You can read that any way you like and it remains true. Kate has written INSTORE’s “The Real Deal” since the very first issue of the magazine in January 2002. Kate was also the “real deal” in management consulting, one of the most prolific, experienced and respected consultants to ever work with jewelry retailers.

Not only that, but she was loved across the industry for her down-to-earth demeanor, quick wit and boundless generosity.

Sadly, we lost Kate when she died from injuries suffered in a fire in her Maryland home in the early morning hours of Easter Sunday. She is survived by her two sons, Nicholas Peterson and Kevin Peterson; her parents, Paul and Connie Bykowski; one sister Beth (and Adam) Henning; two brothers, Tom (and Lisa) Bykowski and Jim (and Annette) Bykowski; nine nieces and nephews, including Marylee, Melany, Morgan, Miya, Dylan, Steven, Robin, Seth and Keith, and many cousins.

Kate was one of INSTORE’s biggest supporters, and we (the INSTORE team) are still trying to wrap our heads around the enormous loss of her insight and her unfailing willingness to help us in any way that she could. I will never forget how, at the first few SMART Jewelry Shows in Chicago, Kate stayed busy the entire time, speaking to audiences or helping us wrangle sources for our stories or trying to get new educational features off the ground (there was one where we basically put Kate at a round table in the middle of the show floor and invited retailers to sit down with her to hash out their problems … I’m kind of surprised more people didn’t take advantage of that, now that I think of it). She was super excited about the upcoming INSTORE Show, and we’ll miss having her there.

But in late 2001, when then-editor-in-chief (now group editorial director) David Squires was getting ready to launch INSTORE, he didn’t know Kate. Nevertheless, he was able to coax Kate and her then-partner Janice Mack Talcott to write the first installment of the Real Deal.

“The department was an idea of mine in the original outline of the magazine: real-life business scenarios, with my go-to example being trying to teach the salesperson who’s too shy to ask for the sale,” says Squires. “I don’t remember how we found Performance Concepts (Janice Mack and Kate) to populate the department. I’d just do a lot of internet searches and try to find somebody who was saying interesting things online.

“Anyway, I don’t think it was too long before the partnership between Janice and Kate broke up.

I remember thinking at the time that this was a very bad loss for INSTORE, because Janice was the more renowned expert due to her relationship with Hearts on Fire, and I was worried Kate might not have Janice’s name recognition or skill level.

“But Kate, obviously, came through in an absolutely massive way and almost single-handedly turned that department into the magazine highlight that it was. And

I also hope that writing the department, as well as her other work for us, in print and at events, helped build her status within the industry.

“She really was a blessing for our publication … and losing her is a tremendous loss.”

I’ve managed the Real Deal for more than 15 years now, and I will feel Kate’s absence keenly. Back when I was still a senior editor for INSTORE, I was assigned to manage submissions from our columnists — a task I still do to this day. And the Real Deal was the most complicated feature of them all. We had to acquire the copy from Kate, get it off to our artist to illustrate, then email the scenario to our readers and get their responses. That requires a fair amount of lead time … and that’s something Kate wasn’t particularly good at providing.

I can’t count the number of times I’ve emailed Kate and said something like, “Kate, if I don’t get that copy today, the Real Deal is not going to appear in this issue!” But it wasn’t that Kate was lazy or a procrastinator … anyone who knows her knows that couldn’t be further from the truth. She was just 100 percent committed to her clients. And her clients needed her so often that it was difficult to find time to write the Real Deal. But she always found a way to get it done, just in the nick of time, even if she had to write it on a plane at 3 in the morning.

And we’re fortunate that her clients needed her because that’s usually where Kate got her inspiration for the Real Deal. As she wrote in our Real Deal retrospective last January, “The question I ask most often when clients reach out for help with especially prickly situations is, ‘If I promise to cover up the identifying details really well, can I use this for a Real Deal?’”

Whenever Kate was asked how she kept coming up with stories, she liked to say, “We don’t make this stuff up … it actually happens!”

In March, for the first time ever, Kate sent me four Real Deal scenarios in advance so that we could get ahead on producing the artwork. I was excited at the time, but it means even more now because we’ll all get to enjoy two more installments of the Real Deal from Kate.

This quote from poet Mary Oliver was one of Kate’s favorites: “When it’s over, I want to say: all my life I was a bride married to amazement. I was the bridegroom, taking the world into my arms. When it is over, I don’t want to wonder if I have made of my life something particular, and real. I don’t want to find myself sighing and frightened, or full of argument. I don’t want to end up simply having visited this world.”

I think we can safely say that Kate achieved her goal of making her life something particular and real. As real as the Real Deal.

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

I didn’t know Kate personally, but I’ve always enjoyed her contribution to INSTORE with the Real Deal. For many years now I have read, related to and responded to these stories and situations. I always looked forward to reading the Real Deal emails, responding and then seeing if I made the upcoming issue with my words of “wisdom.” I also really enjoy seeing other insights and seeing how I might view a situation differently. Again, I didn’t know Kate personally, but she and her talents will certainly be missed. Rest easy Kate.

Bonnie F.
Troy, OH

Kate contributed so much to the processes of our store over the years. She started by helping my father over 30 years ago, and she was still working on projects with me in 2023. It is so hard to stay relevant in any industry over the course of a lifetime, but Kate was always at the top of her game! I loved her honesty and the fact that she was so direct. Kate never held back or sugar-coated anything. A lot of times, with business owners. consultants only tell us what they think we want to hear. Not Kate! I always read her Real Deal articles because they were so relatable and it reminded me that we as an industry all experience similar situations together. She used one of our scenarios AT LEAST once! Kate was a force in our industry and the world will not be the same without her. She will be truly missed!

