Gemporia still sinking

[Golden]

Will get at least one of them assessed with the GIA and if they agree not Internally flawless May consult a lawyer. The authenticity cards do say IF.

 

[Rose de France]

I also always use a credit card - if I buy - if they go under then I have some protection because I used the card.

Credit cart, debit cart and Paypal are the only ways to pay for Gemporia's products.

 

[TheManWithNoName]

Will get at least one of them assessed with the GIA and if they agree not Internally flawless May consult a lawyer. The authenticity cards do say IF.

This is definitely the way to go. You need a truly independent assessment.

The problem with auctioneers is that:

(A) They have a lot of knowledge on a lot of things - but they are not experts on all of those things.

(B) Even when they have given an expert opinion, they have been proven to be wrong.

I remember on one if those Bargain Hunt type shows a few years ago. A chap went on with a 'rare' artwork. Two auction house 'experts' deemed it to be totally authentic and worth a small fortune.

A third experts then proved that it was actually a VERY good copy that was hard to differentiate from the original. It was then worth a fraction of the original estimate.

Gemporia are sly at times and use some very dubious selling tactics - but I think they would be treading VERY dangerously if they knowingly missold an included Diamond as internally flawless.

They would risk a substantial fine from Trading Standards, which would almost certainly grab the attention of the press - and that would seriously damage the reputation of the brand and potentially harm future sales if they had a damaging article published about them in a newspaper.

Even in their current shambolic state, I'm not sure that Gemporia would be stupid enough to risk all of that to make a few extra hundred pounds.

BUT if the GIA confirm that the auctioneer is correct, and the Diamonds are not internally flawless, you absolutely must sue Gemporia to:

1) Get your money back on the jewellery.
2) Get your additional incurred costs back (the cost of the GIA report.
3) Claim for interest.
4) Stop them from doing this to other customers in the future.

Please keep us informed how you get on.

 

[Marietta]

Welcome! Everything you've raised are things that we've all raised too at some point or another.

In my opinion, Gems TV, Gem Collector and Jewellery Maker are all clinging on for their lives.

JM used to be the go-to place for good quality, well priced, gem strands and cabochons. Those days are long gone.

Gems TV used to be the place for decent quality jewellery, with unusual gemstones, at good prices. Those days are long gone.

Gem Collector used to be the place for decent quality stones, at decent prices. Those days are also long gone.

All three of those channels have been watered down to the point where they're unrecognisable to their glory days.

I genuinely believe that for those channels to survive, they need new ownership. The current owners don't seem to know how to turn the channels around - and they're ignoring concerns that HUNDREDS of viewers are complaining about. If you ignore your key customers, and drive them away, you're left with serious problems.

Take JM for example. When it was under Gemporia ownership first time around, they sold a good business. Immediate Media ruined it by bringing in synthetic stones, plastic and glass beads, and general cheap tat. The prices increased. Postage prices increased and moved to a slower, poorer quality delivery service (Whistl). Packing was poor and orders would regularly be received damaged. Inevitably, it lost customers and struggled. Immediate Media sold it back to Gemporia.

Now, all Gemporia had to to was reverse the changes that Immediate Media had made - and revert back to the 'old' Jewellery Maker. Did Gemporia do that? No. They kept JM almost as it was under Immediate Media - but made the problems even WORSE! The tat remained, prices continued to go up, they started flogging Primal products on a jewellery making channel, and it got invaded by Troth and Jake - taking their boring waffling presentations over to JM as well as Gems TV. Like Gems TV, it also got taken over by Jadeite galore. I didn't think it could get any worse than it was under Immediate Media. How wrong I was! Add to that, JM has THE worst, most unprofessional TV "presenter" ever in Carol Roache. That woman is beyond hideous.

If Gemporia survive their money problems as a business, I can't see JM continuing as a channel long term. Everything is overpriced and can be obtained elsewhere for far cheaper, with next day delivery rather than the week or so it takes for JM stuff to arrive. They don't have a USP any more.

Gem Collector has no variety, the prices have shot up to ridiculous levels, they don't even have 'entry level' stones for newbies, and what was a relaxed informal channel has now turned into hard sell and waffle. It is no longer enjoyable to watch.

As for Gems TV. They no longer have a USP either. The quality of their jewellery has declined rapidly. Their prices have risen rapidly. In addition, their approach to the cost of living crisis has been completely back to front. At a time where people are being more savvy with their shopping, with little disposable income and looking for bargains, Gemporia have hiked their prices and offered a lower quality product. Those two things are incompatible - and this will be their demise.

