Help - serious problems with popular online vendor

[rtbrown19]

I appreciate your thoughts and opinions regarding our situation.

We did assume that the rings were safe to wear together without damaging the diamonds. I note that the only potential problem with the recommended set that we discussed with the vendor was that the diamonds may cut away at the shared prongs on the opposite band. Accordingly, we were advised to have them checked annually to make certain that the diamonds remained secure.

Given the anticipated chipping, would any vendor on this board knowingly recommend an engagement/wedding band set that allowed the diamond girdles to rub/touch (an un-soldered set)?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Diamonds in a wedding set rubbing against each other is poor design or manufacture, period. It is unacceptable and the vendor needs to offer to remake the rings. I am confident there are plenty of eternity sets around, including the beautiful set Jadeleaves just got, that are made so that the diamonds do not rub. My Memoire band is made so that the diamonds do not rub my e-ring setting.

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 2/8/2007 10:35:58 PM
Author: rtbrown19

Given the anticipated chipping, would any vendor on this board knowingly recommend an engagement/wedding band set that allowed the diamond girdles to rub/touch (an un-soldered set)?

I sure hope not. The set should actually have been made where the girdles were not exposed, therefore not able to chip each other. I pretty sure Signedpieces and WF both went back to the drawing boards on their eternity designs because of the problem and diamondseeker is right, Memoire bands are also designed in a way where the girdles do not touch.

 

[Officers girl]

I would ask for my rings back have then sent to an appraiser, and go from there. It really sounds you have lost trust in the vendor so Im not sure you would even want to go ahead with them, but if these problems are in your rings it is up to you to shoulder the finaniacal aspect of repair unless the appraiser can find workmanship fault.

Good luck!

 

[Mara]

Date: 2/8/2007 10:35:58 PM
Author: rtbrown19
I appreciate your thoughts and opinions regarding our situation.

We did assume that the rings were safe to wear together without damaging the diamonds. I note that the only potential problem with the recommended set that we discussed with the vendor was that the diamonds may cut away at the shared prongs on the opposite band. Accordingly, we were advised to have them checked annually to make certain that the diamonds remained secure.

Given the anticipated chipping, would any vendor on this board knowingly recommend an engagement/wedding band set that allowed the diamond girdles to rub/touch (an un-soldered set)?

So there was discussion re: the diamonds may cut away at the shared prongs on the wedding band. It didn''t occur to ask about the precious expensive diamonds that would be cutting away at each other? To me that is just a no brainer. I find it amazing that both you and the vendor discussed the potential of diamond eating metal but not diamonds eating diamonds?

Also the last question you posed...re: ''anticipated chipping''....a year ago, 2 years ago? Chipping of girdles was really NOT discussed on here as much as it is now. It''s only been in the last year or so that so many people have come back with some issues and so many vendors either pulled or re-did their designs to ensure no touching therefore no chipping. Also here is another possible thing. Are your wife''s rings loose at all? When mine are loose, they TILT, they do not sit straight up. That means that if I had shared prongs with exposed girdles and if my rings were loose and tilting a bit, they''d most likely hit each other sometimes. Possibly this is the ''unique'' way that was mentioned? Just a thought anyway.

You got the e-ring you said in 2005. That is 2 years ago. The w-rings last year. The e-ring is what is chipped it looks like. So that is almost a 2 year old ring with chips on it. My initial appraiser told me that diamonds girdles take nicks all the time just by ''normal wear and tear''. That''s not even when you have another ring with exposed girdles rubbing on it. So I guess, what IS normal wear and tear? Is 2 years enough time to cause it?

I kind of have to agree with Jazmine as well re: not knowing/researching...maybe I am the odd gal out but when I spend $5k or $10k or $20k on something...I RESEARCH IT. To the hilt. And I would probably hesitate 2 years later on blaming the vendor if there was damage caused that I didn''t even know about that they were nice enough to tell me about when I came to them with another problem that wasn''t their fault to begin with (rhodium). It seems to me like they wanted to be up front and honest about the whole thing and it never even occured to them that the worksmanship was flawed...why else present you up front with an invoice?