Mark and Monika C.
Rockford, IL

Here at Clodius & Co. Jewelers, Kate will be forever missed and never forgotten. Over some 20 years, she helped us get on track for growth, helped solve and give us tools to handle personnel problems. More than that, more than one “Real Deal” story evolved over real incidents we endured and then shared with Kate. The best memories, ones we will hold close, were after store hours, talking about our industry and some of the people who keep it so interesting. Talking about our families and dogs. Getting cool gems out or showing off things from our collection. I remember looking at one crazy piece of antique gold work and speculating about what it was. Kate took a picture and tweeted it out to her network, and in a matter of minutes, we all knew what it was. Amazing. Love of jewelry, people, animals, travel, good food and good wine. Never lacking for interesting things to talk about. Our lives were enriched by knowing her.

Denise O.
La Grange, IL

My eyes are leaking as I write. Kate Peterson, the loss of your presence will send a ripple effect through our industry. When you are stumped as an owner/manager for an answer for the most bizarre circumstances, you could look to Kate Peterson for answers. Either with a quick email, a column reference or a lunchtime recon mission through decades of old INSTORE magazines. She and our community brain hive provide brilliant insights on professionally handling the audacity, indulgences or politely worded refusals to a particular customer situation. Many times, my business savvy depended on a fresh fueled response I gleaned from the pages of INSTORE’S Real Deal columns from Kate Peterson. I am grateful I have an archive that is even more important now that we have lost an iconic negotiating professor and industry collaborator. Thank you for the legacy you’ve created and the wisdom you shared.

Drue S.
Albany, NY

I always enjoyed reading the “Real Deals” and challenging myself to answer them in an intelligent yet sensitive way. Customers can be so challenging these days, and yet, we cannot afford to lose many! The situations were always interesting with the many answers enlightening! I hope they can continue without Kate and I wish her family and family of friends my sympathy and best wishes.

Babs N.
Bozeman, MT

I met Miss Kate at my very first SMART Jewelry Show in Chicago. As she is known for, she made me feel as if she had been excitedly waiting all day to meet me, and she made me feel like I was the most important person in the room. Considering how her schedule was surely PACKED during the show, it is remarkable to me that she took the time to thank me for coming to speak and assure me that she would be listening in. She seemed to have memorized the info I had sent in for my speaker bio; and I continue to look back on that and marvel, as I have no such ability. Over the years, we made sure to always connect at shows. Considering how long it took me to “find my people” in the industry, I’m ever so grateful she was one of them. Miss Kate, I can’t believe I won’t see you at the next show … but I bet I’ll “feel” you there.

Elizabeth M.
Brockton, MA

There are so many things I admire about Kate. She always made me feel like my call was the most important call of her day, and she didn’t forget anything. The Real Deal is my favorite article in the magazine. I look forward to it every month. Her pride in her son showed in those blue eyes whenever we spoke of our kids. Kate will be missed by me every day.

Allison Leitzel W.
Hershey, PA

While Kate’s Real Deal scenarios often gave me anxiety, she would assure me that this was natural based on my stable DISC analysis (thanks, Kate!). Kate was so many things. She was a leader, a mentor, a role model and a friend. I have the greatest respect and admiration for Kate. She was the trifecta of intelligent, witty and personable. Kate was the type of person who you wanted to be around, and you always felt smarter in her presence. My favorite memories of Kate are simple ones. They are the times when I had the opportunity to sit one on one and have genuine, authentic conversations, often while enjoying a drink. As a mom, I admired the way Kate beamed when talking (and bragging) about her sons. From savvy cryptocurrency advice to news of becoming a grandmother, she was loving, happy and proud. When I close my eyes and picture Kate, I will always see her smile and the way it glowed when she talked about her family and her dogs.

Mark L.
Fort Myers, FL

Kate and I had just been communicating about a “Real Deal” scenario we experienced and wanted to write about. I loved brainstorming with her, and whenever she asked me to participate in something, I always said “YES!” I will hold onto great memories with and of her.

Elva V.
Dallas, PA

Having encountered several “sticky” situations over the years, I often relied on the intuitive responses to Kate’s scenarios. She knew how to highlight each incident, giving each of us a perspective on how to do the “deal” in those situations. The Real Deal assured us that we were not alone in our efforts to solve our customer issues while creating the smallest ripple on the pond.

Lori V.
Plymouth, IN

We have known Kate for a long time. She has always helped us with whatever we had going on. She used one of our scenarios for one of the INSTORE cases. She was always helpful and very knowledgeable. She will be missed for sure!

Angela P.
Geismar, LA

I met Kate Peterson when I worked for Charleston Alexander Diamond Importers. They hired Kate and Performance Concepts to train us. She was the most knowledgeable and industry-savvy person I have ever met. She had THE answers to every jewelry or client or peer situation. She was a mentor and a friend and remained so for 15 years. Rest in peace Katie P. You are loved and admired. You were the Real Deal.

Josh R.
Montgomery, AL

I listened to Kate at many of the shows she attended. I picked up a handout or printed an email from one of the seminars she had at the SJTA show and printed the list of I think it was 15 closes … and I taped it to the mirror in the work bathroom. I would read them when I washed my hands every day to get better at closing. One day I was washing my hands, and a client and friend had added his own close to the list. He said to “call your frat bros and get them to come in and buy, use our common bond to close the sale.” I mentioned that one time to Kate at another event I saw her at, and she said well he was right! I was so looking forward to hearing her again at this past Alabama Jewelers Association convention and was saddened by the news of what had taken place. Thoughts and prayers to her family and friends.

James S.
Westborough, MA

Kate’s article was the first thing I read in INSTORE Magazine. I have a few of those customers; have been in business for 46 years.

