Whiteflash free shipping - is it just me or is it a bit deceiving

[scapel]

I noticed that Whiteflash and others have "free overnight shipping". However, it is not clear especially on Whiteflash''s website that if you return the diamond, then you have to pay back the original shipping amount. In fact, this info is not in the free shipping information sections, rather it is in the "10 day money back" section. I would have easily missed this if it wasn''t for a post I saw a few weeks ago about one''s experience with them over the shipping cost. I feel that vendors should make this a bit more clear..am I in the minority in this thinking?

 

[Kaleigh]

Call them and ask them, it''s toll free.

 

[slammie]

I was confused at first too!

 

[pebbles]

you''re not in the minority. when i upgraded my diamond i was given the cost of the diamond minus the shipping cost. at first i was kind of annoyed as i didn''t think it was very clear on the web site.

 

[slammie]

huh?? How can it be free shipping if the take that out of the value of your stone when upgrading? To me, that''s not free....do most vendors do this?

 

[pebbles]

Date: 2/3/2006 5:19:47 PM
Author: slammie
huh?? How can it be free shipping if the take that out of the value of your stone when upgrading? To me, that''s not free....do most vendors do this?

I guess the way to look at it is the shipping is free if you decide to keep it.

I don''t necessarily agree with their policy since I had to pay the shipping to send it back!

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 2/3/2006 5:10:34 PM
Author:scapel
I noticed that Whiteflash and others have 'free overnight shipping'. However, it is not clear especially on Whiteflash's website that if you return the diamond, then you have to pay back the original shipping amount. In fact, this info is not in the free shipping information sections, rather it is in the '10 day money back' section. I would have easily missed this if it wasn't for a post I saw a few weeks ago about one's experience with them over the shipping cost. I feel that vendors should make this a bit more clear..am I in the minority in this thinking?

The free shipping policy for Whiteflash is practically identical to that almost every vendor here, ladies (and gentleman).

Nearly every one of them that offers free shipping says "we will ship your order TO YOU free overnight shipping". Every single one of those vendors' websites addresses return shipping charges in the "Returns/refunds" section of their website.....not a single on of them specifies it in their "shipping policies".

Date: 2/3/2006 5:10:34 PM
Author:scapel

I noticed that Whiteflash and others have 'free overnight shipping'. However, it is not clear especially on Whiteflash's website that if you return the diamond, then you have to pay back the original shipping amount.

I went to James Allen, Quest, Whiteflash, GOG, ERD, NiceIce, Blue Nile, and Mondera.

NiceIce doesn't offer free shipping at all. For all the others, every single one of those vendors WITHOUT exception addresses the question of shipping on a returned diamond in their Return/Refund policies.....nary a word about it in their shipping policies. EDITED TO CORRECT: Not all of them deduct it.......but those that do specify it in the same place: the return/refund section.


So......I'm really curious why you were able to easily identify the "free overnight shipping" for Whiteflash AND OTHERS with no problem, and yet you single out Whiteflash ONLY as being "especially unclear" on return shipping when every other vendor structures that information the exact same way. Why do you feel it's so unclear on their site and not on anyone else's site when they are ALL structured that way?

I'm also more than little curious about the timing of this question. You haven't posted here since March of last year, and now all of the sudden, drop back in to take ONE vendor to task for something that exists with every one of them? Why? My instinct tells me there is more going on here......and it reeks of a concerted effort feeling. If I'm off the mark on this, I apologize in advance......but it's really hard to reasonably think this is just an random coincidence given the unrelenting nature of the harping/picking lately on policy matters.

Folks, this is really beginning to resemble a witchhunt.....which is really not attractive and not in the spirit of what Pricescope is about. I really hope it curtails soon. Constructive critique of any vendor is a good thing, especially if it's response or workmanship issues. But I really feel the relentless picking at policy variances is getting way beyond that lately and I hope it's a trend that doesn't continue.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Burn all those vendors at the stake, and let God sort it out...