I also agree with rainwood re: not ''going all lawyer'' on them as well...it sounds to me like the whole situation is just a negative one and you guys are unhappy and demanding things and the vendor is probably thinking ''hey buddy you wear this ring for 2 years and now you are crying it''s chipped and we ask you to pay to replace the stones at a discount?''...

If the rhodium had never been an issue then you never would have known the stones were chipped, what if 5 years down the line this happened? Would you still feel entitled then?

I''m just throwing things out because to me it''s NOT black and white aka oh no shared prong and chipped girdles. It''s not a story we haven''t heard before. For me bottom line if there''s no explicit warranty saying that the diamonds won''t chip on the rings you bought for X years then the vendor does not HAVE to do anything. If they WANT to do something, that''s their perogative. If you can negotiate something that makes you happy, that is wonderful and I think you should try for that. Though honestly, I''d talk to them about having the set remade so it would not touch. Though again if her rings are looser and tilting, the same thing might happen. I am really not a fan of shared prong eternities as a set and this is partly why.

 

[rtbrown19]

Mara,

I appreciate the feedback. Possibly my original email was not clear:

Although the original ering was purchased in 2005, the ering was remade as part of the custom ering/wedding ring set in March 2006. The rings were not worn together until after our wedding on 20 May 2006 . . . in less than 8 months of wear, 6 stones were chipped. The rings were designed so that the stones did not touch (confirmed by the vendor's in-house jeweler today); however, the vendor has identified the cause of the chipping as one stone in the wedding band rubbing against the stones in the engagement ring as the rings move. In fact, he indicated that the first stones likely chipped soon after the rings were worn together, and, if not caught now, almost certainly all of the stones eventually would have chipped.

Next, we purchased the custom ring set at the suggestion of the sales rep and in-house jeweler of the vendor. Although we used due diligence in choosing a vendor, I certainly am not an expert purchaser of diamonds; the vendor is the "expert" seller of diamonds, and we relied upon his recommendations in having the ring set remade in 2006. It was confirmed again yesterday that the rings were designed so that the stones would NOT touch; however, the vendor has acknowledged that the damage to the rings was caused when the stones DID touch. In order to get around the obvious inconsistency without admitting that the rings were designed incorrectly, the vendor is using the argument that the rings somehow are being worn in a "unique" way. I find the vendor's conclusion to be self-serving because we cannot possibly disprove the magic bullet er . . . "unique" wear theory that he is advancing. Also, in light of the expert responses here rejecting the "unique" wear argument, the vendor's statement simply does not pass the BS test. That, I believe, is pretty black and white.

Finally, although I admittedly am frustrated with the situation, I am not "going all lawyer"; I posted my queries on this website trying to "RESEARCH IT" so that I can intelligently discuss the issues with the vendor. I have not replied to the various emails addressing the legal causes of action because I do not want this thread hijacked into a discussion about consumer protection laws. I remain optimistic that we can reach an amicable solution regarding the remaking/reparing of the rings. However, I believe that you are incorrect to assume that any "concession" by the vendor is somehow gratuitous or that investigating legal options is irresponsible when confronted with a recalcitrant vendor.

 

[JulieN]

Fingers are not perfect cylinders and rings don't fit all the time. That's why soldering is a common suggestion.

If the stones in the set do not touch when the rings are perfectly level, I don't see how one can expect more.

They said that one stone caused the damage to the other stones?

 

[tanalasta]

Rather than a matter of being legalistic and finding out who is more at fault and therefore who should be responsible for paying for the mistake. That doesn't fix the problem at the end of the day but only causes angst between your jeweller and yourself. So if legally he's responsible and has to fix your ring for free - do you think an unhappy jeweller will do a fantastic job? Or the memories attached to the experience would sour wearing the ring again?