Joel M.
Fuqua-Varina, NC

Kate was the first consultant I hired after Scull & Company. She had just started Performance Concepts. She did a lot to help me grow my business. We worked the SMART Jewelry Show together from the start. After that, we seemed to end up speaking at the same places and even traveled together sometimes. We had a lot of shared beliefs and even shared the same birthday. Her loss will be devastating to our trade and to her many friends. I miss her already.

Alan L.
Cape May, NJ

Some people make an impact that seems larger than life. They seem to navigate the bumps and turns successfully and then they are willing to share their experience.

Sarah Hurwitz R.
Frederick, MD

Kate was instrumental in helping us with a smooth transition during a crucial time in our business. With her keen observation, humor and kindness, she provided the best possible support for us during a rebrand and leadership transition. I counted on Kate tremendously as a mentor and friend. It’s a big hole that has been left in our industry and our lives without Kate.

Patricia H.
Frederick, MD

Long before I knew Kate personally and professionally, I loved reading her Real Deal column. Often it was the first page I turned to when I picked up your magazine.

Recently, Kate had become a mentor and friend to our daughter, Sarah, as she was preparing to take over Presidency of Colonial Jewelers from Jeff and me. Her insight, sense of humor, and kindness meant so much to Sarah, and I was so appreciative of her presence in our lives. We will miss her terribly.

The post INSTORE Readers Honor “Real Deal” Creator Kate Peterson appeared first on INSTOREMAG.COM.

Paulson Jewelers had been in their prime downtown Landale spot for 108 years and enjoyed an impeccable reputation for quality and integrity that Tim was committed to safeguarding while he worked to keep the business growing with the times.

Near closing one day in early March, Helen Davies came into the Paulson store with an engagement ring she wanted to sell. The ring was a well-worn, 4-prong solitaire setting stamped “14KP” set with a 7.5mm stone. Paulson’s customer service associate, following company procedure, prepared an intake envelope. She collected Helen’s contact information, noted a description and photographed the ring, then tested the stone in Helen’s presence using the store’s handheld diamond tester, which indicated that it was, in fact, a diamond. The associate then took Helen, the ring and all of the information she had collected to one of the store’s consultation rooms where she introduced Helen to Susan Calder, Paulson’s gemologist and buyer.

After examining the ring carefully using a gemological microscope and the store’s advanced testing device, Susan determined that the stone in Helen’s ring was not a diamond but rather was a diamond-coated synthetic moissanite. She described the makeup of the stone to Helen and explained how it could have fooled the basic diamond tester. When she said that the most Paulson’s could offer for the ring was the melt value of the metal — just over $125 — Helen was furious. She insisted that the stone in her ring was a diamond and that Susan and her fancy equipment were absolutely wrong. She then told Susan that she had bought it from a young man at Town Craftsman Jewelers for $4,500 and produced a hand-written receipt as verification. Susan was puzzled, since she knew Town Craftsman to be a small downtown repair shop that didn’t typically sell any inventory. Hearing Helen’s raised voice, Tim Paulson stepped into the room. Helen demanded that Tim look at her ring and point out Susan’s mistake — but when he put the ring back through the testing device, he confirmed Susan’s findings.

Helen stormed out of the store, but not before announcing her intention to make certain that everyone in town heard about how Paulson’s tried to take advantage of her. Knowing Dan English, the owner of Town Craftsman, neither Tim nor Susan believed that Helen was telling the real story.

Early the next morning, Darren Rendel, a young man Tim recognized as Dan’s assistant at Town Craftsman, came into the store and confronted him, accusing him of lying to a customer, undervaluing her property and trying to buy her ring at well below market value. Darren explained that he personally had sold the ring Tim and Susan saw the day before to Helen Davies after buying it as part of a lot in 2020 from a connection his older brother had in New York.

Guessing that Darren had likely been ripped off by an unscrupulous seller, Tim asked Susan to show him the process she had used to assess the stone. After watching Susan demonstrate on a sample stone, Darren pulled a ring out of his pocket that appeared to be identical to the one Susan had evaluated the evening before and asked her to examine it while he watched. As expected, that ring too held a diamond-coated moissanite.

Darren was mortified. He said that he and his brother had taken $25,000 they had inherited from their grandmother and spent it on 10 identical rings they bought from a dealer they met through his brother’s boss, the owner of a local construction company. He said that though he really knew little about diamonds, they trusted the man completely and saw the buy as an opportunity to make some extra money. Darren said that since Town Craftsman didn’t sell jewelry, his boss Dan was OK with him selling to friends and family on occasion — so Darren didn’t think it was a problem to offer the rings to customers he met while handling their repairs at the shop. He also mentioned that he had “borrowed” one of the old receipt books that had been in the back room waiting to be thrown out since Dan converted to a POS system 5 years ago.

Darren said he had sold nine of the 10 rings but wasn’t sure he could track down any of the buyers except for Helen, who was a friend of his aunt, and who had called him the evening before to complain about Paulson’s. He begged Tim to not tell Dan until he could reach his brother and figure out what to do.

Eric L.
Jewelers, Allentown, PA

First and foremost, Dan needs to restore Paulson’s reputation. After that, he has a lot of work to do to save his repair business. Then he needs to get educated about diamonds and gemstones, if he continues to sell them.

Mark E.
Indianapolis, IN

As the owner of the store, it is your obligation to explain to the other owner what happened. Whether you go into all of the details that were shared with you is another thing. As an independent business in a small local community, you would be doing yourself a disservice if you are not totally transparent with the other business owner.

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

Tim should give Darren the opportunity to talk to Dan first, but if he doesn’t, then I think Tim should definitely have a conversation with Dan. I’d also make sure Darren calls Helen while he’s in the store and explains to her what happened. It’s not fair that Tim and his business get bad-mouthed by Helen for just doing their job. Darren made a big mistake (or mistakes) and needs to own up to them. Then he needs to learn his lesson from this and stay in his lane. There are a lot of crooks out there. Don’t be the idiot that blindly keeps them in business by putting your chips in a game you know nothing about. And Dan needs to keep a tighter leash on his business and his employees.