 

[FireGoddess]

I don''t have anything particular to add with respect to this shipping policy, and I have not bought anything from any online vendors discussed here (yet). But I DO appreciate hearing these complaints as they arise and don''t think they should necessarily be curtailed if they come up. If a person happens to be wrong, or in this case as Alj points out, that all the vendors have the same policy, not just WF, then better for all of us to see this and have it publicly corrected and stated. For instance, I now know that if I buy something from WF or anyone else here and plan to upgrade, I will remember this thread and know that my shipping costs aren''t refunded. I will know that if I get a ring made by WF and it needs to be resized, I will check it immediately to make sure it''s perfectly round so that I don''t run into the problem another PSer has had. I don''t feel these complaints are out of line. Maybe I missed some threads though.

 

[scapel]

ok, Al, I apologize if I "singled" whiteflash out but that is only because I was thinking of buying a diamond from them for a valentine's present and i noticed this. And if I wanted to be argumentative, I will point out the Blue nile does not state that the original shipping will be deducted if the stone is returned in the returns sections as you claim. So, if bluenile does indeed do this, again it is not clear..but as far as I can see, it is not stated so in their returns so I can only assume that they will refund the entire amount. I'm just pointing out that it is frustrating when details like this can be easily pointed out where it is advertised "free shipping" as some vendors do.
As far as making an assumption that I'm trying to stir up something, well, I do feel I have a right to post topics such as this. And although I am grateful that you do make good contributions to this site, I wish you would stop trying to be argumentative and be negative as I have seen you post in that manner at times. Sometimes you just need to take things for face value and not assume one is up to no good!

ETA: one last thing. If WF is taking the original shipping amount from a stone that they are applying a value towards an upgrade to, I REALLY think that needs to be SPELLED out!

 

[icekid]

Date: 2/3/2006 7:16:47 PM
Author: FireGoddess
Maybe I missed some threads though.

I''m confused too, FG, but may also have missed something? If all of the vendors have this policy, I think it is somewhat misleading on all of their parts. However, I am glad that it has been brought up so more people can be aware.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 2/3/2006 7:16:47 PM
Author: FireGoddess
I don''t have anything particular to add with respect to this shipping policy, and I have not bought anything from any online vendors discussed here (yet). But I DO appreciate hearing these complaints as they arise and don''t think they should necessarily be curtailed if they come up. If a person happens to be wrong, or in this case as Alj points out, that all the vendors have the same policy, not just WF, then better for all of us to see this and have it publicly corrected and stated. For instance, I now know that if I buy something from WF or anyone else here and plan to upgrade, I will remember this thread and know that my shipping costs aren''t refunded. I will know that if I get a ring made by WF and it needs to be resized, I will check it immediately to make sure it''s perfectly round so that I don''t run into the problem another PSer has had. I don''t feel these complaints are out of line. Maybe I missed some threads though.

Maybe what I''m saying isn''t translating as I wanted it to.

FG, I never take issue with folks learning about the various vendors and their policies. But in fairness, every single one of the vendors here has absolutely extremely transparent policies. They are all posted online for God and everyone to see.....and all one has to do is read them to know what to expect. If those policies don''t cover an instance of particular instance, all one has to do is ask for more clarification.

I can see complaining about poor response or sub-par workmanship, sure. But to complain that a vendor actually has the nerve to charge for doing work that he is typically paid for....when there was absolutely no written reason to think one would get it for free to begin with? For me, that really feels unreasonable.

If I go to a B&M today and purchase a stone and setting, they will likely size it for me for free while I''m there. Does that mean I should assume that I will be able to walk into their store for the rest of my natural life and get my ring resized for no charge? No.

If I order from LLBean today and there is a special this month that shipping is free, does that mean I should assume that shipping is free for the rest of my life on any other order I place with them?

In either case, if I am mistaken, that''s MY error....and it seems unreasonable to me personally to complain because *I* made a wrong assumption.

What does bother me is the seeming pitting of any single vendor''s policy against any other vendor.....done in a manner to suggest a vendor is trying to gouge a customer.

Examples? Exactly ONE of the vendors on this site offers free lifetime sizing. That''s hardly an overwhelming majority...it''s not even enough to be called a "norm", and yet another vendor is then publicly disparaged for charging to size a ring. Not one of these other vendors says "we''ll size your ring for free"!

