Having an issue with AGL...

[Autumn in New England]

Hello all,

I sent a sapphire and diamond gold ring I recently purchased to the AGL for testing of the sapphire. I specifically wanted to know if the stone was heated, prior to my committing to keep it. The sapphire is around 4.5ct. I selected a gem brief report, which, for mounted stones, is $85. I spoke with Leslie Duran earlier in the week, where she informed me the sapphire was heated. She made no mention of the report needing to be upgraded due to size restrictions or other reasons. In fact, she asked if I wanted to include origin or keep it "as-is." I explained I wasn't keeping the ring, and opted to stay as-is, which I assumed was the gem brief. (Though the ring is very beautiful, I only collect unheated corundum.) When I received a copy of the report via email, I saw that it was a prestige. I asked Maria Frances why the report was upgraded, especially without my knowledge, when Leslie and I had just spoken. She mentioned that gem briefs are really only for loose stones, and the size restriction is 3.99ct. for the stone being tested. Plus, she stated, the ring was a "fancy design." It's a straight-up basic diamond halo. But, again, the price list clearly states that gem briefs include mounted stones, and that the weight restriction is 4.99ct. for sapphires. I had a 5ct. pyrope garnet and diamond ring previously analyzed via gem brief without a problem. Please tell me what I'm missing? I don't want to come off as tight or a complainer. I'm happy to pay for services rendered, and I've never, ever been a haggler in any respect. It is the principle of the matter for me in this case. In any event, I would like to see what everyone thinks, and if my understanding is in any way incorrect, before I push the matter. As you can imagine, I'm not too thrilled about paying a prestige price for a piece I'm not keeping.

Sorry for the terrible photo... it's off the lab report. I just wanted to give everyone an idea of the mounting design.

Thanks in advance,
Autumn

 

[marymm]

Although I wouldn't describe your ring as a "basic diamond halo" and in fact to my eyes more like a fancy design ring ... I agree that their website unequivocally states that Gem Briefs are available for sapphires up to 4.99ct at a price of $70 if loose and at a price of $85 if mounted ... I also agree if they somehow determined Prestige level of service was required on your sapphire due to its size or the fancy ring design, they should have informed you and gained your approval before moving forward.

My past experiences with Marie Frances have been positive. I do believe if you were to email her back attaching screenshots of their website and their pricelist PDF both of which clearly indicate Gem Briefs may be obtained for mounted sapphires weighing up to 4.99ct for $85, and reiterating you never gave permission for Prestige services, the situation will be reviewed and (hopefully) your bill revised accordingly.

Good luck.

 

[demantoidz]

Mastercut gems wrote about AGL messing up which report they ordered for specific gems in this listing.
Obviously the situation is different, with them sending multiple loose stones rather than a set stone.
Point is you are not alone. Hope it works out.

Iranian Demantoid Garnet 2.21 carat in Garnet Family

 

[Autumn in New England]

Although I wouldn't describe your ring as a "basic diamond halo" and in fact to my eyes more like a fancy design ring ... I agree that their website unequivocally states that Gem Briefs are available for sapphires up to 4.99ct at a price of $70 if loose and at a price of $85 if mounted ... I also agree if they somehow determined Prestige level of service was required on your sapphire due to its size or the fancy ring design, they should have informed you and gained your approval before moving forward.

My past experiences with Marie Frances have been positive. I do believe if you were to email her back attaching screenshots of their website and their pricelist PDF both of which clearly indicate Gem Briefs may be obtained for mounted sapphires weighing up to 4.99ct for $85, and reiterating you never gave permission for Prestige services, the situation will be reviewed and (hopefully) your bill revised accordingly.

Good luck.

Thank you, @marymm! I did write Maria again yesterday, but she has not responded. I wrote Leslie late this afternoon and hope to hear from her tomorrow.

Here's a copy of the 2022 price list we were referencing, if anyone is unfamiliar with it.

 

[Autumn in New England]

Mastercut gems wrote about AGL messing up which report they ordered for specific gems in this listing.
Obviously the situation is different, with them sending multiple loose stones rather than a set stone.
Point is you are not alone. Hope it works out.

