't ask for a refund? We are a business, and as such it's our desire for clients to keep their purchases. We complied with everything this client asked for. Our understanding was that they loved the stone despite the GIA report, and just wanted a price adjustment for the discrepancy in grading. We never had any reason to believe otherwise until this thread, 2 months after we closed the transaction.

Now, 2 months later, as a result of this thread we should, again, engage this client and insist upon a refund? MF emailed us earlier this week again requesting a trade, and discussed it with her SO. YET AGAIN, neither has requested a refund.

I understand the desire on a consumer forum to sympathize with and side with the consumer. I agree with that approach. But the things being represented on this thread are not black and white and there have been many inaccuracies posted.

This thread has taken a huge toll on Grace and I. We're giving serious consideration to whether we want to participate in the PS community any longer, not to mention serious thought as to where we take our business from here. To think that the general expectation is that, despite a contract and our offer to do anything to make the situation right for a client, then agreeing to a resolution that's their idea, it's still not enough. To think that small businesses nowadays are expected to essentially offer a no expiration, whenever you feel like it, refund policy where not only do we revisit closed transactions but we also reach out to clients and insist that they accept refunds even when they haven't asked for one is simply and utterly beyond me.

Though I know I'm not the sympathetic party in this mess, this thread has discouraged and upset me to a point where I simply can't participate any longer. MF and her SO are welcome to contact us privately and we will work with them towards a resolution that is fair for all parties. In fact, anyone who wants should feel free to do so, as we won't be revisiting this thread for updates.

I'm done.

I was very specifically told by Grace that a refund was not an option for us when I let her know about the GIA grade, I still have the email, it was very clearly stated. That is why we never asked because we were already told we couldn't have one. You stated yourself in this thread earlier, that we couldn't have one, only last night did you change your mind and state it was in fact possible.

I got your email this morning. We have emailed Victor and I will call him today and make arrangements for your courier to pick up it at a time that is both convenient for you and Victor.

I do not wish for you to leave PS, that would be very unfortunate. I am, to my knowledge, the only PSer who has had a discrepancy with you on a purchase, and it's being remedied now. All of your other transactions have had stellar reviews and it's why we went with you in the first place.

Regards...

 

[ericad]

This was after you kept telling them a refund would not be possible after purchasing with layaway. Why would they think they could ask for a refund??

This is false. We never told her a refund would not be possible. You are mistaken. We never denied her a refund because the subject of a refund was never broached. Your assertion that we repeatedly denied them a refund is completely and utterly fabricated. Please stop repeating this false information.

So you do offer refunds on layaway items?

Layaways, by definition are non-refundable. I've been very clear about this - it's a general policy. But given this situation, with the lab discrepancy, we told MF that we would do anything they wanted to make it right. We would have refunded their money if that's what they wanted, but this is not what they requested. I'm not sure how many more ways or more times I can say this. If MF assumed we wouldn't be open to waiving our policy and issuing a refund, therefore didn't ask for one, that's not within my control.

If I purchase something that I feel was misrepresented, and no longer wanted that item, I would ask for a refund. If I purchased something that I felt was misrepresented but I still wanted to keep the item, but receive a partial refund to compensate for the discrepancy, I would ask for that.

As I'm sure you know, Maisie, we are very open with our policies and do everything we can to be flexible for people. We've had clients enter into layaways, who needed to cancel them and we've always done everything to accommodate such requests. So even though our layaway agreement states certain terms, we have made exceptions many times for people depending on the situation.

 

[ericad]

This is really getting beyond ridiculous everyone. Really. As I've clearly stated since the beginning, this was a final sale purchase not contingent upon a 3rd party appraisal.

That being said, when MF initially emailed with the results of the GIA report she asked if we would consider allowing her to trade the stone for a different one (she didn't ask for a refund, the subject of a refund never came up). She asked for a different stone and we told her yes. We also told her that, though the sale wasn't contingent on an appraisal and was a final layaway sale, we would do anything it took to find a resolution they were both happy with. Again, there was no request for a refund. Her SO then emailed us to say he's not interested in a different stone and would like a credit back for the grading discrepancy and we agreed, reducing the price of the stone in accordance with the GIA report. Again, he did not ask for a refund. We complied with his request and adjusted the price to what all parties felt was fair for a near 3ct, GIA S/T colored diamond.