The vendor is not necessarily a 'diamond expert'. Their job is to to sell a product. The consumer is the one who has just as much responsibility, as Mara has implied, in being well informed.

To be fair, an e-ring/w-ring combination 'may' be unique and that your wife should have noticed that perhaps they were in fact rubbing against each other.

Julien writes:
Fingers are not perfect cylinders and rings don't fit all the time...



If the stones in the set do not touch when the rings are perfectly level, I don't see how one can expect more.

Fingers are not perfect cylinders and are unique - hence why they may have rubbed on your wife's finger when they weren't intended to.

Did you get your jewellery insured? Which would cover chipping? If you didn't then I believe that from the jeweller's perspective, an amicable solution starts from your bank account and the jeweller's good-will whether he would want to touch your rings again or not. He is under no obligation to do so once you have accepted the rings. As a lawyer, you should realise that you 'win' some and you 'lose' some ... and that it isn't always fair. That's life. It's character building.

It's like buying a car, not insuring it and then finding it doesn't fit that well into your garage - only 'just'. Then you scrape the side of your car on the way out several months later and then want your money back because the dealer may have informed you of the dimensions of the vehicle and that it 'should' fit into your garage.

However, I'm just pretending to be devil's advocate from the jeweller's perspective.

Mara's post is perfectly practical advice. I would negotiate peacefully with the jeweller and see whether 'out of goodwill' he can remake the rings for you. However, I would still expect to pay a fair dinkum amount for it.

 

[rtbrown19]

Julie - I appreciate your candor; in fact, your succinct response is much clearer than the 20 minute explanation provided by the vendor. However, your response ignores the duality of the problem here. Assuming that the rings are perfectly level, but knowing that "[f]ingers are not perfect cylinders and rings don''t fit all the time," do you believe that the vendor has a responsibility to advise the consumer of potential chipping problems with this type of setting? In other words, in this a customer service issue (as opposed to a design flaw)?

My greatest fear in buying online was not that I was going to get a cz; instead, it was that the customer service would be lacking. This sales rep for the vendor was fantastic on the front end guiding me through the selection and purchasing process. However, I had a nagging concern about follow-up care given that I had never actually met anyone at the vendor, the vendor is more than a thousand miles away, and the vendor''s warranty is voided if the ring is worked on by another jeweler. Now I feel like my original fear is becoming a reality (including the part about eating crow at the local jeweler who warned me that I would "get what I paid for" in terms of customer service from an online vendor.

In light of the geographic separation and warranty issues, what advice do you (or anyone else) have for an online consumer to help insure that a ring is a good fit and not being worn in a unique manner?

Also, what is the best way to address the post-sale problems with an online vendor? In this connection, I am fairly certain the responses indicating that I should be happy with any concession (because I have no recourse) will scare away many potential online buyers reading this thread.

Again, your thoughts truly are appreciated as we work through this issue.

 

[JulieN]

I don''t believe that shared prong rings should carry a warning label. A four-prong solitaire has that higher risk than a six, but you would not expect to be warned about that. Of course, most people do expect that their rings will not be damaged in normal wear, and that is what insurance is for.

If a wearer has special needs (horseshoe sizer, sizing beads, etc.) it is the responsibility of the wearer to have such aids installed.

I don''t know if it was workmanship or if it was normal wear. It is possible that when it shipped out, it was perfect. Through normal wear, one of the stones moved a bit in the setting and then caused damage to the other stones. And then it would not be a workmanship issue or a unique wear issue, but normal wear.

Lots of possibilities.