Barry N.
Naples, FL

As friends in the business, the jeweler owes it to his friend to discuss and not withhold info. By keeping the secret, he colludes and becomes suspect himself. They can all work together to try to decrease the damage done by the foolish employee. The employee had no business trying to do business out of ignorance. He may have seriously tarnished the reputation of his employer.

Ralph V.
Edmonton, AB

He absolutely should not honor the request. He should call the owner, Dan, immediately and tell him the whole story as he knows it. It’s Town Craftsman’s reputation that’s on the line now. Darren’s decision to “borrow” some old receipt books puts Town Craftsman right in the crosshairs.

Dan needs to own up to the situation, find a way to locate the other eight rings that were sold and refund the purchase prices of all of them.

When the truth comes out, and it will, Helen will understand that it was Darren and not Paulson’s that was “trying to rip her off.” Allowing entrepreneurial freedom isn’t always the best choice, but particularly with people who are not trained in the things they are selling. Town Craftsman will take a huge hit from this, and Darren might not have a job when all the dust settles.

Patrisha C.
Centerville, MA

Darren needs to be held accountable to both Helen and Tim. First, Helen needs to be reimbursed no questions asked and apologize to Tim for her mudslinging. Secondly, Darren and his brother need to find the nine other buyers and reimburse them if possible. Darren’s boss needs to set store policy that no “outside” sales carry his store logo, period.

Incidents like this give honest jewelry stores a bad image. No one without gemological training should be buying stones, period, including those who have been in business for years. This type of screwup costs customers, reputations and money. Personally, I would fire Darren and charge him with fraud.

Tracy W.
San Gabriel, CA

Paulson’s reputation is being smeared in town. Give him a set time, maybe a week, to resolve this, but only if he contacts Helen and asks her to stop talking until he can get to the bottom of things. Tell him you’ll need to talk to the other jeweler to maintain your name in the community.

The post When a Gemologist Reveals That a Client’s “Diamond” Is Moissanite, The Reputations of Two Jewelry Businesses Are Threatened appeared first on INSTOREMAG.COM.

Back in mid-January, Leanne Keller came into Allure to order a special wedding band for her husband as a gift for their tenth anniversary.

The ring was an 8mm tungsten carbide band with a 4mm meteorite inlay — a style that Allure’s wedding band supplier was able to make and deliver in plenty of time for the Kellers’ March 5 anniversary.

While writing up the order, Maria explained that unlike precious metal bands, the tungsten and meteorite ring Leanne was ordering could not be resized. She suggested that Leanne bring her husband back to the store so they could measure his finger and ensure a precise fit before placing the order. Leanne reminded Maria that this was going to be a surprise and said that she was certain that her husband wore a size 10. Maria noted on the order that the size was a customer request, not verified in-store.

As Leanne handed Maria her debit card to pay for the $1,450 ring, she asked if it was possible to have a special message engraved inside the ring. Maria knew that the manufacturer offered laser engraving, but in an effort to ensure that there would no misunderstanding, she brought her store manager in to answer the question.

The store manager told Leanne that they could engrave a short message in the ring and explained the laser engraving process. He told her that since she wanted the ring personalized, though, it was very important to order the correct size, since engraved rings were not even exchangeable under the manufacturer’s sizing warranty. He explained that should her husband need a different size at any point, she would be extended “courtesy pricing,” but that she would need to buy a replacement. Leanne impatiently repeated her assertion that her husband wore a size 10, insisting that she would not ruin her surprise by bringing him in. She gave Maria the engraving instructions, paid for the ring and left the store.

Leanne returned on Feb. 20 to pick up her ring. As was the store’s procedure, Maria went over the order with Leanne in detail and verified that everything was as promised. Leanne was very happy with the ring — inside and out — and even stopped to tell the store manager how much she loved it.

Maria felt a touch of dread when she saw Leanne scowling as she walked back into the store with her husband on March 7. She walked directly up to Maria, put the ring box on the counter and told her that the ring was too small. Maria calmly asked to measure the man’s finger and was not at all surprised to see that he needed a size 11. She explained to the couple that as previously discussed, the ring was not exchangeable, but that she would call the manufacturer to get the courtesy price for a replacement.

Leanne became belligerent, insisting that Maria had lied to her. She said she clearly remembered being told that though the ring could not be sized, it could easily be exchanged for the correct size at no additional charge. When Leanne’s tirade got loud enough for other customers to hear, the manager stepped in, with Allure’s owner at his side. Over constant, loud interruptions, the manager explained the same policy regarding engraving that he and Maria had explained to Leanne when she placed the order. He even pointed out her signature on the original order form, which included a clear statement that “engraved or altered items are not returnable or exchangeable.” During the exchange, Leanne’s husband stood silently off to the side, looking seriously embarrassed.

While Maria was processing the paperwork for the new order, Leanne kept loudly insisting to no one in particular that she would never come back again, that the entire staff was incompetent, and that the store was the biggest rip-off in town.

After they left, Maria went to the store owner in tears and told her about a number of other quite nasty things Leanne had said before she and the manager came over. The owner decided to call Leanne and tell her that the ring would not be reordered, and that a check for her full purchase price would be waiting for pickup at the store. Despite the owner’s calm demeanor, the call didn’t go well.

The next day, Leanne’s husband came into the store to pick up the check. Before he left, he apologized to Maria, to the store manager and to the owner for his wife’s behavior, saying that she was not well and was going through a difficult time. He told the owner that he still wanted the ring and asked her to please consider allowing him to reorder it in the correct size. He even offered to pay for the original ring in addition to the new one. The owner said she would think about it and get back to him in a few days.