At no point along the way did either MF or her SO request a refund, or express to us that a refund was their preferred resolution.

Though it was a final sale, we were willing to look at and consider all options.

Now, it seems the consensus is that, as a vendor we should have insisted upon refunding their money even though they didn't ask for a refund? We are a business, and as such it's our desire for clients to keep their purchases. We complied with everything this client asked for. Our understanding was that they loved the stone despite the GIA report, and just wanted a price adjustment for the discrepancy in grading. We never had any reason to believe otherwise until this thread, 2 months after we closed the transaction.

Now, 2 months later, as a result of this thread we should, again, engage this client and insist upon a refund? MF emailed us earlier this week again requesting a trade, and discussed it with her SO. YET AGAIN, neither has requested a refund.

I understand the desire on a consumer forum to sympathize with and side with the consumer. I agree with that approach. But the things being represented on this thread are not black and white and there have been many inaccuracies posted.

This thread has taken a huge toll on Grace and I. We're giving serious consideration to whether we want to participate in the PS community any longer, not to mention serious thought as to where we take our business from here. To think that the general expectation is that, despite a contract and our offer to do anything to make the situation right for a client, then agreeing to a resolution that's their idea, it's still not enough. To think that small businesses nowadays are expected to essentially offer a no expiration, whenever you feel like it, refund policy where not only do we revisit closed transactions but we also reach out to clients and insist that they accept refunds even when they haven't asked for one is simply and utterly beyond me.

Though I know I'm not the sympathetic party in this mess, this thread has discouraged and upset me to a point where I simply can't participate any longer. MF and her SO are welcome to contact us privately and we will work with them towards a resolution that is fair for all parties. In fact, anyone who wants should feel free to do so, as we won't be revisiting this thread for updates.

I'm done.

I was very specifically told by Grace that a refund was not an option for us when I let her know about the GIA grade, I still have the email, it was very clearly stated. That is why we never asked because we were already told we couldn't have one. You stated yourself in this thread earlier, that we couldn't have one, only last night did you change your mind and state it was in fact possible.

I got your email this morning. We have emailed Victor and I will call him today and make arrangements for your courier to pick up it at a time that is both convenient for you and Victor.

I do not wish for you to leave PS, that would be very unfortunate. I am, to my knowledge, the only PSer who has had a discrepancy with you on a purchase, and it's being remedied now. All of your other transactions have had stellar reviews and it's why we went with you in the first place.

Regards...

Please respond directly to Grace via email rather than via this thread, if you haven't done so already, to make the specific arrangements.

I've reviewed the same emails as you, MF, and I interpret them very differently. At the end of the day perhaps we are faced with a difference in communication style. We felt we opened the door to a refund scenario and that you didn't step through it, but rather decided that you want to keep the stone as long as the price was adjusted. Truly, we would have refunded your money 2 months ago if we believed that's what you wanted. That's why we offered to ship you the stone round trip at no cost, prior to Victor setting it, so that you could see it in person and decide whether to keep it before committing to the setting, which you declined. We honestly believed that you loved the stone and wanted to keep it, despite the GIA report, so we worked with you to make that happen.

What I stated in every post on this thread is that the sale was non-refundable, HOWEVER we made an offer to you to do whatever you wanted to make it right. We may not have been explicit in saying so, but by that we meant even waiving the usual policy for a refund if that's what you wanted. Had you even once expressed a desire to unwind the sale, we would have bought back the stone.

From the vitriolic posts by other PS'ers on this thread, I know that we will not be believed by many in this regard, however I assure you I'm being sincere. But despite the many positive experiences posted here, and lack of a single negative client review, I'm so very disheartened to see that we were not given the benefit of the doubt.

We wish you the best of luck in finding a new stone for your amazing setting, and hope to find a new home for this beautiful and special diamond.