I think if Gemporia is to survive long term, it needs new owners to bring in new ideas. It's been stale for a good few years now - and there doesn't seem to be any sign of change or improvement.

Steve Bennett told us, exactly one year ago, that he recognised that there were some issues and he was going to make some changes. NOT ONE THING has changed for the better since he made that statement a year ago other than speedier refunds. Every other problems that was there under Colin Wagstaffe, remains now under the Bennetts.

Not a brain among any of them!

 

[Marietta]

I have a friend, who sits on my desk next to my pyrite, to keep me focussed. Say hello to Jake
View attachment 27992

Nice dog, shame about the ape!

 

[AndyW]

Will get at least one of them assessed with the GIA and if they agree not Internally flawless May consult a lawyer. The authenticity cards do say IF.

Auctioneers are not truly independent and are really only there to provide valuations based on potential sale value. Their bottom line is to earn commission from both seller and buyer, usually based on the hammer price in an auction. They will also take into account market conditions, sales history and other factors around who their usual buyers are, etc.

For an auctioneer, the Gemporia certificate should have been enough. Listing wordings - here in the UK, at least - are quite tightly governed. "A 9K gold ring hallmarked at Birmingham Assay Office with 10 diamonds, estimated 2ct TCW. Manufacturers certificate included." for example, could have been enough. The Buyer then decides.

Were they advising in the capacity as Valuer, not Auctioneer? And, if so, on what basis - resale, insurance, replacement, etc? What you will have been told will have been the opinion of the individual(s) who looked at the stones on that day. What were their qualifications? I would hope that he/she would have given you their informal assessment of the clarity to justify their statement at least.

The only query that I would have is if the Gemporia certificate grading only refers to, say, just the central stone. TGGC's T&Cs (s3) only refers to not guaranteeing a gemstone origin. I can't find anything that refers to cut or clarity.

If your concern is whether the diamonds are really IF then, as internationally recognised assessors, the GIA is probably the only way forward. But don't be too disheartened. Let's face it, a ring with a GIA certificate will have a little more potential resale value than one with a TGGC certificate alone.

 

[Ostrichkeeper]

They’re selling Argyle brown diamonds again and Lynn has stated that it’s crucial and very important to keep the certification because they’re irreplaceable. They’re apparently not just like South African ones lol. Toby is comparing large sized diamonds against the tiny little ones they’re currently flogging. Oh, you get both earrings Toby just said, not just one. Making a big deal of getting two earrings, unbelievable guff today. This guy could do this in his sleep. Toby and his price points, whatever they may be.

 

[TheManWithNoName]

Auctioneers are not truly independent and are really only there to provide valuations based on potential sale value. Their bottom line is to earn commission from both seller and buyer, usually based on the hammer price in an auction. They will also take into account market conditions, sales history and other factors around who their usual buyers are, etc.

For an auctioneer, the Gemporia certificate should have been enough. Listing wordings - here in the UK, at least - are quite tightly governed. "A 9K gold ring hallmarked at Birmingham Assay Office with 10 diamonds, estimated 2ct TCW. Manufacturers certificate included." for example, could have been enough. The Buyer then decides.

Were they advising in the capacity as Valuer, not Auctioneer? And, if so, on what basis - resale, insurance, replacement, etc? What you will have been told will have been the opinion of the individual(s) who looked at the stones on that day. What were their qualifications? I would hope that he/she would have given you their informal assessment of the clarity to justify their statement at least.

The only query that I would have is if the Gemporia certificate grading only refers to, say, just the central stone. TGGC's T&Cs (s3) only refers to not guaranteeing a gemstone origin. I can't find anything that refers to cut or clarity.

If your concern is whether the diamonds are really IF then, as internationally recognised assessors, the GIA is probably the only way forward. But don't be too disheartened. Let's face it, a ring with a GIA certificate will have a little more potential resale value than one with a TGGC certificate alone.

Exactly this. You worded it far better than I did.

Id also be intrugued to know if the auctioneer offered to buy it? That woukd also ring alarm bells.

Grading in the industry is also crudely done by examining the stone with a loupe too.

A loupe is supposed to a 10x magnification loupe, and its also supposed be held a certain way - but many people don't hold a loupe properly (myself included).