Iranian Demantoid Garnet 2.21 carat in Garnet Family

Thank you for the comment, @demantoidz!

 

[theredspinel]

Oh I’m sorry this is happening to you @Autumn in New England

I agree with you and the other posters (though imo the ring has a basic diamond halo - I don’t know what would make it fancy haha) that you should definitely persue the matter, as a matter of principle. It does clearly look like their error, and why should anyone have to pay for that. Especially for something you are not even keeping!

I would definitely take screenshots of the website info and send to them, I do think they will resolve it satisfactorily but it sucks you have to go through this effort.

 

[2Neesers]

I wouldn‘t want to pay for services I didn’t agree to or authorize. Do you recall what you authorized on the form you filled out? I‘ve only sent items to AGL a few times, twice for GemBriefs for stones in settings, so that’s been a service they offer.
I did notice when filling out their form that they have a check mark auto-filled for Prestige on the first line. I’ll add a screenshot showing it below. Very odd.. so I used white-out or scribbled that check mark out, but I could see how it could cause confusion in the lab if it was left as is.
I also have great service from Marie and hopefully she will be able to resolve the issue for you. Sorry the sapphire ended up being heated!

 

[ShinyPink]

When I first sent stones to AGL, I completed the first line, checking "GemBrief" but leaving their checkmark as is. I called them after they received it, telling them I did NOT want the prestige, just in case. I don't know why they do that. I'm sure a lot of people have had prestige reports in error.

 

[Autumn in New England]

Oh I’m sorry this is happening to you @Autumn in New England

I agree with you and the other posters (though imo the ring has a basic diamond halo - I don’t know what would make it fancy haha) that you should definitely persue the matter, as a matter of principle. It does clearly look like their error, and why should anyone have to pay for that. Especially for something you are not even keeping!

I would definitely take screenshots of the website info and send to them, I do think they will resolve it satisfactorily but it sucks you have to go through this effort.

Thank you, my friend! When are we (you... lol) receiving your new turq goodies?

 

[Autumn in New England]

I wouldn‘t want to pay for services I didn’t agree to or authorize. Do you recall what you authorized on the form you filled out? I‘ve only sent items to AGL a few times, twice for GemBriefs for stones in settings, so that’s been a service they offer.
I did notice when filling out their form that they have a check mark auto-filled for Prestige on the first line. I’ll add a screenshot showing it below. Very odd.. so I used white-out or scribbled that check mark out, but I could see how it could cause confusion in the lab if it was left as is.
I also have great service from Marie and hopefully she will be able to resolve the issue for you. Sorry the sapphire ended up being heated!

Yes, this is so misleading!! I do the same thing... I cross out the check mark and then choose "gem brief" on a separate line. Alas, this was not the issue though. AGL felt the stone/piece did not meet the criteria for a gem brief report, and bumped it up to a prestige. More on that in a minute. Thanks for the comment, @2Neezers!!

 

[Autumn in New England]

When I first sent stones to AGL, I completed the first line, checking "GemBrief" but leaving their checkmark as is. I called them after they received it, telling them I did NOT want the prestige, just in case. I don't know why they do that. I'm sure a lot of people have had prestige reports in error.

Frustrating indeed! Thanks for sharing!!

 

[Autumn in New England]

Update:

I spoke at length with Leslie today. I was disappointed in her initial response. She admitted the stone did fall within the size range for a gem brief (though Maria had said it did not), but also reiterated that the ring was "too busy" a design for the gem brief. I still think that's very strange. The ring is a cushion center stone with a single perimeter of same sized round diamonds. It's all very subjective. In any event, she went on to add that the only way they put mounted colored stones with diamonds on a gem brief is if the stones are synthetic. Now this is historically untrue, because I've had mounted natural colored stones with natural diamonds on a gem brief previously. But this is all besides the point, because I explained that these exceptions should all be included on the price list. Otherwise, what purpose does it serve? I feel like it's a little nervy to charge a customer more than double for a service they did not request, without notification, and for reasons never mentioned on their pricing page.