 

[movie zombie]

ericad, this is not the first time a vendor has been publicly brought to task at pricescope.....and it too was re a stone on layaway. like you, the vendor made it good....and then changed policy. it is a fact of life that businesses do so in response to the market.

 

[ericad]

ericad, this is not the first time a vendor has been publicly brought to task at pricescope.....and it too was re a stone on layaway. like you, the vendor made it good....and then changed policy. it is a fact of life that businesses do so in response to the market.

Our layaway policy is sound and we have no plans to change it. As I stated, we try to be flexible on a case by case basis, but layaways will continue to be final sale. What we have changed, which we implemented before this thread, is that, going forward, both JbEG owned and consignment goods will be accompanied by lab reports or appraisal documents. From this point forward, any piece sold on layaway that includes papers will be held to the terms of the contract. Buyers always have (and always have had) the option of using an independent appraiser prior to committing to a purchase (with no money even changing hands). We also allow clients to purchase goods on a credit card, utilize the inspection period, then return it to us for a credit card refund and then we put it on layway for them so that they can see it first. We customize every buying experience to the needs of the client, and have always done so.

To my knowledge we have the most flexible policies of any other seller of comparable size. While many want to hold us to the policy standards of big vendors like WF, GOG, BGD, etc. (GIA or AGS only, lengthy return periods, capacity to issue indefinite returns, etc.), the fact is that we are not a seller of that scale. We are a small internet business and every day we just do our best to make people happy, keep our inventory fresh, and keep little pieces of history alive. We pride ourselves on our fairness and honesty, and seeing our integrity questioned so quickly by people who have never done business with us (even worse is to see our integrity questioned by people who have done business with us, and have directly benefited from and appreciated our flexibility) is what's been most difficult.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

I've read through all this. What a mess. I realize MF is in Canada and JbEG is in the US, so phone call costs can be a factor, but seems like this should be a situation that might be best discussed over the phone? Was all communication done by email? Just something for everyone to consider when making purchases or discussing options. It IS nice to have everything documented in writing, so it seems it would have been best for verbal communication with a follow-up email in writing. I guess the main reason this came to mind is that, now that there is serious business taking place, as in the stone being returned, this new resolution is being conducted through forum responses.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

I am sorry for all that has gone on. Yes two sides. I hope all works out. I can't wait for pics!!!

I am a huge fan of OEC's and OMC's. Have a new ( to me ) ring posted in SMTB..

I have never ever seen a GIA cert for these stones. EGL is by and large the accepted lab for them. It's the standard, right or wrong, but that's the way it is..

Link? I just looked but couldn't find the thread!

 

[Kaleigh]

I am sorry for all that has gone on. Yes two sides. I hope all works out. I can't wait for pics!!!

I am a huge fan of OEC's and OMC's. Have a new ( to me ) ring posted in SMTB..

I have never ever seen a GIA cert for these stones. EGL is by and large the accepted lab for them. It's the standard, right or wrong, but that's the way it is..

Link? I just looked but couldn't find the thread!

It's titled Kaleigh's ring? Prob on page 2? I can bump it for you...

 

[MichelleCarmen]

I am sorry for all that has gone on. Yes two sides. I hope all works out. I can't wait for pics!!!

I am a huge fan of OEC's and OMC's. Have a new ( to me ) ring posted in SMTB..

I have never ever seen a GIA cert for these stones. EGL is by and large the accepted lab for them. It's the standard, right or wrong, but that's the way it is..

Link? I just looked but couldn't find the thread!

It's titled Kaleigh's ring? Prob on page 2? I can bump it for you...

ahhh, oh my that is INCREDIBLE! Gorgeous...

Not sure why I couldn't find it the first time, but my brain isn't all together at the moment. lol Okay, I am off to go back and drool some more.

 

[ericad]

And using GIA master stones and SAYING that you do, but then loupe-holeing to say that the STANDARDS are EGL standards regardless of the stones is frankly wrong.