Every vendor''s return policy seems to be the same regarding return shipping charges, and yet only one gets singled out for that policy?

In another instance, someone assumes a trade-up will be set free of charge...... even though not a single other vendor offers free resetting on upgrades in their policies.

It''s not the WHO of the vendor involved......frankly, I''d be equally pissed if someone were saying "Oh, Wink doesn''t cover return shipping charges" or "Jon doesn''t cover return shipping charges". SO???? neither does anyone else - where''s the beef?

It''s not a mere observation of the policies that rankles me....it''s the fact that they are being wielded in a fashion to take vendors to TASK. It would be like disparaging Blue Nile or Jonathan for not giving a PS discount when that''s not nearly a "norm" factor around here. No one else gives a PS discount (at least not to my knowledge at this writing), so why pick on only Blue Nile or only GOG for not giving it when NO ONE else does other than the one vendor?

It''s the implication that a vendor is trying to gouge simply because they charge for something another may elect not to, or vice versa. It''s up to each vendor to set their policies, and it''s up to consumers to read and understand them and *ask* if there is something not spelled out of something they''re unsure about.

 

[scapel]

I haven''t checked all the sites you mentioned Al, but James Allen does not state that they will deduct the cost of shipping if a item is returned anywhere.

 

[scapel]

Look, I''m not saying that if I got free shipping at LLbean I''d expect that for the rest of my life! That''s a bit extreme and has nothing to do with my point. All I''m saying is that since with most merchandise you don''t expect to pay back the original shipping when you return something, just the shipping you would incur sending it back, it irritates me that it is not spelled out clearly.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 2/3/2006 7:34:29 PM
Author: scapel
ok, Al, I apologize if I ''singled'' whiteflash out but that is only because I was thinking of buying a diamond from them for a valentine''s present and i noticed this. And if I wanted to be argumentative, I will point out the Blue nile does not state that the original shipping will be deducted if the stone is returned in the returns sections as you claim. So, if bluenile does indeed do this, again it is not clear..but as far as I can see, it is not stated so in their returns so I can only assume that they will refund the entire amount. I''m just pointing out that it is frustrating when details like this can be easily pointed out where it is advertised ''free shipping'' as some vendors do.
As far as making an assumption that I''m trying to stir up something, well, I do feel I have a right to post topics such as this. And although I am grateful that you do make good contributions to this site, I wish you would stop trying to be argumentative and be negative as I have seen you post in that manner at times. Sometimes you just need to take things for face value and not assume one is up to no good!

ETA: one last thing. If WF is taking the original shipping amount from a stone that they are applying a value towards an upgrade to, I REALLY think that needs to be SPELLED out!

That''s where the problem has come in. People assume what isn''t spelled out, and then they get mad at the vendor when their assumption is wrong.

Of course you have a right to post topics such as these. It''s not the topic that gave me the feeling of being unfair....it was the singling out of one for something that every other vendor does precisely the same way.....and yet you don''t take them to task. It just felt like a smear.....and as I stated in advance, if I''m wrong about that feeling, I apologize....and I''ll do so again.

But I won''t apologize for bringing up what I feel is a valid observation. It''s not my intention to be argumentative, but if something doesn''t ring true to me, I will absolute question it. That''s how we all learn new things. I never take anything at face value, and if I''m unclear on intent, I ask......which is what I did here. I didn''t assume, I asked and said WHY I asked....because it felt off to me.

'');" height=15 alt="Insert smilie

" src="http://www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/1.gif" width="15 border=0">

 

[feathers]

Just my opinion, but I think putting the "refund less original shipping" information in the "return policy" section is quite appropriate.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 2/3/2006 7:43:44 PM
Author: scapel
I haven''t checked all the sites you mentioned Al, but James Allen does not state that they will deduct the cost of shipping if a item is returned anywhere.

Scapel....mea culpa.......the structure of how I wrote that didn''t make it clear what I''m saying.

"Every single one" was meant to apply only to the fact that every vendor who deducts shipping specifies it in returns/refunds, not in their shipping policies. It wasn''t intended to read that all of them deduct shipping. Only that for those who do, every one of them makes mention of that in their returns/refunds policy.