If a loupe isn't held the 'industry standard' way, then it won't produce an industry standard result. Holding it too close for example could result in it being magnified by 11x rather than 10x - and that could result in an inclusion being shown.

'Internally flawless' doesn't mean that it has no inclusions. It just means that it's 'internally flawless' at 10x magnification.

As much as I distrust Gemporia these days, I don't think they'd be stupid enough to risk something like this. The reputational damage alone would be far more damaging financially than the extra money they'd gain by 'overgrading'. It would be kamikaze behaviour in my opinion.

I'm intrigued to see how this pans out. If the GIA prove that Gemporia did sell included stones as internally flawless, then that could be fatal for a company that is already struggling both financially and reputationally.

 

[Pebbles]

Credit cart, debit cart and Paypal are the only ways to pay for Gemporia's products.

There's potentially a massive difference in the length of protection time, depending on which payment method someone chooses in the UK.

PayPal & debit cards offer 6 months maximum. Credit cards offer 6 years financial protection. All At their evaluation of each case of course, please do your own research.

I bought quite a lot of tiles recently & found this out the hard way. I bought them by debit card.

 

[TheManWithNoName]

There's potentially a massive difference in the length of protection time, depending on which payment method someone chooses in the UK.

PayPal & debit cards offer 6 months maximum. Credit cards offer 6 years financial protection. All At their evaluation of each case of course, please do your own research.

I bought quite a lot of tiles recently & found this out the hard way. I bought them by debit card.

Don't forget too that although Gemporia think that they have no responsibility once their 6 month warranty period is up, that is not true in law. In law, it just means that Gemporia are not 'automatically responsible' once those 6 months are up.

Not many people realise that a consumer has SIX YEARS of protection after they've bought a product - regardless of how long the warranty period is.

The only thing that changes is the 'burden of proof'. In the first six months of buying a product, if that product fails, the seller has to prove that the fault was not there when they sold the product. They are never able to do this because it would mean checking every single product they sell, testing them, taking photographs, etc. It just isn't practical - so they just refund or replace.

After six months, the burden of proof shifts to the buyer. It is then up to the buyer to prove that the item was 'inherently faulty'. In order to do this, the buyer needs to obtain an independent inspection so that if the inspector discovers a design flaw, or a weak spot in the product, they can write an independent report documenting as such.

If, for example, you bought an expensive ring with a HUGE stone, but that stone was only held in by 4 prongs, and the stone fell out and smashed, an independent expert might state that the prongs of the ring were insufficient for the size of the stone and should have had 8 prongs. That would be enough, in law, to prove that the ring was not fit for purpose and 'inherently faulty' from the very beginning.

The grey area in law is this:

The law says that "Goods must be 'fit for purpose' AND 'last a reasonable length of time" - but there is no specific defemination of what a 'reasonable length of time' is.

Courts tend to use some common sense. Would a £20 ring be expected to last for 6 years? Unlikely. So a Judge might rule that a reasonable time would be 12 months. If it fails after 12 months, then tough.

But if you bought a £3000 Lorique ring, a Judge might rule that it is very reasonable to expect a product of that value to last 6 years - and therefore, if you can prove that it was 'inherently faulty' within that timescale, you'd be entitled to a partial refund (an amount deducted to reflect some of the use you had of the product before it failed - so, for example, if the ring cost £6000, and failed after 2 years, a judge might rule that a £4000 refund would be fair because you've been able to use and enjoy the product for 2 full years before it failed).

Obviously none of that applies if an item was mis-sold and not as described. There is no time limit. If you bought a 'Purple Spinel' ring for example, and found out ten years later that it isn't actually Spinel - it's actually Amethyst - you'd have a case in law because the item was not as described and the seller committed fraud by mis-selling.

 

[Pebbles]

Very worthwhile knowing. Great information, thank you.

I was referring to cover if a company goes under. In my case if I'd have paid by credit card I'd have likely been covered for my issue. Because I paid by debit card I only had such financial purchase back up for 6 months. Same with PayPal, 6 months. But my case was with a company that suddenly closed down. So a different scenario.

 

[TheManWithNoName]

Very worthwhile knowing. Great information, thank you.

I was referring to cover if a company goes under. In my case if I'd have paid by credit card I'd have likely been covered for my issue. Because I paid by debit card I only had such financial purchase back up for 6 months. Same with PayPal, 6 months. But my case was with a company that suddenly closed down. So a different scenario.