This diamond's color, graded upside down under a proper grading lamp using a proper set of grading cz's, fell right between a GIA M and N (we told MF this). It had less body color than the N grading stone. Because we use EGL, we estimated the color to be L/M because that's what we felt EGL would grade it. We then took it one step further and graded it against other certed stones. We then asked 2 jewelers to also grade the stone against their own grading stones and other lab certed stones and they concurred with our grading, so we felt we were accurately representing the color. I stand by our process and think that we did everything reasonable to accurately represent an uncerted diamond.

When the diamond came back from GIA we were stunned. Clearly I and our two jewelers got it wrong. We immediately acknowledged this to MF and apologized profusely. To this day I don't understand how it happened, but I look forward to receiving the stone back so that I can learn from it. And as I've said before, we are now sending all stones to EGL for a lab report so that we are never again accused of intentional misrepresentation.

It's interesting to me that, despite our reputation, the conclusion most people come to is that, based on this one transaction, we are shady, dishonest, or as one poster so eloquently put it, "crap". We are a fairly new business, learning as we go, and we are human and make mistakes. The grading discrepancy was simply a mistake, which we acknowledged and tried to remedy the moment it happened. To date, we're still very sorry and very confused by it, but we've taken steps to ensure it will never happen again. That won't help restore the business we may have lost as a result of this thread, however we will move onward and continue to build our long list of happy and satisfied customers. Our heartfelt thanks to the clients who have emailed us with their support as a result of this thread. We greatly appreciate each and every one of you.

 

[maplefemme]

Everything is moving forward privately and positively...
For the last time, I will reiterate, I was told in written response that a refund was NOT possible, but they would do their very best to keep this a positive experience for me. I don't know how I could have misread that statement, it was very clear.

But I want to move on and give JbEG the courtesy of not rehashing more.

Thank you everyone...

 

[galeteia]

I have read through this entire thread in one sitting, and my takeway is this: JbEG is a flexible, accommodating, gracious, and overall spectacular vendor. I am impressed with how Erica has handled the situation, the unfair judgments by PSers based off of partial/incorrect information stemming from a miscommunication, and what to them would look like an otherwise happy customer who suddenly changed their mind and dragged them into a public forum to discuss it.

Kudos to you, Erica. You have shown yourself to be an exemplary vendor.

Maplefemme, I understand that there were misunderstandings that resulted in your overall unhappiness and I am glad that you have been again offered the choice to make it right, now that they know your true feelings, even months after the transaction was closed. An engagement ring is a very emotional choice and I completely understand how distressing this must have been for you.

Full disclosure: I have no connection to either party in this thread, this is just an outside observation purely based on the information contained in this thread.

 

[makemepretty]

Everything is moving forward privately and positively...
For the last time, I will reiterate, I was told in written response that a refund was NOT possible, but they would do their very best to keep this a positive experience for me. I don't know how I could have misread that statement, it was very clear.

But I want to move on and give JbEG the courtesy of not rehashing more.

Thank you everyone...

Hope you find the stone of your dreams.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

It's interesting to me that, despite our reputation, the conclusion most people come to is that, based on this one transaction, we are shady, dishonest, or as one poster so eloquently put it, "crap". We are a fairly new business, learning as we go, and we are human and make mistakes. The grading discrepancy was simply a mistake, which we acknowledged and tried to remedy the moment it happened. To date, we're still very sorry and very confused by it, but we've taken steps to ensure it will never happen again. That won't help restore the business we may have lost as a result of this thread, however we will move onward and continue to build our long list of happy and satisfied customers. Our heartfelt thanks to the clients who have emailed us with their support as a result of this thread. We greatly appreciate each and every one of you.

Yeah, I kinda wonder about keeping this thread going or up on the forum, for that matter. Again I think that earlier on, once contact was made between you and MF that all communication on PS should have been taken offline and the thread closed. I know others may not agree with this, but we're talking about a huge financial purchase and should have been discussed privately. Maybe I should have pushed the concern button? I doubt JbEG will loose business over this b/c you do have an excellent reputation and people have heard great things about you. Also, MF has handled herself with much care, so really, both of you have proven to be as professional as possible, however, all of us are SO opinionated lol that we jumping aboard w/our views didn't really help at all. JMO.