I''ve gone back to edit it, but to restate so it''s very clear:

*One vendor (Nice Ice) doesn''t offer free shipping at all - to the customer or back. Since you''re paying shipping, it wouldn''t be deducted from refund.

*A few vendors who offer free shipping to the customer don''t specify if shipping is included or excluded from refund at time of return. (Blue Nile, Mondera, James Allen). Nor do they assure that that such charges won''t be deducted. To me, this would fall under the heading of "ask the vendor - don''t assume".

*Wink''s website doesn''t explicity say 100% of purchase price will be refunded or not on stones. I can''t find where it says stones are 100% refundable.....all I see is what is charged if you don''t have a grading report; what restocking charges might be, and the statement "shipping, insurance and handling are non-refundable." I''d not assume anything here either - I''d ask.

*All vendors that DO deduct initial shipping from the amount of refund specify that term in their returns/refunds section. None of them specify that in their shipping policies section.

GOG: "30-day return policy less shipping" - specified in the refunds/return section.
WF: "We will promptly give you a 100% refund for your diamond and up to a 100% for the ring, less original shipping" - specified in the refunds/return section.
ERD: Diamonds returned within the alloted time "receive a full refund (less shipping/handling)." - specified in the refunds/return section of policies.


My comments were intended to focus not on who does/doesn''t charge it, but on the "where it says it" piece of the equation for those who do charge because that''s what I understood your issue to be....not that they charged it, but where they offered that information (in returns/refunds instead of in shipping).

Hope that is clearer.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 2/3/2006 8:15:35 PM
Author: feathers
Just my opinion, but I think putting the ''refund less original shipping'' information in the ''return policy'' section is quite appropriate.

That was what I was getting at.....that every vendor who does deduct shipping specifies it in the same place....the return policy section.

 

[scapel]

Point taken Al. However, I still feel:
Free is always free, but cost of shipping built into the price of the product and therefore chargable separately if the product is returned does not equal free. It could very easily be argued that if the latter is the case, as part of the offer it should be stated as a caveat alongside the offer of free shipping. Whilst I agree that everyone should read the returns policy, it is misleading to bury this caveat in another section. And finally, I do not assume anything but one would expect that policies should be clearly stated..I don''t have time to email and call every vendor on every policy they have.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

If the vendors did not charge for the shipping when a diamond is returned, you''d have people really taking advantage of having diamonds sent just to look at and then return them. The vendor certainly shouldn''t have to incur the shipping cost (considering it is around $35 or more) when a person returns a diamond. And I''m not sure I follow the upgrade points, but it makes sense to me that the value of the diamond itself is the amount that is applied toward the next diamond...why would one think that the amount of shipping would apply toward a diamond upgrade???

 

[Garysax]

Date: 2/3/2006 9:00:58 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
If the vendors did not charge for the shipping when a diamond is returned, you''d have people really taking advantage of having diamonds sent just to look at and then return them. The vendor certainly shouldn''t have to incur the shipping cost (considering it is around $35 or more) when a person returns a diamond. And I''m not sure I follow the upgrade points, but it makes sense to me that the value of the diamond itself is the amount that is applied toward the next diamond...why would one think that the amount of shipping would apply toward a diamond upgrade???

Exactly. They already call in stones for free, which no doubt costs them some shipping. I guess it just never would have occured to me that they would also ship to me AND pay for shipping back to them if I for some reason didn''t like the stone (now if they sent me the wrong stone or something, that is TOTALLY different). If that were the policy I''d just have every single stone that I was even slightly interested in sent to me personally after it was called in so I could see it, which doesn''t strike me as particularly good business on their part, considering the costs that would be involved if many consumers did that.

I dunno, it just never seemed reasonable that they would do that and I really didn''t have any trouble finding that policy on their website spelled out nicely when I bought the diamond... but that''s just me.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 2/3/2006 8:57:00 PM
Author: scapel
Point taken Al. However, I still feel:
Free is always free, but cost of shipping built into the price of the product and therefore chargable separately if the product is returned does not equal free. It could very easily be argued that if the latter is the case, as part of the offer it should be stated as a caveat alongside the offer of free shipping. Whilst I agree that everyone should read the returns policy, it is misleading to bury this caveat in another section. And finally, I do not assume anything but one would expect that policies should be clearly stated..I don't have time to email and call every vendor on every policy they have.

