Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

what would you do if you were mislead by a trusted PSer?

EvaEvans

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
462
I'm surprised that you would still libel the seller with accusations of undisclosed damage. Sure, you're entitled to have an opinion, but that's an ugly thing to speculate on without proof.
I do not accuse the seller of hiding ring defects, but yes, I believe that the ring was damage while still in the seller possession.
Many times in my jewelry practice I have had cases when the owner of some jewelry wasn't aware of some damage - either on the setting, either on the diamond.
I had owners believing that their jewelry is made by some brand name or that the stones are diamonds, just because their husband or fiance told them so.
"Believing" is not a proof that count.
My advise for sellers:
Make an appraisal of the jewelry on your name, and after that put it in a box and lock it in the safe without wearing it any more, and be sure that only you have an access to it.
Make a final inspection of the jewelry prior to ship it.
 

lovedogs

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 31, 2014
Messages
9,600
I do not accuse the seller of hiding ring defects, but yes, I believe that the ring was damage while still in the seller possession.
Many times in my jewelry practice I have had cases when the owner of some jewelry wasn't aware of some damage - either on the setting, either on the diamond.
I had owners believing that their jewelry is made by some brand name or that the stones are diamonds, just because their husband or fiance told them so.
"Believing" is not a proof that count.
My advise for sellers:
Make an appraisal of the jewelry on your name, and after that put it in a box and lock it in the safe without wearing it any more, and be sure that only you have an access to it.

Make a final inspection of the jewelry prior to ship it.
This is absurd.
 

EvaEvans

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
462
The point remains, where is the proof? In the case of the jewelry brand being not as described, that's fairly easy to prove: Show PayPal the original listing with the brand name and then show them an appraisal stating that the item is not from said brand (either different brand or counterfeit). The seller could still argue that the buyer switched the item, but in cases like this that are easy to document, the buyer would definitely have more of a leg to stand on.

With damage-based claims, unless the buyer takes time-stamped pictures immediately after receipt of the package clearly showing the damage that was not described in the listing, there is no possible way to prove whether the damage was sustained before or after the sale. No. Possible. Way.

Again, good luck trying to open a case like that with PayPal. I would really love to see you try.
Don't forget, that the buyer of the supposedly "counterfeit" jewelry did NOT provided any document for his claim, but neither do the seller (both didn't have any document as a proof). Interesting, 3 months buyer was wearing the jewelry, and at last decided, that this jewelry is fake.

So, let see our case here:
1) Buyer noticed some abnormality straight after receiving the ring. The buyer communication with the seller is documented with date and time. The buyer also provided photos.
2) The seller didn't provided any current appraisal, and the seller used old pictures to sell the item, not actual pictures. Ebay count all pictures as part of the item description. Meaning - seller was cheating on the actual condition of the ring.
 

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
5,889
Any trade is a business, in fact.
Even a long time have past, there is a reason paypal to offer 180 days return. Ebay minimum return period is 30 days. Even if a private sale is made, if you use a safe method to pay, you are protected.
The defect on the setting is not of "normal wear", as I can see on the provided picture.
The ring was hit severe, in my opinion.
Many sellers does not offer returns, but if the item is not as described, this does not count.
Paypal, not you, will judge and decide on the end.
No one disputed the discoloration present upon receipt, but it cannot be proven or disproven when the chip occurred. With no ill intent toward jetmal, it sounds like she addressed the discoloration upon receipt and opted to keep the ring anyway. That would likely negate any return/refund option for that reason. Since she kept the ring AND wore it, it is reasonably possible the chip occurred while she wore it. PP wouldn’t have any way to determine this. It’s possible they could err on the side of the buyer, but I think it’s not likely. And to be fair, from a seller perspective, it isn’t really fair to penalize prinsad for something that may not have been present at the time of sale. It simply cannot be proven UNLESS jetmal specifically asked about chips and prinsad said ‘none’ but even then, who was the owner when it occurred? If jetmal hadn’t worn the ring at all and/or reported the chip sooner, a return/refund would seem more likely & reasonable. Three months later, after wearing it then trying to resell it & learning about these ‘defects’ just doesn’t seem ‘right’ in my mind.
 

EvaEvans

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
462
This is absurd.
Well, well, your expressions are always too extreme!

Any jewelry at home could be damage by some other family member. I had such case. The owner didn't noticed the damage made by someone else, as she didn't wear the ring at the time and the ring was left in a box.
 