 

[ericad]

[ETA, I forgot to hit quote, this is in response to MF's last post]

And again, I will reiterate that those were not the exact words used, and it's not what we intended to communicate to you. There's nothing more I can say about it, MF.

Here are direct quotes from the email in question. I see now that, depending on one's position, it could have been interpreted many ways, and I apologize that we weren't more clear in our communications with you. I thought it was obvious that we were pointing out terms of the layaway so that you'd understand we were showing a willingness to waive these terms. We should have been more straightforward.

From your original email, notifying us of the GIA results:

[Edited to remove MP's quote per dreamer's advice]

From our response to you:

"We are certainly most happy to accept the 2.93 in trade and send you the 2.67 instead. "

"Having said all that, N****, I want to work on a solution that would work for you, and best of all, make you happy."

"Considering that lay-away items are final sale items, and that the sale was not made contingent upon a 3rd party independent appraisal, I hope you understand that we are doing our VERY best in keeping this a positive experience for you."

"Perhaps we should send you the stone first before its set so that you get to see it in person first and spend some time with it?"

"Its a beautiful stone, it truly is. And that is why I have no hesitations about taking it back and adding it to our current inventory."

"We stand by our promise and commitment to making (and keeping) you happy."

"We will resolve this, one way or the other - I promise you this."

"OK - I will wait and see what you both decide. If you both wish to see the stone first, I will pay to have it shipped to you and back to Victor, if you like. Im sure that will help. The last thing I want you to feel is left out in the lurch - we will make this right."

 

[Dreamer_D]

All the most beloved PS vendors have had a thread like this Erica. Not this exact issue, mind, but similar. How a vendor handles themselves when these sorts of situations tells us more about their reliabilty and trustworthiness than 100 positive threads. So though I am so certain it is painful, I am equally certain Erica that this thread has done no harm to your reputation. I am not an invested party -- not a client or a particular friend of MP (though she seems like a very nice person of course ) but I too think you handled yourself with grace in this thread, and I applaud the outcome.

MP I am glad you have your refund

ETA: Erica you might want to edit and delete MP's commentary in your above post, it is generally agreed it is not a good idea for vendors to quote their clients (assumed) private emails.

 

[yssie]

Cheers for resolution on both sides! And ditto Dreamer - these threads do happen, and you've handled your company's reputation well Erica Maplefemme I'm glad you and SO have the ending you want, and can now move forward!

I know GIA will accept re-submissions if the client feels the grading is off - perhaps something to seriously consider for this stone. From my understanding grading these lower colours is rather more guesswork than the regular D-J, and so it's certainly possible the GIA graders *were* off - they're just humans too! An O/P would be well within acceptable ''appraiser error' margin, even Q/R...


Edited for spelling*

 

[ericad]

I know GIA will accept re-submissions if the client feels the grading is off - perhaps something to seriously consider for this stone. From my understanding grading these lower colours is rather more guesswork than the regular D-J, and so it's certainly possible the GIA graders *were* off - they're just humans too! An O/P would be well within acceptable ''appraiser error' margin, even Q/R...

I was thinking along these lines too, Yssie. When the stone comes back, we'll again bust out the master set and go through the same motions to make sure we weren't having an off day. I will be the first to admit if it was a clear cut error, but if I still feel strongly that the body color doesn't merit an S/T grade, we may resend it to GIA.

Grace and I look forward to being reunited with this stone. And if in fact it is more tinted than we originally thought, we have a fab setting idea in mind, halo'd in white melee using two fancy yellow french cut side stones...I'm getting all tingly just thinking about it.

Taking a deep breath now and focusing on moving forward. Sorry for my earlier temper tantrum (goodbye, cruel pricescope!) - one thing that Grace and I always say we need to work on is getting less attached to our stones and our transactions. We take each one so personally, and it's difficult to make sound business decisions while balancing that level of sensitivity. We are working on it.