Scapel......a few things. I'm not directly my observations solely AT you or TO you.....as I noted earlier, there's been a rash of this going on lately. It's for general consumption, and not to be taken personally.

Having said that, your post now leads me to believe you take issue with two things: Both with the fact that some vendors deduct the shipping charges, and with the way they disclose that information.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on whether or not it's misleading. I don't believe that it is. How much of a refund one will get when they return anything is a non-issue *until* they return them, so I personally feel it's totally appropriate for such details to be listed in that section. I don't consider that buried. So, we can agree to disagree on that one.

Maybe they should all rephrase this way: "Free shipping applies to all sales. Returns don't constitute a sale, so shipping will not be free on returned goods and will be deducted from the refund." Of course, I'm sure someone would find fault with that too, the first time they misinterpret what that means.

Date: 2/3/2006 8:57:00 PM
Author: scapel

And finally, I do not assume anything but one would expect that policies should be clearly stated..I don't have time to email and call every vendor on every policy they have.

I personally feel the policies of most of the vendors here are very clearly stated. In fact, the format and even the language in most of the sites mirror each other.....which tells me that they have effectively addressed everything they can think of that applies to probably 95% of their transactions.

If you don't have the time to ask a question about the rare, oddball thing that might not be specified......well, pardon the bluntless, but that's your call, and if it doesn't work in your favor, that's your problem. Since 95% of what you need to know is already spelled out, it's likely you'd have narrowed down to a 1st and 2nd pick. At that point, you don't need to ask every vendor. You need to ask your first choice, and only if you find the reply unsatisfactory, then ask the second. 10 minutes? 20 minutes at most?

Now, only you know what your time is worth to you. If you feel that your 10 minutes is better spent elsewhere, that's entirely your call, of course. But if that shortcut costs you $50 or $100 down the line for not clarifying something, that's the price you pay for applying those 10 minutes elsewhere.

My own personal belief: If I don't have the time to understand all the factors that matter to me in any given purchase (whether it's a house, car, jewelry, home theater, whatever), then either 1) I shouldn't make the purchase until I do have the time to do it right, or 2) make the purchase with the knowledge that I'm choosing to taking the risk in not knowing all the terms because I want to shortcut it, and that might come at my own expense (financial or otherwise) later.

As a side observation.......it always amazes me that people (people in general...not you individually, Scapel) don't have 10 minutes to do it right the first time, but those same people miraculously find an entire hour to spend bitching about (or fixing) the outcome of their shortcut later.

My sister was booking non-refundable flights to come home for Thanksgiving one year several years ago. We asked her 3 times before booking "are you SURE these dates are good for you around your classes, etc?" Yes, she assured us. We suggested she double-check with her professors to make sure it was ok to miss any classes those days....she didn't have the time (15 minutes to call them both) to do it. She said "I'm sure it's fine - book the flights"...so we did. The next day, she mentioned her travel schedule to each of them.....and then learned that she would fail both classes for missing more than 2 classes for each course.....and would subsequently not be reimbursed for those classes as planned.

She spent the next FOUR HOURS trying to persuade the professors and the dean's office to make an exception and, when that didn't work, calling the airlines to beg for alternate flights, calling her contacts to make sure they could take her to the airport on the new days........AND spent $100 out of her pocket to change the flights.

That was a costly 15 minutes.

 

[scapel]

Date: 2/3/2006 10:38:57 PM
Author: Garysax

Date: 2/3/2006 9:00:58 PM

Author: diamondseeker2006

If the vendors did not charge for the shipping when a diamond is returned, you'd have people really taking advantage of having diamonds sent just to look at and then return them. The vendor certainly shouldn't have to incur the shipping cost (considering it is around $35 or more) when a person returns a diamond. And I'm not sure I follow the upgrade points, but it makes sense to me that the value of the diamond itself is the amount that is applied toward the next diamond...why would one think that the amount of shipping would apply toward a diamond upgrade???