Sherrie L.
Sharon, WI

I would have taken the husband’s offer immediately. He was fully apologetic, HE wanted the ring, he was willing to pay the agreed-upon price. (I would have given him the “courtesy price” on the replacement, even if it cut into profit.) HE is your customer then, not his harridan of a wife.

Lex A.
Denver, CO

Post-COVID, it feels as though many customers’ fuses are non-existent (in our industry as well as many others *cough cough airlines*). While we all know the mantra “the customer is always right,” but more and more it feels as though anyone in the service industry has become a pin cushion for the angst of some out-of-control, ticking time bombs of people.

Ultimately, I don’t think we should be rewarding folks for bad behavior. It WOULD be easy and acceptable to bend over backwards to make this situation right, but just as customers are allowed to take their business elsewhere, we should be allowed to say goodbye to unruly hotheads.

Sure, the word of mouth may do some harm, but more than likely people in Leanne’s orbit don’t take her word as gospel either. The store did everything right in explaining the path she was headed and shouldn’t feel guilty for her disappointment (to put it nicely). Focus on providing excellent customer service for the many people who appreciate it and say goodbye to bad apples.

Robert D.
Mendham, NJ

The store made a generous offer by getting another ring for cost. We had a similar situation this past Christmas with earrings I did not want to make. When Leanne made it PERSONAL, she should have been asked to leave. Deal with the husband another day.

Naomi V.
Haines City, FL

I totally agree and respect the response from the store owner. I believe owners/managers need to always stick to store policy, if not for consistency, then to show loyalty to employees who enforce policies every day. When an owner or manager shows up during a store complaint and goes against store policy, it makes the employees look incompetent and gives customers the right to demand breaking store policy. I believe the owner keeps loyal employees because of the support they show their staff! Great story!

Bill M.
Old Saybrook, CT

She did the right thing. Goodbye, good riddance!

Stacey H.
Lincolnwood, IL

Obviously something is seriously wrong with Leanne. Let the husband pay for both rings and let him know that you’re grateful for his business and hope his wife gets well soon. He apologized, and if Leanne ever becomes normal again, she’s going to be grateful for their compassion and forgiveness. When someone asks forgiveness sincerely, you have to forgive, especially since no one died. Forgive and accept the payment!

Linda F.
Lexington, KY

I think that the store owner did the right thing by refunding the customer and banning them from future purchases. Protecting your staff from abusive customers when they did nothing wrong is the right thing to do.

Gloria H.
Topeka, KS

I would have exchanged the ring at no cost to the customer, no questions asked. It is so rare this would happen that I would rather pay another $200 for another ring and have it engraved than make an unhappy customer who will badmouth us to others, or even worse, put out a bad review. Good reviews trump all! One bad review could scare many other customers away.

Ursula P.
Naples, FL

Maria, and the store owner did everything right. The customer was clearly out of line — for whatever reason! In some rare cases, it is better to separate a disruptive customer than try to retain her/him. Leanne’s husband was gracious in acknowledging and apologizing for his wife’s conduct. Although he wants to keep and pay for the earlier ring and offers to order and pay for one in the correct size, I would prefer not to be involved in another potentially volatile situation with the couple. I would thank the husband for his understanding and kindness and explain that I cannot accept his offer in order to avoid a future elevated situation that would be difficult for everyone. And ask for his understanding. As retailers, we certainly want to cherish our customers, but we also must have the backs of our loyal team members and not allow blatant customer abuse that borders on insult.

Brenda M.
Kalamazoo, MI

The husband might want to get the ring because it could be the last significant gift he gets from his wife. She could be in the early stages of dementia or Alzheimer’s, or some other kind of mental or medical crisis. I would have compassion on the husband and honor his request for a replacement at an attractive (but profitable) price. He does not expect the store to take a loss, so he is an honorable man. But he does want the gift from his wife — although he’s only had it a day, it already has great sentimental value to him. People with dementia and Alzheimer’s can be extraordinarily mean, no matter how sweet or kind they were before. Until she is better (if she can get better), I would help him get his ring and consider him to be the client instead of her. He has opened the door for us to kindly ask what we should do the next time she comes shopping, and to request that he be with her.

Mary T.
Leavenworth, WA

I would relay to the husband that, with regret, they’re fired! Don’t give her another chance to abuse your employees.

Peter T.
Show Low, AZ

Giving the obnoxious customer her money back is simply encouraging her (and those like her) to abuse businesses. As soon as the customer got belligerent, they should have been asked to leave. The “very difficult time” the witch is going through does not give her the right to treat others badly. If the husband wants to buy a second ring, he would still need to pay for both the first ring and the discounted price for the second. It would be good to mention to him that his wife isn’t allowed in the store unless she can behave herself. If that offends him, so be it. If she was a good customer and behaved like a decent person, that could be taken into account when the time comes to charge for the second ring, but I would charge for the second ring. When we clearly convey a possible problem to the customer, and that issue comes to light, it is not the store’s responsibility to cater to the customer’s stupidity.

Mark E.
Indianapolis, IN

Interestingly enough, I had a very similar situation, only it dealt with a diamond engagement ring. While in Las Vegas, the client claimed her diamond “jumped” out of her 4-prong solitaire and was lost. As I inspected the ring, noting that the prongs had been severely struck by something, I commented she was lucky she didn’t lose a finger or worse. At this point, the client became quite abusive with her language. After telling her that we would replace her diamond with an equal or better diamond at no cost to her, I declared the issue to be resolved. At this juncture, I turned to the overly embarrassed and red-faced husband and began talking about sports, totally ignoring the still complaining wife. Luckily the husband took the cue and hurriedly escorted his wife out of the door. As promised, we replaced the diamond with a bigger, better-quality diamond and at no additional cost to her. Bottom line, no matter what course of action you take, you’ll never see that client again.