 

[Laila619]

Erica, I honestly don't think anyone is questioning your or Grace's integrity. No worries there! It's PS, you know people are going to have opinions. It doesn't mean anyone thinks you're bad or shady!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Erica, I honestly don't think anyone is questioning your or Grace's integrity. No worries there! It's PS, you know people are going to have opinions. It doesn't mean anyone thinks you're bad or shady!

In fairness, some people did use those terms Take your lumps Erica, PS is a double edged sword for vendors. Hopefully the benefits outweight the negatives for those who can survive the scrutiny.

 

[ericad]

ETA: Erica you might want to edit and delete MP's commentary in your above post, it is generally agreed it is not a good idea for vendors to quote their clients (assumed) private emails.

Done, thanks for the advice. The last thing I want to do is step in it again, lol.

As a result of going back and re-reading our emails many times these past 2 days, putting myself in Grace's shoes and in MF's shoes, I do see how the misunderstanding happened. I interpreted the emails after having the benefit of private conversations with Grace 2 months ago, where we decided that we'd bend the rules of the layaway agreement and give MF whatever resolution she wanted (even if that meant buying the stone back out of our pocket, since we already remitted proceeds to our seller). We also, obviously, hoped that she would opt to keep the stone, so our correspondence was worded in a way that I now realize was probably too ambiguous. MF, on the other hand, was reading the emails with fear in her heart that she has no recourse and that she didn't get the OEC of her dreams. So again, a different set of reading glasses and a different interpretation.

 

[Maisie]

Erica,

I am sorry if my posts came across as vitriolic (I had to look that up in the dictionary). I was responding to things written in this thread and really did feel for Maplefemme. I know you helped my son to buy his fiancee's engagement ring on layaway... and you did also offer me an extended layaway on a ring on your site (which I didn't end up taking you up on). My feelings on the problems that Maplefemme encountered does not mean I don't think you are a good vendor. I just think that in this case it could have been handled better. All PS'ers have an opinion and we usually like to tell everyone what we think. Its the nature of the site.

If it makes any difference I think you have done the right thing by refunding Maplefemme. I also think that she might not have reached this outcome had it not been posted on Pricescope.

 

[iheartscience]

I have read through this entire thread in one sitting, and my takeway is this: JbEG is a flexible, accommodating, gracious, and overall spectacular vendor. I am impressed with how Erica has handled the situation, the unfair judgments by PSers based off of partial/incorrect information stemming from a miscommunication, and what to them would look like an otherwise happy customer who suddenly changed their mind and dragged them into a public forum to discuss it.

Kudos to you, Erica. You have shown yourself to be an exemplary vendor.

Ditto this. I personally think JbEG has gone above and beyond, and their reputation has not been harmed at all, IMO. Not many vendors would give a refund based on an oblique post made on a forum. Honestly, if I were in their shoes I don't know that I would make the same offer. (And I don't mean that as a slam on you, MF, it's just that a refund is directly against JbEG's layaway policy and JbEG were under the impression they had resolved the issue a few months ago.)

 

[Aoife]

I have read through this entire thread in one sitting, and my takeway is this: JbEG is a flexible, accommodating, gracious, and overall spectacular vendor. I am impressed with how Erica has handled the situation, the unfair judgments by PSers based off of partial/incorrect information stemming from a miscommunication, and what to them would look like an otherwise happy customer who suddenly changed their mind and dragged them into a public forum to discuss it.

Kudos to you, Erica. You have shown yourself to be an exemplary vendor.

Maplefemme, I understand that there were misunderstandings that resulted in your overall unhappiness and I am glad that you have been again offered the choice to make it right, now that they know your true feelings, even months after the transaction was closed. An engagement ring is a very emotional choice and I completely understand how distressing this must have been for you.

Full disclosure: I have no connection to either party in this thread, this is just an outside observation purely based on the information contained in this thread.

Ditto to this.

In addition, this thread really highlights for me the responsibility the consumer has to ask questions, and to make sure that s/he fully understands the terms of the transaction before entering into it.

Ed. to add: It makes me really want to go to the JbEG website immediately and buy something.

 

[CharmyPoo]

MF - I am sorry the process wasn't as smooth for you as you and your boyfriend wanted. However, I think the realities are that we need to be "smart" consumers and can't blindly trust vendors no matter how wonderful their reputation it.