Exactly. They already call in stones for free, which no doubt costs them some shipping. I guess it just never would have occured to me that they would also ship to me AND pay for shipping back to them if I for some reason didn't like the stone (now if they sent me the wrong stone or something, that is TOTALLY different). If that were the policy I'd just have every single stone that I was even slightly interested in sent to me personally after it was called in so I could see it, which doesn't strike me as particularly good business on their part, considering the costs that would be involved if many consumers did that.


I dunno, it just never seemed reasonable that they would do that and I really didn't have any trouble finding that policy on their website spelled out nicely when I bought the diamond... but that's just me.

Just to clarify - I don't have a problem paying for shipping if I'm returning a diamond as diamondseeker rightly pointed out, it would be very costly for the business. I just think they should state where it says free shipping that you would be responsible for the cost should you return.

 

[scapel]

Date: 2/3/2006 10:40:11 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 2/3/2006 8:57:00 PM

Author: scapel

Point taken Al. However, I still feel:

Free is always free, but cost of shipping built into the price of the product and therefore chargable separately if the product is returned does not equal free. It could very easily be argued that if the latter is the case, as part of the offer it should be stated as a caveat alongside the offer of free shipping. Whilst I agree that everyone should read the returns policy, it is misleading to bury this caveat in another section. And finally, I do not assume anything but one would expect that policies should be clearly stated..I don''t have time to email and call every vendor on every policy they have.

Scapel......a few things. I''m not directly my observations solely AT you or TO you.....as I noted earlier, there''s been a rash of this going on lately. It''s for general consumption, and not to be taken personally.

Having said that, your post now leads me to believe you take issue with two things: Both with the fact that some vendors deduct the shipping charges, and with the way they disclose that information.


I guess we will have to agree to disagree on whether or not it''s misleading. I don''t believe that it is. How much of a refund one will get when they return anything is a non-issue *until* they return them, so I personally feel it''s totally appropriate for such details to be listed in that section. I don''t consider that buried. So, we can agree to disagree on that one.


Maybe they should all rephrase this way: ''Free shipping applies to all sales. Returns don''t constitute a sale, so shipping will not be free on returned goods and will be deducted from the refund.'' Of course, I''m sure someone would find fault with that too, the first time they misinterpret what that means.

Date: 2/3/2006 8:57:00 PM

Author: scapel


And finally, I do not assume anything but one would expect that policies should be clearly stated..I don''t have time to email and call every vendor on every policy they have.

I personally feel the policies of most of the vendors here are very clearly stated. In fact, the format and even the language in most of the sites mirror each other.....which tells me that they have effectively addressed everything they can think of that applies to probably 95% of their transactions.


If you don''t have the time to ask a question about the rare, oddball thing that might not be specified......well, pardon the bluntless, but that''s your call, and if it doesn''t work in your favor, that''s your problem. Since 95% of what you need to know is already spelled out, it''s likely you''d have narrowed down to a 1st and 2nd pick. At that point, you don''t need to ask every vendor. You need to ask your first choice, and only if you find the reply unsatisfactory, then ask the second. 10 minutes? 20 minutes at most?


Now, only you know what your time is worth to you. If you feel that your 10 minutes is better spent elsewhere, that''s entirely your call, of course. But if that shortcut costs you $50 or $100 down the line for not clarifying something, that''s the price you pay for applying those 10 minutes elsewhere.


My own personal belief: If I don''t have the time to understand all the factors that matter to me in any given purchase (whether it''s a house, car, jewelry, home theater, whatever), then either 1) I shouldn''t make the purchase until I do have the time to do it right, or 2) make the purchase with the knowledge that I''m choosing to taking the risk in not knowing all the terms because I want to shortcut it, and that might come at my own expense (financial or otherwise) later.


As a side observation.......it always amazes me that people (people in general...not you individually, Scapel) don''t have 10 minutes to do it right the first time, but those same people miraculously find an entire hour to spend bitching about (or fixing) the outcome of their shortcut later.