Jo G.
Oconomowoc, WI

So many mistakes, first of all selling crap metal as valuable jewelry. I have hated the stuff since the 90s and refuse to sell it in rings. Chains and bracelets, okay; rings, never. Screamers make a lot of noise, but the worst they can do is a one star. I would have mailed the check, not made them come back in. If the husband wants the ring, order it for him. I give my customers 3 strikes for bad behavior, one each time. That allows for personal struggles that turn ugly in my store, or a fight with a loved one, or bad medical news. You go straight to 3 strikes if you give a one-star review, in which case we never work for you again. She was told six ways to Sunday how things were going to roll out, but I would not have engraved the ring until we knew it fit. A gift cert for the engraving could have been included with the ring, just in case, because people are sometimes stupid.

Bruce A.
Sherwood Park, AB

This owner should write a book under the title, “Perfect Response to an Impossible Situation”! She not only saved the sale by offering a full refund, she received an apology from a new customer. Chalk up two wins in her column, three if you count the support she showed her staff!

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

It’s tough because I understand why the owner did what she did to just get rid of the headache, but if someone was insulting my staff, my store and making a scene like that … I wouldn’t have been that accommodating. She would have been stuck with the ring and I would have fired her as a customer. The situation played out, however, and her husband is trying to make it right. I would let him re-order and pay for both rings so at least you’re not out the money. And no excuse makes up for her scummy behavior. Maybe she’ll feel bad and apologize, or maybe she’ll raise more trouble because her husband tried to make it right and went behind her back. Who knows, but keep an eye on this woman!

The post A Belligerent Customer Finally Pushes a Store Owner Too Far appeared first on INSTOREMAG.COM.

Several months ago, Michelle and Dean ran into their neighbor, Paul Henry, while waiting for a table at a local restaurant. During their conversation, Paul mentioned that he was considering a surprise proposal to the woman he had been seeing for the past year and asked Michelle if she could help him select a ring.

Of course, Michelle was delighted, and they set up an appointment for the following Saturday.

Paul had bought the house next door to the Lucases several years ago after battling through a nasty divorce. Michelle had only met Paul’s ex-wife once when she was dropping their daughter Olivia off for a weekend visit. Much to Paul’s chagrin, however, she and Dean had also overheard several of the woman’s loud and nasty “driveway tirades” on other occasions when she wasn’t happy with some element of Paul’s more traditional parenting style.

Michelle was surprised that Saturday afternoon when Paul arrived at the store with Olivia in tow. He explained that his ex had needed to switch weekends at the last minute, and he didn’t want to cancel the appointment, so he had brought Olivia along to help him choose a ring. For the first 20 minutes while Paul looked at different versions of the designer setting his soon-to-be-fiancée had pointed out in the store’s window several weeks before, Olivia sat patiently beside him, engrossed in a game she was playing on her new iPhone. When the setting choice was made and the discussion turned to diamonds, Olivia asked Michelle if she could look around while her dad finished his shopping. With Paul’s nod of approval, Michelle gave the OK, and the child walked off into the busy store.

The conversation quickly returned to diamonds, and after a half-hour spent looking at several options, Paul settled on a stunning 1.70-carat F VS1 emerald cut, bringing the total cost of his ring to $23,600. Paul retrieved Olivia from the store’s watch boutique while Michelle processed the paperwork and his credit card, then father and daughter left the store.

As the team was closing that afternoon, Jack Patel, Michelle’s newest coworker, asked if he could have a word with her. He told Michelle that while she had been working with Paul, he had seen Olivia take one of the new $65 sterling silver and gemstone bead bracelets off of the display. He thought he had seen her put it into the pocket of her hoodie but couldn’t be sure. He checked the display after Olivia had moved on to another area of the store and confirmed that the bracelet hadn’t been put back in its place. Jack said that he became busy with customers at that point, but while preparing for closing, he was able to confirm that the bracelet hadn’t been sold, and he was unable to find it when he took another look around the store. Because he really couldn’t be sure that Olivia had actually taken the bracelet, and he knew that Paul was a friend, he thought it best to tell Michelle before bringing the situation to the store owner’s attention.

The last thing Michelle wanted was to jeopardize her sale over a $65 bracelet, and she definitely didn’t want to be put in the middle of what was sure to be an awkward situation, but it was closing time on Saturday, and Linda Burke, the store owner, had already left for the day. Michelle and Jack agreed that they would take one more careful look around first thing Monday morning, and if the bracelet wasn’t found, they would talk with Linda.

After another futile search, Michelle and Jack explained the situation to Linda when she arrived Monday morning. Linda pulled up the security video from the area of the store that included the bracelet display. In the video, they could clearly see Olivia taking the bracelet off the display, but her position and the angle of the camera made it impossible to see exactly what she had done with it. Video of Olivia in other parts of the store during her 30-minute walk-around offered no clues. They knew for certain that the bracelet was nowhere in the store, and though all three believed they knew what had happened, they couldn’t prove that Olivia took it.

Linda was torn over what to do. As the parent of a young teen herself, she was certain that she would want to know if it had been her son in a similar situation.

As a business owner, however, while she believed that halting the development of a potential future felon was a good thing, she also recognized that there could be plenty of possible negatives attached to bringing the situation to Paul’s attention — especially knowing that any effort to address the issue with Olivia would have to involve her combative and over-indulgent mother.

Jo G.
Oconomowoc, WI

If you can’t prove it, leave it alone. It is the cost of doing business. If there was clear theft on the video, absolutely call Paul, but that is not the situation in the story.

Bruce A.
Sherwood Park, AB

Assuming a keystone mark-up, at best this is a thirty-three-dollar write-off. Handle it the same way as any small jewelry items disappearing occasionally from a display with easy public access. That is the reason your accountant set you up with an ICR (Inventory Change Report). I would handle the situation this way whether there was a sale or not.