Here is how I see it. JbEG went out of their way to provide an extended layaway plan for a consignment piece. The person that owns the diamond is also put in a situation where their diamond sale drags on. They were very clear with their policies upfront that it will be a final sale and that you have the opportunity to view the diamond prior to the sale.

There is always a risk in opinions on diamond specs for an uncerted piece. We encourage on PS every day that people should take an uncerted diamond to an independent appraiser or it is buyer beware. It should be no different if it is JbEG or not. For whatever reason, you did not chose this option. You also chose not to see the diamond after it was paid off and sent straight to Victor. In fact, to this day - I don't believe that you have yet to see this diamond or have it appraised.

JbEG's policy is very very clear that they do not accept refunds on layaways - this was not a surprise and was well communicated. From how I interpreted the emails, JbEG reminded you of the policy but asked you what you wanted to do because they wanted to make you happy. At this point, you had the choice to say that given the circumstances - their policy should not apply and you would be happier with a full refund and that you don't feel a partial refund will be sufficient. JbEG could have said no at that point but you never asked - you just assumed because they reiterated their policy that there are no workaround. They worked with you on an extended layaway plan so you should know that they may also consider their policy given the situation. Instead, you asked for a partial refund or a trade in. JbEG honored your request which is probably more than what many other vendors would have done.

In my personal opinion, I see no reason why JbEG or another vendor should offer a refund upfront in this situation. Why should they offer up options that are not beneficial to their financial model and also potentially screws their consignment owner because their piece will now be unsold? The poor seller has waited for over 4 months to get their piece officially sold. Further, you had every opportunity to validate your purchase before the sale. You chose not to take advantage of this offer.

It appears you are unhappy because you now realize you should have asked for a refund. You are saying that you were told it was not possible BUT did you ever ask "I want a refund?"

Anyways, I am sorry for what you went through but I also don't believe vendors should bend over and suck it all up. I am also not one to think that the customer is always right. I have no affiliations with JbEG and have never done business with them. I do think Erica has been exceptional in her correspondences in this thread and I find that she provides exceptional customer service on the few times I chatted with her through email.

 

[ericad]

I have read through this entire thread in one sitting, and my takeway is this: JbEG is a flexible, accommodating, gracious, and overall spectacular vendor. I am impressed with how Erica has handled the situation, the unfair judgments by PSers based off of partial/incorrect information stemming from a miscommunication, and what to them would look like an otherwise happy customer who suddenly changed their mind and dragged them into a public forum to discuss it.

Kudos to you, Erica. You have shown yourself to be an exemplary vendor.

Maplefemme, I understand that there were misunderstandings that resulted in your overall unhappiness and I am glad that you have been again offered the choice to make it right, now that they know your true feelings, even months after the transaction was closed. An engagement ring is a very emotional choice and I completely understand how distressing this must have been for you.

Full disclosure: I have no connection to either party in this thread, this is just an outside observation purely based on the information contained in this thread.

Ditto to this.

In addition, this thread really highlights for me the responsibility the consumer has to ask questions, and to make sure that s/he fully understands the terms of the transaction before entering into it.

This is so true, Aoife. Many people may also not realize that most sellers can be flexible on their terms. For example, while our standard inspection period is 3 days, we often extend this upon request to any reasonable length of time a buyer requests. While layaways are final sale, we offer different work-arounds so that buyers can see the piece before they commit with a non-refundable deposit. We are happy to use a client's independent appraiser and often they act as escrow agents so that money need not change hands until the piece is appraised and accepted by the buyer. All of these options are available but buyers have to ask and request them. We correspond with dozens of people each day and it's simply not possible to communicate these nuances to every buyer. So we devise policies that work for 90% of consumers and trust that those who need "special handling" will simply ask if it's possible.