 

[coda72]

RT, I don''t often reply to this type of thread, but I felt compelled to in this case. First of all about the yellowing issue, I would definitley get platinum over white gold for this reason. For a set that is worn every day, it seems likely that it will yellow quickly. I know oftentimes budget is a consideration, but for something like this I would make allowances in the budget for platinum. I know there are arguments against platinum too, that it scratches quickly and so forth, but I personally would rather have scratches than a piece of jewelry that is supposed to be white looking yellowish. In fact I replaced my husband''s white gold ring 3 months after we were married for that reason. His ring was looking quite yellow, and I wasn''t happy about it. The next day I went and bought him a platinum band. It''s very scratched by now (2 years later), but at least it''s still white! I have nothing against white gold, I have some jewelry that is white gold, but I don''t wear it every day like I do my wedding set.

As far as the customer service issue after the set is sold, I have to agree with you. That is probably why I''ll never get a wedding set online. I have other pieces of jewelry from online vendors that I''m happy with, but they don''t need much maintenance and care because I don''t wear them every day. I''m not sure what advice to give you, but I do think the vendor had (and has) a responsibility to tell you of the potential problems a given wedding set might have. It sounds to me like that was not the case here. I don''t know if you can expect any financial consideration from the vendor though. It sounds to me like just replacing diamonds isn''t going to resolve the situation. The way the bands are made, you could be replacing diamonds once a year, and I doubt if you want to keep doing that. The inconvenience of having to send the rings back alone would drive me crazy, not to mention having to go weeks without them and then there''s the $1000+ it may cost . I hate to say this, but maybe you should just get the rings remade with a local jeweler. I know that''s not what you wanted to hear, but it may be for the best.

 

[ayala_jessica]

Date: 2/8/2007 7:03:44 PM
Author: MeddlingKids
When I started reading your post, I assumed you were part of the legal profession.

As I''m sure you are well aware, this situation has the potential to get quite messy. In order to demonstrate fault on the jeweler''s end, you will need to prove that the damage to the rings was not due to your wife''s negligence. When she''s wearing the engagement ring and wedding band, can she contort her finger in a way that would cause the diamonds to cause damage to eachother?

Being a lawyer, I imagine you would have access to discounted (if not free) legal fees if you decided to pursue legal action against this vendor. But, I would consider consulting with a few other expert jewelers to get their opinion before you proceed. While some might suggest paying the fee to have the jeweler fix the ring and moving on, I do not think this would spell the end of your problem. The rings were either designed incorrectly or were worn inappropriately. The repairs you described will not likely solve either of these underlying issues. (I''m assuming you are not considering soldering the two rings together).

In any event, please keep us posted. Your findings could potentially enlighten numerous posters on this forum.

I totally agree with this. You may want to get some independant experts examine the settings to establish the cause of the damage of the first chipped stone and if this chipped stone is indeed the cause of the chipping of the others diamonds. Only this way you could involve the jeweler''s responsibility if the damage was caused by a defect in the setting.

Please, keep us posted on this.

 

[jaz464]

To me, any two objects that constantly rub together are going to eventually wear down. Many women always wear their set. What should one expect from two pieces of metal and diamond that are constantly worn beside each other day in and day out. Something will eventually wear down. No one need be a PS member to get that. It is friction, plain and simple. And yes, if you discussed the diamonds eating into the gold, why not ask about the diamonds eating into the diamonds?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 2/9/2007 7:38:43 AM
Author: jazmine
To me, any two objects that constantly rub together are going to eventually wear down. Many women always wear their set. What should one expect from two pieces of metal and diamond that are constantly worn beside each day in and day out. Something will eventually wear down. No one need be a PS member to get that. It is friction, plain and simple. And yes, if you discussed the diamonds eating into the gold, why not ask about the diamonds eating into the diamonds?

Jazmine, only the metals should be touching. The rings should not be made so that the diamonds would rub against each other. There are brands that make acceptable settings for shared prong rings. I know for a fact that Memoire does and I haven''t heard any complaints about the Tiffany ones. The design is flawed if diamonds are damaging other diamonds in a matched set. It would be different if they just went and bought an eternity ring from another vendor that was not specifically made to match.