TreeScientist

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 16, 2018
Messages
1,248
Don't forget, that the buyer of the supposedly "counterfeit" jewelry did NOT provided any document for his claim, but neither do the seller (both didn't have any document as a proof).
Sorry, but I'm going to have to call B.S.on this. No way in hell PayPal would side with the buyer if they didn't provide proof for the counterfeit claim and returned the item 90 days after purchase with scratches. And if PayPal did side with the buyer in this case, then, as @lovedogs said, shame on both PayPal and the seller. That is truly absurd.
 

prinsad

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
283
Don't forget, that the buyer of the supposedly "counterfeit" jewelry did NOT provided any document for his claim, but neither do the seller (both didn't have any document as a proof). Interesting, 3 months buyer was wearing the jewelry, and at last decided, that this jewelry is fake.

So, let see our case here:
1) Buyer noticed some abnormality straight after receiving the ring. The buyer communication with the seller is documented with date and time. The buyer also provided photos.
2) The seller didn't provided any current appraisal, and the seller used old pictures to sell the item, not actual pictures. Ebay count all pictures as part of the item description. Meaning - seller was cheating on the actual condition of the ring.

I did provide current pictures and videos of the ring in its current condition, if you read the thread you would know that. Also, the appraisal provided was only 6 months old at the time. Furthermore, there was no damage to the ring ever not in my possession and not in OPs possession, I know OP would not lie about that either. The chip is microscopic, how would myself or op know about it without a loupe. I don’t know why you are so intent on assuming malice.
 

EvaEvans

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
462
No one disputed the discoloration present upon receipt, but it cannot be proven or disproven when the chip occurred. With no ill intent toward jetmal, it sounds like she addressed the discoloration upon receipt and opted to keep the ring anyway. That would likely negate any return/refund option for that reason. Since she kept the ring AND wore it, it is reasonably possible the chip occurred while she wore it. PP wouldn’t have any way to determine this. It’s possible they could err on the side of the buyer, but I think it’s not likely. And to be fair, from a seller perspective, it isn’t really fair to penalize prinsad for something that may not have been present at the time of sale. It simply cannot be proven UNLESS jetmal specifically asked about chips and prinsad said ‘none’ but even then, who was the owner when it occurred? If jetmal hadn’t worn the ring at all and/or reported the chip sooner, a return/refund would seem more likely & reasonable. Three months later, after wearing it then trying to resell it & learning about these ‘defects’ just doesn’t seem ‘right’ in my mind.
Yes, I agree with you, that the setting damage could be proved as per-existing, but the diamond chip could have occurred later. I also agree, that paypal can deny the claim.
However, if everithing was always determined, we wouldn't have the need of our judicial system!
 

JPie

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 12, 2018
Messages
2,503
I do not accuse the seller of hiding ring defects, but yes, I believe that the ring was damage while still in the seller possession.
You certainly implied it, multiple times. The seller already explained that the soldering was done by David Klass before he shipped it to her, which is the likely source of discoloration. As for the chip, there is no way to know when it happened: prior to the seller's possession of the diamonds, during her ownership, or when the OP wore it briefly. Your speculation isn't constructive and doesn't seem to have any factual basis.

The defect on the setting is not of "normal wear", as I can see on the provided picture.
The ring was hit severe, in my opinion.
Hmmm,
I don't see only the "discoloration", but rough surface and modification of the bezel. That is not a result from "normal" wear.
I still believe that this ring was damage prior the sale.
 

EvaEvans

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
462
I did provide current pictures and videos of the ring in its current condition, if you read the thread you would know that. Also, the appraisal provided was only 6 months old at the time. Furthermore, there was no damage to the ring ever not in my possession and not in OPs possession, I know OP would not lie about that either. The chip is microscopic, how would myself or op know about it without a loupe. I don’t know why you are so intent on assuming malice.
Your pictures was actual - fine!
Did you wear the ring within this 6 months after the appraisal?
 

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
5,889
Well, well, your expressions are always too extreme!

Any jewelry at home could be damage by some other family member. I had such case. The owner didn't noticed the damage made by someone else, as she didn't wear the ring at the time and the ring was left in a box.
Well it IS pretty absurd to suggest the average person buy a piece of jewelry, get it appraised, then lock it away forever unworn until owner decides to sell it. :roll:

Why bother buying it in the first place?

In this case, we aren’t talking about the Hope Diamond. We’re talking about a relatively simple three stone ring that is (no offense to all it’s owners) not of ‘Hope Diamond collectibility’. It’s a ring likely bought, made & intended to be worn ... and it was ... by a couple of people.
 