 

[iugurl]

It's interesting to me that, despite our reputation, the conclusion most people come to is that, based on this one transaction, we are shady, dishonest, or as one poster so eloquently put it, "crap". We are a fairly new business, learning as we go, and we are human and make mistakes. The grading discrepancy was simply a mistake, which we acknowledged and tried to remedy the moment it happened. To date, we're still very sorry and very confused by it, but we've taken steps to ensure it will never happen again. That won't help restore the business we may have lost as a result of this thread, however we will move onward and continue to build our long list of happy and satisfied customers. Our heartfelt thanks to the clients who have emailed us with their support as a result of this thread. We greatly appreciate each and every one of you.

Yeah, I kinda wonder about keeping this thread going or up on the forum, for that matter. Again I think that earlier on, once contact was made between you and MF that all communication on PS should have been taken offline and the thread closed. I know others may not agree with this, but we're talking about a huge financial purchase and should have been discussed privately. Maybe I should have pushed the concern button? I doubt JbEG will loose business over this b/c you do have an excellent reputation and people have heard great things about you. Also, MF has handled herself with much care, so really, both of you have proven to be as professional as possible, however, all of us are SO opinionated lol that we jumping aboard w/our views didn't really help at all. JMO.

MF is the one who started talking about it. If a PSer wants to talk about a purchase gone awry along with other PSers and perhaps even the vendor, they shouldn't be able to? Isn't that a large part of PS?

 

[kenny]

Actually, all things considered my overall opinion of jbeg has gone up after this thread.

As unfortunate and painful as they are I think threads like this are VERY valuable to us consumers.

 

[ericad]

It's interesting to me that, despite our reputation, the conclusion most people come to is that, based on this one transaction, we are shady, dishonest, or as one poster so eloquently put it, "crap". We are a fairly new business, learning as we go, and we are human and make mistakes. The grading discrepancy was simply a mistake, which we acknowledged and tried to remedy the moment it happened. To date, we're still very sorry and very confused by it, but we've taken steps to ensure it will never happen again. That won't help restore the business we may have lost as a result of this thread, however we will move onward and continue to build our long list of happy and satisfied customers. Our heartfelt thanks to the clients who have emailed us with their support as a result of this thread. We greatly appreciate each and every one of you.

Yeah, I kinda wonder about keeping this thread going or up on the forum, for that matter. Again I think that earlier on, once contact was made between you and MF that all communication on PS should have been taken offline and the thread closed. I know others may not agree with this, but we're talking about a huge financial purchase and should have been discussed privately. Maybe I should have pushed the concern button? I doubt JbEG will loose business over this b/c you do have an excellent reputation and people have heard great things about you. Also, MF has handled herself with much care, so really, both of you have proven to be as professional as possible, however, all of us are SO opinionated lol that we jumping aboard w/our views didn't really help at all. JMO.

MF is the one who started talking about it. If a PSer wants to talk about a purchase gone awry along with other PSers and perhaps even the vendor, they shouldn't be able to? Isn't that a large part of PS?

I think what MC was trying to say (forgive me if I'm wrong) was that maybe MF could have contacted us privately for a refund before claiming that we "repeatedly denied" her a refund, which just wasn't true. If she contacted us and said, "Hey E, I know you told me I couldn't have a refund 2 months ago, but honestly I'm sick over this grading situation and really unhappy with the diamond, would you reconsider?" I would have immediately said something like, "What do you mean? We would have refunded your money if that's what you wanted, but you said you want to keep the stone and get a credit back, so now I'm confused." and from that point we would have engaged in this same dialog privately and she would have still received her refund because we would have realized that there was a big misunderstanding as to what we were willing to do to make the situation right for them.

At that point, had we not refunded her money, it would be totally appropriate for her to post her negative experience on PS. But we truly didn't know that she was unhappy with the resolution until she posted on this thread.

 

[junebug17]

Erica, I honestly don't think anyone is questioning your or Grace's integrity. No worries there! It's PS, you know people are going to have opinions. It doesn't mean anyone thinks you're bad or shady!

I disagree with this. I think some posts have been very disparaging and unnecessarily harsh. An opinion can be stated without ripping someone to shreds.

I'm glad to see this situation has been resolved.

FWIW, this incident will in no way discourage me from purchasing from JbEG in the future.