And to all who say it is because her rings must be loose, I say that is ridiculous as well! Right now my rings are loose because the weather is cold and they will be quite snug again in the summer. So does everyone here but me go have sizing beads put in for winter and then have them removed every summer? I find this amazing that the woman would be blamed for this because her rings might be loose??? No excuse!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

rtbrown,

My sincerest advice to you considering all I have read here is to know that you are likely in the right about the rings being defective, but the most satisfactory way for your wife to have excellent rings at this point is to make the insurance claim and start all over. Since you bought your rings, Mark Morrell has designed the most gorgeous set for Jadeleaves, and it is in 900 platinum which is quite durable and stays very white with periodic polishing. Here are a couple of pictures and the thread for you to look at:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-gog-rock-in-long-awaited-mark-morrell-wedding-set.56404/

http://www.mwmjewelry.com/

 

[diamondseeker2006]

One more:

 

[mrssalvo]

honestly rtbrown, with the time that has passed it's going to be hard to prove workmanship and not normal wear and tear. If you had noticed poor workmanship in the rings when you first got them you'd have a better case. If it were me, I'd turn it over to insurance, that's what it's for, take the $ and get a new set from somewhere else.

If you still love the look of the shared prong, Memoire makes a set where the girdles don't touch, whether the rings are perfectly still or the hand is moving. They also offer lifetime warranty's on their stones and settings on some of the designs so that might be of interest to you as well.

 

[lumpkin]

Everyone has made good points, and regardless of who is at fault, it''s going to be difficult to get the vendor to take care of this at no charge to you, and if he does, he''s not going to do it with any enthusiasm. I agree that you will just end up remembering all the difficulty everytime you see the ring (and your wife will too). Good feelings will not be attached to the ring, and you shouldn''t have an unpleasant association with your briadal jewelry. I think you should cut your losses and get a platinum set through a local jeweler. If the rings are insured, go through your insurance to recoup some of your money. Your time is worth money, too, and it will take a lot of time and aggravation to continue with the current jeweler.

 

[rtbrown19]

The vendor''s in-house jeweler confirmed that the damage to the ering is coming from a single stone on the wedding ring; however, he indicated that the offending stone has not shifted or otherwise moved due to a loose prong.

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 2/9/2007 9:23:59 AM
Author: rtbrown19
The vendor''s in-house jeweler confirmed that the damage to the ering is coming from a single stone on the wedding ring; however, he indicated that the offending stone has not shifted or otherwise moved due to a loose prong.

I understand your frustrated, disappointed and upset and if you want to continue to fight it to prove it''s their fault and make them take responsibility, you can. I just think you''re going to have an uphill battle for reasons already mentioned above. You have insurance, use it, take your money elsewhere.

 

[enbcfsobe]

I feel badly that you are in a difficult and upsetting situation -- don't let it get the better of you, though! It sounds like you have some valid concerns regarding the ring design, and the vendor should be willing to at least try to work out a compromise on that.
I hope that by this time you have taken a deep breath and are not ready to run to court or threaten this vendor further regarding your legal abilities or connections. I know that as a lawyer, it is sometimes reflex to fall back on what we know to protect ourselves and our loved ones from any harm -- great or small. I personally find this especially true in situations where I feel that I am at a disadvantage because the person with whom I am trying to negotiate has some skill or knowledge that I cannot reasonably match. Unfortunately, this is one of those things that makes many people dislike lawyers and apply unfair stereotypes. In my modest experience, I have found that something shuts off in many peoples' brains when, in the course of a conflict situation, I mention that I am an attorney or threaten to take legal action. My mentors have reinforced that such a threat more often incites unnecessary litigation (which nearly always has high monetary and emotional costs) than brings about a speedy resolution. This should not have come as a complete surprise -- it is quite natural to respond to a threat with a 'fight or flight' instinct. Neither fight nor flight includes negotiation, which seems to really be what you want.
While I do not suggest that you need to be entirely apologetic in this situation, explaining that your frustration may have led you to prematurely make threats, and that you neither hope nor seek to resort to such actions, may re-open the lines of communication. If you still feel you are not receiving appropriate responses, try a letter (on paper, not email) that does not threaten legal action, but is signed by you as "esq."
This situation really sounds like getting back to the bargaining table is more about psychology than law. The posters here have made a significant effort to give you an idea of what the vendor's point of view may be. Acknowledging that viewpoint may make a huge difference in how your discussions with the vendor proceed, and you don't lose any ground by merely saying "I understand that you may feel that _____." Good luck!!

