Re: Carrot or Stick
This is not a product's liability matter. But, the question presents legal matters that addressable.
Here is the chronology as I uderstand it. A diamond weighing 1.15 ct was purchased and appraised, the stone was then set; you then had the stone re-mounted and, to your horror you discovered that
the jeweler who mounted the stone initially had chipped/polished it thereby decreasing its carat weight.
Thus, you may have actions against the first jeweler for diminuation of value, conversion of the chip, and breach of contract based on
non-performance.
Questions are: Was the appraisal performed by a certified gemologist, independent of the first jeweler? Was the second weighing also
performed by a certified gemologist? What is the difference in the appraisal? Does the chip affect quality as well as weight?
Obviously, a relevant issue is that the diamond is a wedding ring and thus has sentimental attachment. "Are you attached to
the particular diamond or would a replacement of like kind and quality (as existing prior to the damage) be a suitable remedy?"
Causation issues arise as you must meet a burden of showing that damage was caused by the first jeweler and not a result of a subsequent act of another. Thus, "Does the second jeweler confirm
that the setting was the original or can he/she otherwise render professional/expert evidence to lock down the matter of causation?" Another question is, "Was the damaged corner of the diamond within the setting in such a manner that an expert would assert that
the setting itself precluded the diamond from being damaged while in the setting?" This last point goes far to show that the damage occured while the stone was outside of the setting and tends assist in meeting your burden of causation. Moreover, "Was the damaged corner set within the setting in a manner that rendered the damage as non-observable?" This brings into play the Uniform Commercial Code dealing with Sales of Goods. Other questions are, "Was the diamond insured? If so, was it specifically scheduled on a policy?" Also, "Is/was the first jeweler bonded and insured as to workmanship?"
There are several methods to seek redress. An advisable method may be to obtain the service of an attorney to make an oral and/or written demand upon the party(ies) suspected of occassioning your loss.
A well crafted demand letter which articulates a lawful, cognizable claim with causational and evidentiary issues fully addressed may go further than an ordinary, garden variety customer complaint especially where the jeweler has an attorney review the demand (which is likely since jewelers
cannot satisfy every demand without due inquiry or rebuttal). Moreover, an initial demand from an attorney will prevent issues/facts from being asserted that may later preclude a recovery/remedy.
G. Joseph Holthaus III
(410) 799-9002
(410) 619-5918 (pager/voice)