EvaEvans

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
462
You certainly implied it, multiple times. The seller already explained that the soldering was done by David Klass before he shipped it to her, which is the likely source of discoloration. As for the chip, there is no way to know when it happened: prior to the seller's possession of the diamonds, during her ownership, or when the OP wore it briefly. Your speculation isn't constructive and doesn't seem to have any factual basis.
How many times this ring have changed its owner?
 

EvaEvans

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
462
Well it IS pretty absurd to suggest the average person buy a piece of jewelry, get it appraised, then lock it away forever unworn until owner decides to sell it. :roll:

Why bother buying it in the first place?

In this case, we aren’t talking about the Hope Diamond. We’re talking about a relatively simple three stone ring that is (no offense to all it’s owners) not of ‘Hope Diamond collectibility’. It’s a ring likely bought, made & intended to be worn ... and it was ... by a couple of people.
I suggest this just for seller protection. If worn, a small chip on the diamond could happen without to be noticed.
 

EvaEvans

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
462
Sorry, but I'm going to have to call B.S.on this. No way in hell PayPal would side with the buyer if they didn't provide proof for the counterfeit claim and returned the item 90 days after purchase with scratches. And if PayPal did side with the buyer in this case, then, as @lovedogs said, shame on both PayPal and the seller. That is truly absurd.
I have seen very unfair decisions made by ebay and paypal.
The judicial decision anyway will not be good for one of the sides.
 

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
5,889
Point of note: while prinsad may have posted the ring on eBay, it is not clear if that is also where the transaction took place and if those protections would even be available in this case. There are a few PSers who post items on eBay and LT or DB, link to them all on here in pre-loved, and discussions/sales still take place outside of eBay for a couple of reasons, be it seller familiarity, reduced price by avoiding the eBay fees, etc.
 

kmoro

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Sep 13, 2018
Messages
1,076
Just to make it clear here, I did disclose the discoloration to my buyer and sent a pic of it. And I did reach out to prinsad regarding it the day I took it out of the box and I sent a pic of it to her and it is date and time stamped....I didn't ask for a refund, all I wanted to know is why was it discolored. From there I would have had to make a decision based on what I was told. Did I feel mislead, yes.....but am I running around calling people a liar, no! And I have not seen anyone else call her a liar here, so I'm not sure why Niel made that comment. I'm using this platform for educational purposes, that IS why we are all here right? Thanks to HS4S_2 I now know that this discoloration thing has happened to someone else before. Learning happening here! :geek:

I am aware that I should have taken it in for an appraisal immediately. But I did not because like prinsad, I was just so excited about my pretty new ring, and then "life" happened and I had to deal with more pressing issues than getting the ring in to be appraised and polished. When the chipped stone was also discovered, it made me worry that a chip along with a potential solder job may have meant that something happened to the ring that was not disclosed to me, and therefore I wasn't able to disclose to my new buyer. My buyer requested a return window which I granted, because I believe in them. In hindsight, I should have asked for one for myself. Could I have chipped the stone? Sure. Could she have? Sure. Could it have been there all the while and she didn't notice, absolutely. I didn't notice it either because I didn't loupe it. But my buyer did. After reading some of the comments here, I do agree that I should split the shipping expense with my buyer and I have refunded her.

I would like to go with Yssie's comment that "There's a very believable version of this wherein everyone's telling the truth " I do not think anyone had malicious intent. I have learned a lot from this experience, and I shared it on this platform so that I could learn from others, and share my story to help others in the future. Thanks everyone for your replies, much appreciated! And thank you for the well wishes for my son....surgery went well and he is recovering beautifully!
@jetmal
I’m just going to point out that when you said you “feel mislead” by the seller, that is essentially the same as saying that you feel lied to. However, saying that you “feel” misled instead of “were” misled means that you were open for alternative explanations ... you felt lied to but were not sure if you were lied to. At least that’s what I get from the language used. Being misled just sounds better than being lied to - a distinction without a difference. The thread title is quite aggressive, so I would expect you to understand that you started off that way and others just followed your lead. Now that your position has softened, you’re accusing others of being too harsh.

I think it would help if you cleared this up just a bit, as in, do you feel misled now or do you now feel your seller was as honest as possible? Maybe you felt deceived at first but feel better about it now? Usually these things just need more communication to be resolved. I have a feeling the whole transaction was in good faith on all sides, and I hope that you do too. And I hope that you end up very happy with that ring - it’s very pretty :appl:

@EvaEvans holy cow, I assume that you have had some bad experiences on Paypal. I think that you may be projecting a personal experience because it feels more like your trying to force your opinion on others rather than offering your opinion as advice. It is as if you are fighting a different fight. I think you’re trying to help but got carried away or something.
 