TANALASTA -- Do not ever assume that because he is a lawyer he has money to replace this item out of pocket. While I would agree that the amount spent indicates that he might be well off, you have no idea whether he is now deeply in debt because he wanted to 'wow' his girl. Do you have any idea what incoming district attorneys or public defenders make?? It is less than an entry-level public school teacher in many cities. Do you think that lawyers are somehow exempt from paying back their student loans??? I hate emoticons, but your comment deserves one of these:

 

[starryeyed]

Date: 2/9/2007 9:23:59 AM
Author: rtbrown19
The vendor''s in-house jeweler confirmed that the damage to the ering is coming from a single stone on the wedding ring; however, he indicated that the offending stone has not shifted or otherwise moved due to a loose prong.

Hi rtbrown19. I am so sorry this is happening - what a drag!

If I were you, I would be totally frustrated. It seems like this has been a hassle from the start - the restocking fee, the yellowing, and now the chipping. It doesn''t sound like the vendor is being very accommodating about the problem right now either. For your own sake, try to keep this as light and pleasant as possible. I feel so badly that you are having problems with something so important as your wedding set and I would hate to see you carry negative emotions whenever you look at your wife''s hand.

MrsSalvo brings up a good point about the "warranty". Have you reviewed the language that the vendor uses regarding "warranty" matters? If the single stone was not set properly, this is a defect in workmanship. If other problems ensued because of the defect, it''s NOT your fault. Let''s face it, fingers shrink and swell, rings spin and get knocked on things. It''s the nature of wearing rings on a hand and any good design is going to take dynamics and normal wear conditions into account. This sounds like defective workmanship and a "warranty" issue to me.

If the vendor does not cooperate, please feel free to warn others of this vendor. If the whole thing blows up, please report it to the BBB, so that other consumers can be made aware of the problem.

 

[strmrdr]

Has any work been done on the rings yet?
If not tell them not to touch them until this is settled.
If work has been done that you approved game over.
Never going to prove anything.
Next send the rings to an appraiser for an in person professional appraisal.
Iv found Richard Sherwood to be extremely fair and helpful in these situations.
RockDoc has extensive expertise in this area also.

There is absolutely nothing we can tell you that matters from pictures and thousands of miles away.

 

[tanalasta]

Ahh... another lawyer to argue against. You people do tend to stick together don't you?

Having read my post out of context, notice that I mentioned I was pretending to play the devil's advocate from the jeweller's perspective. I wasn't writing a personal attack against lawyers, although you seem to have taken my post that way. I was providing a perspective from 'the other side of the fence' in order to prove a point - that taking up legal action against a vendor would be an uphill battle and associated with memories / difficulties that are best avoided if possible.

As a lawyer you should know how many cases are settled 'out of court'. Far more than the public are usually aware of... especially when related to torts and negligence etc...

The ideal situation would be an full-insurance replacement with a vendor of the original poster's choice. That may or may not be possible.

In the meantime, I am fully aware of how much a lawyer makes. You will have to take my word on that. But those who succeed past the initial years (especially those who are towards the 'cream') do very well indeed. Everyone starts from somewhere.