Jack L.
Lake Forest, CA

Sometimes, you have to bite the bullet and move on. The store owner is not going to convert Olivia’s behavior by floating this incident to her parent(s), especially since the video was inconclusive. Yes, the theft of a $65 item is as bad as the theft of a $650 item, but, weighing everything, forget it and move on to the next $20,000 sale.

Stuart T.
Reisterstown, MD

Ever heard the phrase, “They shoot the bearer of bad news?” If you inform the father who just gave you a huge sale that you think his daughter is a thief, how well do you think that will go over? Eat the $ 65 bracelet, chalk it up to good will and be happy for the sale.

Mary T.
Leavenworth, WA

Unfortunately, nothing can be done. If the camera had shown the theft, I would have approached Paul after the diamond sale had taken place. Now, the girl just needs to be watched each time she comes into the store. In a real situation, I would make sure that the camera focus would be better in that area.

Leo A.
St. Louis, MO

The Aanswer is in the story itself: “In the video, they could clearly see Olivia taking the bracelet off the display, but her position and the angle of the camera made it impossible to see exactly what she had done with it.” Not going to make an accusation or mention anything without solid proof she took it. Now, if the video can show there was no other option, such as falling on the floor, I would bring it up to the dad as a “just so you know” type thing.

Tracy W.
San Gabriel, CA

Let it go. For a $23,000 sale, your cost on a $65 sterling bracelet isn’t much. If the girl didn’t take it, however unlikely, you have alienated a neighbor and future client. Not to mention the legality: You can’t prove by the video that she took it. If she did, she’ll get caught sooner or later. If she comes into the store again, have an associate shadow her.

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

I know there is a nice sale riding with Paul here, but there is also a duty to call out a potential thief and the opportunity to change the course of a young girl heading for trouble. I think they just need to simply say someone saw Olivia take the bracelet but couldn’t see where she put it down, and now, they can’t find it. Then ask Paul if he’ll ask Olivia where she put the bracelet down, and hopefully, she’ll confess if she has any kind of decency. I know $65 isn’t much for a bracelet, but it’s the principle behind the theft. You play this delicately and gracefully, but I wouldn’t let it slide.

Drue S.
Albany, NY

If it was my client’s daughter, I would chalk this up to a very slight loss for not having a potential nightmare on my hands. It’s never a good idea to get in the middle of family drama. $65?? Well spent to keep serenity and peace in the store and without the ire of a helicopter mom!

Ellen L.
Seattle, WA

I would definitely have a conversation with Olivia’s father first. There may not be actual video of Olivia taking the bracelet, but it wasn’t in the inventory after she left. Hmmmm. This is a good opportunity for some enlightened parenting and a teaching moment. We live now in a society with too much permissiveness, so writing this off just feeds that tendency. And if Olivia were Black or Hispanic … Dad, get her to ‘fess up and then make her apologize to the store and make proper restitution.

Elisa R.
Ocala, FL

A few important things to note: 1) Small town, word travels fast; 2) Divorce, the daughter is the victim; 3) The customer is a neighbor; and 4) The actual loss, triple key? These are all factors in bringing an accusation regarding an individual’s child. A parent will immediately respond defensively and turn the anger to you. In a small town, that can be devastating to your business. I can conclude from Dad’s ring purchase that a $65 bracelet would not have been a big deal. The theft of the bracelet is the daughter is acting out. The owner should clip the security footage and have a private conversation with the father outside of the store setting. Perhaps on his home turf. Make it very clear that you are not accusing the daughter of anything, in fact the video is inconclusive. As a parent and a friend, you are providing the clip for his purview. The video is for his information and is the only copy. Confirm your support as a parent and a friend.

Stan G.
Charlotte, NC

Because of the dollar amount and inconclusive video, I’d say let it go. The next time the girl comes in the store, have the entire staff stare a hole through her and she’ll know exactly why. Her hands will stay in her pockets! Paul knows what his daughter is capable of, so it won’t be a shock to him to find out she’s got sticky fingers. Her path of lawlessness will become exposed soon enough elsewhere and the local jewelry store won’t have to call out a juvenile for a petty theft. Keep selling diamonds, don’t worry about raising somebody else’s kid.

Megan C.
Poulsbo, WA

While this is a potentially uncomfortable situation, if handled with professionalism, it could be managed well. I’d contact Paul and ask to speak with him in person, possibly away from the store, in a neutral setting. I’d explain what happened in the store but clearly state that they have no proof that his daughter took the bracelet. I’d ask him how he would like to respond to his daughter’s possible action. I’d make it very clear that as the salesperson, I’m willing to absorb the loss of the bracelet. Because Paul has stated that there is a conflict between the two parents, out of respect for him, I am bringing up the possibility that Olivia took the bracelet to him directly so he can decide how to proceed. Be compassionate but not overly emotional. This could be more of a moment for Paul to teach Olivia about consequences instead of punishment, but the store would request Olivia not wander unaccompanied the next time Paul needs to bring her along for any visits.

The post A Client’s Daughter May Have Pocketed a Piece of Jewelry Without Paying. What Should the Store Owner Do? appeared first on INSTOREMAG.COM.

In early 2018, Gail Arman, CGA, the head of Oliver & Ashe’s Gemology Services Department, handled the insurance replacement of a large, high-quality ruby for Linda Dennison, a longtime customer who had lost the stone from its mounting while attending her daughter’s destination wedding in Switzerland. The original ruby had belonged to Linda’s grandmother. Gail had done a detailed appraisal on the piece in 2014, so she was familiar with the gem and its unique nature. After lengthy discussions with Linda and her insurance company, Gail set out in search of a replacement gemstone that would closely match the unusual size and shape as well as the superb quality of the lost ruby.