EvaEvans

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
462
I thought you said you read the whole thread?
Yes,
as I understood these old cut diamonds were bought from ebay and assembled together. You made this 3-stone ring with DK. Right?
If these diamonds were loose, did you issue GIA certificates? As I understood, no.
You made the 3-stone ring and appraised it, right?
Well, not always chips are particularly mentioned, chips are normally part of the diamond clarity. However, some appraisers note the chips in special notes.
I will read yours and the buyer's messages again tomorrow, but what I remember was, that when the second buyer brought this ring to DK for checking, David Klass said that the ring setting wasn't in original condition and DK didn't remember the chip on the diamond.
If I didn't understand it correctly, let me know.
I will read the tread again to see if I missed some important details.
 

JPie

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 12, 2018
Messages
2,503
Yes,
as I understood these old cut diamonds were bought from ebay and assembled together. You made this 3-stone ring with DK. Right?
If these diamonds were loose, did you issue GIA certificates? As I understood, no.
You made the 3-stone ring and appraised it, right?
Well, not always chips are particularly mentioned, chips are normally part of the diamond clarity. However, some appraisers note the chips in special notes.
I will read yours and the buyer's messages again tomorrow, but what I remember was, that when the second buyer brought this ring to DK for checking, David Klass said that the ring setting wasn't in original condition and DK didn't remember the chip on the diamond.
If I didn't understand it correctly, let me know.
I will read the tread again to see if I missed some important details.
Considering that you're referring to me as the seller and I am not, I can see it's fruitless to discuss this further with you. Good day.
 

EvaEvans

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
462
Considering that you're referring to me as the seller and I am not, I can see it's fruitless to discuss this further with you. Good day.
I am sorry, I saw that you are not the seller, but I was trying to answer all accusations at once and the result is a mess.
I am trying to speak about "buyer" and "seller" to avoid personal connection as I am not defending/accusing any particular person.
I am tired of this thread too.
 
Last edited:

Laila619

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
11,564
Hahaha good luck getting your money back on a damaged item 90 days after the sale. As @Wewechew already said, I'm not sure why we're even arguing about this anymore because the OP isn't going to go that route.

But let's take a hypothetical scenario where a buyer did make a claim to PayPal on a damaged jewelry item 90 days after delivery. Please tell me @EvaEvans, how on earth would the buyer prove that the damage was not sustained during the 90 days that it was in their possession? PayPal would take one look at such a claim and say "No thanks, we're not getting in the middle of a he said she said."

PayPal buyer protection does apply to private transactions, and it can be used to file a claim if the seller never sent the item at all, but when it comes to filing claims about the condition of a used item in a private sale, the buyer doesn't have a leg to stand on.
You must not be very familiar with PayPal. It does apply to private transactions, and in most cases, they almost ALWAYS side with buyers. Not always of course, but most of the time. If a buyer claims something is significantly not as described (SNAD cases) they basically take the buyer's word for it.
 

nala

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 23, 2011
Messages
3,450
Can the chipped diamond be polished? If so, can the first seller graciously offer to split the costs of doing so? Most people on this board are suggesting that no one is to blame. That being the case, we also have to believe that Jetmal didn’t chip the diamond herself bc she stated she didn’t really wear it. Unfortunately, Jetmal is the only one who is taking a financial hit and most posters are just telling her too bad, so sad. Yet claiming that all parties are being honest. As an honest seller doing business with ps member, I would be inclined to help out. Especially if I had worn the ring for 6 months prior to selling and didn’t loupe it before I sold it.
 
Last edited:

nala

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 23, 2011
Messages
3,450
You must not be very familiar with PayPal. It does apply to private transactions, and in most cases, they almost ALWAYS side with buyers. Not always of course, but most of the time. If a buyer claims something is significantly not as described (SNAD cases) they basically take the buyer's word for it.
This. Absolutely. PayPal accepts pics and original emails as “proof” of items not as described. Her email points out a discrepancy that she tried to address immediately.
 
Last edited:

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,087
Can the chipped diamond be polished? If so, can the first seller graciously offer to split the costs of doing so? Most people on this board are suggesting that no one is to blame. That being the case, we also have to believe that Jetmal didn’t chip the diamond herself bc she stated she didn’t really wear it. Unfortunately, Jetmal is the only one who is taking a financial hit and most posters are just telling her too bad, so sad. Yet claiming that all parties are being honest. As an honest seller doing business with ps member, I would be inclined to help out. Especially if I had worn the ring for 6 months prior to selling and didn’t loupe it before I sold it.
I think the takehome here is that anyone thinking of selling jewellery ought to acquire a loupe and photograph using it.