As for the specific questions:
I don't know if he is in significant debt because he wanted to wow his girl. Do you? Either way, does it matter - he's unhappy with his purchase and we're trying to find ways to make him happier. Try to see the 'end' of the picture, not the irrelevant bits before that.

 

[Mara]

i totally agree re: having the vendor ship the rings to richard sherwood..he is a known appraiser and i know this vendor has worked with him before. in any case, he will definitely be able to give his expert opinion and it might stand weight if you wanted to fight to have the rings remade for free or whatever it is you are after.

diamondseeker, no one is BLAMING this woman for anything, the only thing ridiculous to me is that people are so willing to say oh there must be a huge problem and the vendor should be paying for it without even knowing very much.

in my opinion, there are simply not enough FACTS to know what is really going on. there's a lot of emotion out there as usual. but it's always kinda fun to see how people who have never even made a ring in their lives or been involved in the process can be SO SURE that it's a design flaw or some sort of problem RATHER THAN just for a minute considering the possibility that the rings were worn in a unique way that caused the damage. sure it could be just the vendor trying to cover themselves, but maybe it's not? also if this vendor is adamant the rings do not touch when worn side by side then it makes me wonder if they really don't. because they hae to know that the poster would get advice on sending the rings to an appraiser who could tell right off if they do.

and i know you have one shared prong memoire DS. but we are talking TWO shared prongs that are NOT memoire's. it's not about 'well memoire can make it so it doesn't touch'...it's about these particular rings. and i'm sorry but flat out there is a possibility if this woman's rings ARE LOOSE and they are tilting, the stones WILL bang into each other. i have seen my TWO eternity rings knock each other at a tilt before and thought 'boy i'm glad this isn't shared prong'. and been grateful for 4 prong protection. sometimes my w-ring actually is laying down girdle side against the other ring for a few minutes at a time before i notice it. it's just a suggestion and it's not ridiculous in my opinion to consider the possibility.

honestly my personality is kind of practical about there always being two sides of the story. when people post these kinds of things, my first thought is never 'oh my gosh what a horrible situation'. it's more about actually dissecting the situation and thinking about possibilities that A or B or C could have happened and possibilities. so i am always hesitant to jump on the sympathy bandwagon. yes it is a drag to have to go through this. but in the end somehow it will all work out.

oh and i like coda's suggestion on getting the rings remade locally if possible and being sure they are satisfactory. then you could just go to the store and talk to them in person.

in any case, i think you should have the rings sent to a reputed independent appraiser so they can check it out as your absolute next step. just call the vendor and tell your sales rep or whoever you are working with at this point (i might imagine it's a higher up) that you want the rings shipped out to someone like a richard sherwood for an appraisal on the damage and what might have caused it. everyone is going to be familiar with that kind of process. good luck.

 

[enbcfsobe]

While I appreciate that you were trying to play devil''s advocate, leading with inflammatory statements is not the way to get people to read your whole post!! But let''s not have a contest of who can read least. If you think that this is a case of lawyers ''sticking together'' you clearly missed that my post was trying, politely, to discourage the OP from perpetuating the stereotype. I noted that the stereotype was unfair -- that is not to say it is entirely unfounded. It drives me crazy when people (lawyers or not!) overreact and then try to back it up with a threat of legal action. I didn''t think that focusing on my personal distaste for this approach would help the OP, for the same reason that his threatening legal action didn''t help his own situation. The OP has a real problem, and may have some valid reasons to expect a different response. While I don''t condone the way this was handled, I did not think it was for me to admonish the OP. I personally have moved past the stage where I thought threatening to sue everyone who pissed me off was appropriate or helpful. At the same time, I empathize with his reaction, and understand that it is somewhat reflexive in this type of situation. I thought the latter sentiment would be more helpful in guiding the OP towards a reasonable response.