Long story short, Leslie apologized, and mentioned I would receive a refund of the price difference on Monday. So I'm really pleased with the resolution, and I should mention that Leslie and Maria both remained very professional and polite in their tone throughout the discussion.

Just let this serve as a warning to collectors sending mounted gems to the AGL in the future. It's not the "crime" of the century or a huge deal, but it's the principle of the matter. Personally, I think they saw a "more valuable than your average" ring come in and decided to preclude it from their least expensive report for arbitrary reasons.

Thanks for commenting, everyone!!

Autumn

 

[theredspinel]

Thank you, my friend! When are we (you... lol) receiving your new turq goodies?

Hahaha it can be “we”! I hope soon, my fingers keep almost pressing ‘buy’ on other items; I think the only cure will be when they have some turquoise to hold… the “buy it” impulse will be satiated (I hope)! Tracking hasn’t started yet but both items say shipped!

 

[Autumn in New England]

@theredspinel

Yippee! I await your review with baited breath. I hate to be the one to break this to you, but once you hold those cool, smooth, lustrous beads in your hand for the first time, your lust will only increase.

 

[theredspinel]

@theredspinel

Yippee! I await your review with baited breath. I hate to be the one to break this to you, but once you hold those cool, smooth, lustrous beads in your hand for the first time, your lust will only increase.

No no no no no!! That just will not do!!

 

[lilmosun]

This is truly disappointing and sorry you went through this (but glad they made it right by you).

In the past, I was most impressed that AGL always called me with a preliminary assessment first and confirming that I wanted to move on with the Prestige Report based on the verbal assessment - even when a Prestige Report was what I ordered (and their initial assessment agreeing it made sense as what they saw was what I expected if not better).

I have a couple of rings with diamond halos that I will now be reluctant to send to AGL as they do not warrant the cost a Prestige report. Although I prefer AGL for their CS expertise, I will need to consider GIA for those pieces.

 

[Autumn in New England]

Hi @lilmosun... so here's the thing. I prefer the professionalism and consistency you receive from the GIA. They also have a lab in NYC, like AGL, which is convenient for me. That way I don't have to send everything across the country. Plus, I was a student of the GIA. But there's no question that AGL is waaaaaay faster, which is vital if you want to have something tested before committing to keep it. And I trust the competence of Chris Smith and Monruedee Chaipaksa. I happen to prefer the layout of their gem briefs and reports as well. The other nice thing is that it's a small operation, so you can speak directly with an invested party, such as Maria or Leslie.

Here's what I would do in the future if you decide to send something in to AGL. Ahead of shipping the item, give Maria as much info on it as possible, and ask if the item falls within the restrictions for a gem brief. If she says she is unsure and needs to see the piece in person first, make it clear that you want to be notified if the item, once received by AGL, does not meet the criteria for a gem brief. Do this all via email, rather than a phone call, so you have the conversation in writing. And I think this should prevent an issue in the future.

Thanks for your comment!

Autumn

 

[T L]

Does Christopher Smith still head the AGL?

 

[voce]

Sorry you're having trouble with AGL. I don't submit stones to them directly, so I don't know how various labs have been with customer service.

Another thought is, what's the underside of the ring like? Is there a doughnut hole? Can they illuminate the gem easily to examine the sapphire? If the diamonds tilt down and there is no doughnut hole like in my attachment, they may have considered it a hassle to examine the sapphire and decided to charge you for prestige. Regardless, I 100% believe they should have communicated with you beforehand instead of surprising you with the upgrade and trying to justify afterwards.

 

[Autumn in New England]

Hi @voce... that's a very good point, and Maria did mention it prior to my sending the ring in (when I asked if the sapphire could be tested in the mounting). The underside has a large opening almost the size of the sapphire itself, so it was not considered a hindrance while testing the stone. And they never mentioned that it was. But it is definitely something to think about before sending in a mounted gem for testing. Thank you for your comment!

 

[Autumn in New England]

Does Christopher Smith still head the AGL?

As far as I know, he does indeed, @T L!