I personally would not sell a piece without clear photos for fear of a situation exactly like this. I have however bought without macro pictures. Sometimes I get lucky. Sometimes there are issues that would have turned me off the purchase had I known beforehand.

If I choose to accept the risk of buying pre-loved sans return policy and I’m disappointed by what I’ve spent my money on, well, “too bad, so sad” seems exactly right: I chose to take that risk. It sounds like Jetmal refunded her buyer’s shipping expenses - which I feel she had no ethical obligation to do given the circumstances of disclosure.

I’ve sold stones that I paid far too much for here on PS. When doing so I disclosed the problems, and priced them fairly for what they were, and swallowed the loss. They all sold quickly, and all buyers were satisfied. Examples:
http://www.pricescope.com/forum/preloved-ps-jewels/a-very-ugly-diamond-t212385.html
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/must-see-exqisite-grand-best-real-diamonds.241159/

I’ve also had the experience of buying with excellent closeup photos that are very carefully angled to obscure chips/nicks. That is misleading, IMO.
 
Last edited:

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
5,889
Most people on this board are suggesting that no one is to blame.
I don’t think it’s that easy; rather, I think most of ‘us’ feel Iike both prinsad & jetmal appeared to act in good faith, neither admittedly had a loupe, jetmal didn’t get an appraisal immediately to alert her about any other possible damage (e.g., the chip there or not), and she accepted the response from prinsad regarding the dark spot; so, no one can definitely say when the chip occurred and I think ‘we’ are just taking the parties at their word. It really wouldn’t be right to lob ‘blame’ at someone when ‘we’ don’t know all the facts.

Heck, I’m not even convinced there is a chip ... I blew that image up so big on my iPad and still couldn’t make it out, so even if prinsad had a loupe, I’m not sure she’d have seen it if it was there before she sold it.

What I do know is the side stones were SI 1 & 2 per prinsad’s SMTB thread ... so there are/were bound to be some inclusions in the diamonds. Anyone expecting IF sides would only be fooling themselves if they did 45 seconds worth of research on this ring’s history.
 

nala

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 23, 2011
Messages
3,450
I don’t think it’s that easy; rather, I think most of ‘us’ feel Iike both prinsad & jetmal appeared to act in good faith, neither admittedly had a loupe, jetmal didn’t get an appraisal immediately to alert her about any other possible damage (e.g., the chip there or not), and she accepted the response from prinsad regarding the dark spot; so, no one can definitely say when the chip occurred and I think ‘we’ are just taking the parties at their word. It really wouldn’t be right to lob ‘blame’ at someone when ‘we’ don’t know all the facts.

Heck, I’m not even convinced there is a chip ... I blew that image up so big on my iPad and still couldn’t make it out, so even if prinsad had a loupe, I’m not sure she’d have seen it if it was there before she sold it.

What I do know is the side stones were SI 1 & 2 per prinsad’s SMTB thread ... so there are/were bound to be some inclusions in the diamonds. Anyone expecting IF sides would only be fooling themselves if they did 45 seconds worth of research on this ring’s history.
Exactly. No one really knows. We also don’t know what PayPal would decide— yet many posters here post with such certainty. Jetmal asked what recourse she has. She has nothing to lose by going thru PayPal. No one here can assure her that doing so is bad advice. Worst case she wastes a few minutes of her time. She’s probably wasted a lot more time reading the replies on this thread.
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
18,748
I made the comment about people calling her a liar due to some of the comments that came shortly after this thread started. Including one threatening to report her as a unscrupulous member which has since been deleted. (I think ?). Jetmal my comment wasn’t directed at you
@EvaEvans says she/he sees severe damage where that chip is including millgrain damage. Which is absurd. Also you state you have extensive eBay sales and a “jewelry practice “
Sounds very busnessy. Might be best to declare yourself as such.
 

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
5,889
Exactly. No one really knows. We also don’t know what PayPal would decide— yet many posters here post with such certainty. Jetmal asked what recourse she has. She has nothing to lose by going thru PayPal. No one here can assure her that doing so is bad advice. Worst case she wastes a few minutes of her time. She’s probably wasted a lot more time reading the replies on this thread.
I read nowhere that someone said “don’t go to PP”; rather, that it’d likely - given the circumstances - not produce the anticipated outcome given the circumstances. Obviously, she is free to do as she deems appropriate and she should. But she asked for everyone’s opinions/thoughts and that what people (for the most part) provided.

Where we agree: no one knows the facts, including the parties to the transaction. And based on all that was said, no one has evidence/proof to refute the statements made.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top