 

[rtbrown19]

Again, I truly appreciate your thoughts, advice and recommendations. In an isolated instance for the average person, simply taking the insurance money (and/or nominal concessions from the vendor) and walking away would make the most sense in terms of cost v. benefit. However, I do have the time, money and patience to pursue what I view as the "principle" of the issue(s). Accordingly, for now, we will go through the motions of sending the rings to a trusted outside appraiser (as no work has been done on them to date). I hope that my experience will help others in making a decision about buying online in the future.

tanalasta - until now, nothing I have written has been in response to your posts . . . you lost all credibility with me when 1) you inferred that a vendor would do a shoddy job on a ring he was legally obligated to fix, and 2) arguing that a buyer should be as much of an expert as a jeweler who makes custom wedding/ering sets. I will now resume ignoring your posts.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

rtbrown, best of luck to you. We obviously will be interested to see how this turns out. I, however, do not feel this is an issue that reflects on all internet purchases, I think it reflects on one ring design and how that vendor chooses to handle this situation if the appraiser deems that the diamond in the wedding band has caused the damage in the other ring. In any event, I hope your wife ends up with a beautiful new, problem-free set of rings!

Mara, the Memoire band is next to a wg band which would be all scratched up if the diamonds were not set properly, and my e-ring band is not scratched at all by the diamond wedding band. Shared prong rings can be made so that they do not damage the ring next to them, diamonds or no diamonds in the other band.

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 2/9/2007 10:40:28 AM
Author: Mara
i'm sorry but flat out there is a possibility if this woman's rings ARE LOOSE and they are tilting, the stones WILL bang into each other.

mara rtbrown said in a previous post:

"The vendor's in-house jeweler confirmed that the damage to the ering is coming from a single stone on the wedding ring; however, he indicated that the offending stone has not shifted or otherwise moved due to a loose prong."

so this would lead me to believe the stones aren't loose and causing the damage. Of course I agree that none of know or can tell anything from pics so involving a third party is a excellent idea in this case.


rtbrown, I think sending the rings to Richard Sherwood is a fabulous idea. I've done business with him in the past and he is very honest and fair. Then you will know how to procede from there. good luck.

 

[crown1]

i am sorry about the ring situation. if the company says one stone is causing the problem and that it is in the same shape as when they made it it sounds like a defect to me. if this design has potential to damage diamonds if the ring does not fit in a perfect manner i think it should be duly noted each time it is being considered.

i am not surprised that you did not see the damaged stones. not everyone is into louping their jewelry.

many years ago when i was young i had a ring resized. i asked if it could be made smaller and was told it could be. there was no warning that it could damage the stone. after it was resized the jeweler wanted me to examine it with a microscope. i was in a hurry and quickly looked at it. i didn''t get a good look as i was never able to get the thing properly focused. being young and stupid with excellent eye sight and it looking fine to the naked eye i paid and went on my way.later on at home i louped the ring and found that one of the diamonds was damaged. it was obvious once it could be seen with the loupe. i took my lumps and did nothing about it. i had accepted it. lesson learned was that the jeweler knew they had damaged the ring but didn''t tell me and only was going to acknowledge it if i saw it and complained. that was my take anyway.

i have easily purchased 70 thousand dollars worth of jewelry since then and it has not been from them. they could have told me what happened and we could have worked it out but they didn''t. the fact that they did not acknowledge their mistake has cost them my business and me to distrust them.

i have purchased from the vendor i think you are working with. i had no problem with the one purchase i made. it was not a ring but the purchase was over 5 thousand dollars. i have been reading ps for about 3 years and have seen many lovely things they have made and seen many good outcomes to situations people have posted here. i have also read about one or two where they did not do what i think was right. i think you have a point here.

lastly i think that the fact that you are an attorney does not put you in any different position than anyone else. you probably were unwise in mentioning it to try to get some leverage in getting the situation remedied but you should not have to pay any more than a pauper would have to pay in the same situation. i hope the vendor rethinks your situation. if they don''t and you can get your insurance to pay on this i would take the money and run to a different vendor.