My sister was booking non-refundable flights to come home for Thanksgiving one year several years ago. We asked her 3 times before booking ''are you SURE these dates are good for you around your classes, etc?'' Yes, she assured us. We suggested she double-check with her professors to make sure it was ok to miss any classes those days....she didn''t have the time (15 minutes to call them both) to do it. She said ''I''m sure it''s fine - book the flights''...so we did. The next day, she mentioned her travel schedule to each of them.....and then learned that she would fail both classes for missing more than 2 classes for each course.....and would subsequently not be reimbursed for those classes as planned.


She spent the next FOUR HOURS trying to persuade the professors and the dean''s office to make an exception and, when that didn''t work, calling the airlines to beg for alternate flights, calling her contacts to make sure they could take her to the airport on the new days........AND spent $100 out of her pocket to change the flights.


That was a costly 15 minutes.

All good points, but what I''m saying is this. Policies are generally well stated. But you were saying that people are always assuming and blaming a vendor if they didn''t spend the time to find out specifics. Let''s say I buy a diamond from Bluenile. They don''t have anything on their site that indicates that the original shipping will be deducted upon a return. Call me ignorant but if I was unfamiliar with the other online vendors here I would not have a clue that I would be charged this if that was their policy, and I wouldn''t necessary know to call them and ask.

 

[mrssalvo]

I''m coming in way late and just read this thread. I checked out WF''s Free Shipping policy and to me it''s not that confusing. They ship your purchase for free. If you go to the Return''s section, it clearly states you will get a 100% refund minus the shipping costs. I''m just not sure what the big deal is or how they can be more clear

 

[dhog]

this may not happen to everyone but if you read it it seems
easy to understand,at least for me.I won''t stick up for whiteflash
just present the facts as I see them.

PACKAGE WILL INCLUDE:

-Diamond
-Original AGS Certificate
-Whiteflash Diamond Tool kit
-Verification letter from an independent appraiser
-Invoice

You will receive an e-mail from processing department the day your package is shipped. The day your package is delivered to FedEx begins your 10-day viewing period. In the event you are not satisfied with your purchase, you will need to submit a written request for return BEFORE 2 pm CST of your tenth viewing day. You will then be given return instructions. Your package must be post marked no later than the 11th day. Once we receive your diamond and has been checked by an independent appraiser, and it is in its original, undamaged condition, you will be refunded via company check the full purchase amount less $75.00 shipping/insurance.

Please respond to this email and confirm the contents of your order are correct and your agreement to terms of purchase. Placement of your order will be placed on a HOLD STATUS until a confirmation for this email has been received.

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 2/3/2006 10:38:57 PM
Author: Garysax

Date: 2/3/2006 9:00:58 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
If the vendors did not charge for the shipping when a diamond is returned, you''d have people really taking advantage of having diamonds sent just to look at and then return them. The vendor certainly shouldn''t have to incur the shipping cost (considering it is around $35 or more) when a person returns a diamond. And I''m not sure I follow the upgrade points, but it makes sense to me that the value of the diamond itself is the amount that is applied toward the next diamond...why would one think that the amount of shipping would apply toward a diamond upgrade???

Exactly. They already call in stones for free, which no doubt costs them some shipping. I guess it just never would have occured to me that they would also ship to me AND pay for shipping back to them if I for some reason didn''t like the stone (now if they sent me the wrong stone or something, that is TOTALLY different). If that were the policy I''d just have every single stone that I was even slightly interested in sent to me personally after it was called in so I could see it, which doesn''t strike me as particularly good business on their part, considering the costs that would be involved if many consumers did that.

I dunno, it just never seemed reasonable that they would do that and I really didn''t have any trouble finding that policy on their website spelled out nicely when I bought the diamond... but that''s just me.

Makes perfect sense to me.

 

[Dancing Fire]

c''mon guys, use some common sense. if evey vendor ships out 50 stones per day to customers and everyone of them are returned,after a FREE LOOK SEE, by not charging a shipping fee they would be out of business in a hurry. i''m not on the side of the vendors, but just use some common sense here.

 

[Kaleigh]

Good point DF. Is this a first for me to agree with you?? Just kidding!!!

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 2/4/2006 12:19:42 AM
Author: kaleigh
Good point DF. Is this a first for me to agree with you?? Just kidding!!!

no....i think

this is teh second time we agree. hee,hee