Yeah for some reason, I had it in my head that this was the post about the internally flawless diamonds.

It is Thursday to be fair. My brains starts to malfunction after about midday on Wednesdays...........

 

[Pebbles]

Yeah for some reason, I had it in my head that this was the post about the internally flawless diamonds.

It is Thursday to be fair. My brains starts to malfunction after about midday on Wednesdays...........

Yes you're right it is about flawless diamonds.

I think credit card companies are still worth getting involved too if someone does get hard evidence that what they were sold may not be what it seems.

Just because the administrator company and Citizens Advice told me that credit card companies are supposed to share the buyer's financial loss with the seller for up to 6 years after the purchase date. Providing purchased by a credit card not debit card.

Obviously I was enquiring about issues after a company I bought from had gone kaput. But I'd imagine it's still worth contacting a credit card company if you can provide evidence that you've been mis-sold an item.

 

[Ant7t]

They’re selling Argyle brown diamonds again and Lynn has stated that it’s crucial and very important to keep the certification because they’re irreplaceable. They’re apparently not just like South African ones lol. Toby is comparing large sized diamonds against the tiny little ones they’re currently flogging. Oh, you get both earrings Toby just said, not just one. Making a big deal of getting two earrings, unbelievable guff today. This guy could do this in his sleep. Toby and his price points, whatever they may be.

Random comment, but related. I remember way back, someone saying regarding a stone size 'in a ring' and 'in a pendant'. Selling the pendant, they said, and I paraphrase, 'you get the same sized stone for a lesser price'. Obvious really, there's less metal in a pendant than a ring, so it should be cheaper, regardless of the stone's size.

 

[Ostrichkeeper]

If I’m remembering correctly most of the internally flawless diamonds were very small so they won’t have a high value anyway being so small. They’re lovely in fairness but it’s the same kind of size that they put into all their cluster rings. A pawnbroker I know told me this.

 

[ianrobo111]

interesting on this discussion about value. I brought a 900 5.5gram platinum ring from the Jewellery Quarter (only place I would ever buy that value from) a couple of months ago. Gemporia a couple of nights again had a ring, same weight 5.6grams for 800 but not my size - U !!

so guess if you are looking there will be the odd 'bargain' but got to be ITK about it !

 

[Kit10]

Currently on TJC website a 950 platinum band ring, 7.06 grams for £663.99.

 

[Golden]

Were they advising in the capacity as Valuer, not Auctioneer? And, if so, on what basis - resale, insurance, replacement, etc? What you will have been told will have been the opinion of the individual(s) who looked at the stones on that day. What were their qualifications? I would hope that he/she would have given you their informal assessment of the clarity to justify their statement at least.

It was what they valued the rings at in order for them to sell them on - and obviously to make a profit. My main gripe is they should not have been sold as IF if they are not

 

[TheManWithNoName]

It was what they valued the rings at in order for them to sell them on - and obviously to make a profit. My main gripe is they should not have been sold as IF if they are not

I'm very sceptical and I'm of the opinion that they were full of BS.

I reckon they told you that they were not IF Diamonds so that they could imply that the diamonds were lower quality, lowball you an offer in the hope that you would accept it - so that they could then sell them on as IF Diamonds at a far higher price.

 

[AndyW]

I'm very sceptical and I'm of the opinion that they were full of BS.

I reckon they told you that they were not IF Diamonds so that they could imply that the diamonds were lower quality, lowball you an offer in the hope that you would accept it - so that they could then sell them on as IF Diamonds at a far higher price.

I agree. Sounds all wrong and smells. Sounds like a tactic from forty or fifty years ago.

No reputable auctioneers are in the business of scamming in this way at all. These are not unsigned or newly discovered works of art, where the attribution is in question. They are metal and minerals, both of which can be tested on the spot with easily obtainable and affordable methods. With that simple job done, they have no need to challenge Gemporia's clarity grading to sell them for you, as long as the certificate was part of the auction lot. As TMWNN said, whatever we may think in general about Gemporia's current incarnation, I don't believe that this basic industry-wide use of the GIA clarity scale would be abused by them.

Wrong firm, wrong type of place for getting another meaningful grading. Go to another firm to actually consign them for sale, with the Gemporia certificate, and let the market decide or send them to a place designed for the job of grading gemstones.