Gail located three different options for Linda, from which she selected a 3.02-carat emerald cut Mozambique ruby with excellent color (hue, saturation and tone) and superb clarity. The gem came with lab reports from both GIA and Gubelin. Of course, as she always did, Gail verified all the specifics on the ruby in her own lab with her own equipment and was satisfied that the documentation was both authentic and accurate. Gail’s cost on the ruby was just under $34,000, and based on a pre-arranged replacement pricing agreement, she sold it to Linda’s insurance company for $41,500. Linda’s mounting was repaired and the ruby set by Oliver & Ashe’s expert craftsmen, and the ring was delivered several weeks later. Over the ensuing years, Linda visited Oliver & Ashe regularly, and Gail made a point of checking and cleaning the ruby ring at every opportunity.

Early last December, Linda was out shopping with a friend who took her into Handleman’s, a nearby competitor of Oliver & Ashe. The manager of the Handleman’s store, in an effort to extend complimentary service, offered to clean Linda’s rings — including her beloved ruby. As he inspected the ring prior to cleaning, he commented that the stone was one of the better synthetics he’d seen. Indignant, Linda challenged him, stating that she knew for certain that it was not synthetic, but the manager insisted that, though not an appraiser, he was very familiar with rubies and was certain that this particular stone was lab-created, since natural rubies in that size really didn’t come in so perfect a color and clarity. Somewhat confused, Linda and her friend left Handleman’s and headed directly over to Oliver & Ashe.

The store was extremely busy, even for the first Saturday in December, and the staff appeared to be short-handed. Linda asked for Gail but was informed by Zach Nichols, the store’s new sales manager, that both Gail and Ashe Maxwell were out sick and were not expected back before the following Wednesday. She did not know Zach — or for that matter, any of the other associates in the store, as she had always dealt with Gail — but being very upset at that moment, she asked Zach if he knew anything about gemstones. He told her that he was a graduate gemologist as well as being the sales manager and that he would be happy to help her. She handed him her ring and simply asked, “Is this stone synthetic?” Zach had never seen the ring before and did not know Linda. He took the ring back to the lab for closer examination. In Linda’s presence, he inspected the stone carefully, then brought in another Graduate Gemologist for a second opinion. After a brief conversation, Zach and his associate (the newest addition to the store’s lab team) told Linda that yes, in fact, the ruby was a very good synthetic.

Linda was confused. She explained the entire history to Zach, insisting that the ruby had never been left for repair and had never been out of its mounting since Gail handled the replacement. Zach, mortified at his mistake but unsure of how to walk back his comments without appearing phony and unprofessional, assured her that they would get to the bottom of the confusing situation and promised to have Gail call her later that day. Zach contacted Gail immediately after Linda and her friend left the store and explained the sequence of events. Needless to say, Gail, knowing with 100 percent certainty that the ruby she had sold Linda and her insurance company was genuine, was confused and upset. Faced with the imminent need to call Linda, she needed to plan a strategy.

Stuart T.
Reisterstown, MD

We all have had employees who felt the need to exceed their job responsibilities to show us how smart they are. He was the store’s sales manager, not a member of the store’s appraisal department. Being a GG doesn’t mean that he was qualified to offer his opinion. Some of the new synthetic stones are made of the same material, so it is very hard to distinguish with a quick exam. At this point, Gail should contact Linda to come in to discuss it. At the meeting, she would check the stone out to see if it indeed was the ruby they sold. If in fact it was the same, I would then offer to remove the stone in front of her, package it and send to the GIA. With the new GIA report, they could then confirm that the stone was genuine. I would then give Zach the opportunity to pay for the recheck on the ruby as a way of hopefully teaching him a lesson.

Bruce A.
Sherwood Park, AB

What a great problem to have, a genuine ruby that is so exquisite that only the best of the best can recognize its authenticity! Gail certainly lived up to the trust that Linda first placed in her. As for the staff and Handleman’s, it just proves that when it comes to natural corundum, there are experts and then there are professionals. Gail should remind Linda that the only professionals that should work on her precious ring should be the Oliver & Ashe Jewelers team!

Thomas A.
Memphis, TN

I find that it is always best just to be honest. Lay the story out there. Explain that these were only opinions. Apologize and show the proof that it is what she paid for.

Greg T.
Murfreesboro, TN

Never ever give an over-the-counter opinion on a ruby without a formal gemological test. Rubies are one of the most difficult to properly identify, even for 80 percent of gemologists who have attended GIA classes. Honesty and truth always prevail, along with a little explanation and getting a new GIA lab report.

Patrisha C.
Osterville, MA

Call Linda and set an appointment with her to review paperwork and possibly FaceTime with the lab to reassure her that her ruby is real and that she wasn’t misled. Even offer to have the stone regraded. Make sure she has copies of all lab reports.

Speak with the store manager regarding the incident. Advise that there are no “sight” IDs. Testing has to be done to correctly ID stones, especially in a case like this. Sight IDs always are a quicksand area, no matter how many years in the trade.

Check with your legal team about how to handle your competition. Depending on your state, you could have legal recourse.

Moving forward set up a policy on gem IDs (i.e., two to three people grade each one, etc.) and make sure you keep the employees up to date and educated on the latest treatments and enhancements.

Jo G.
Oconomowoc, WI

Throw them under the bus? Oh heck yes, then back up said bus and do it again! We do not tell anyone anything. Want a value on a piece? Pay the gemologist. Want to know what something is? Pay the gemologist. The sales manager needs to be strongly spoken to, although it seems he has learned his lesson too late to help either his company or his coworker or their client. I will say this story feels fake because a small company might let this sort of thing happen, but a larger, fully staffed store should certainly have stronger rules in place.

Mike F.
Kokomo, IN

Look into the documentation that was included from the ruby supplier and confirm all of the identifying characteristics. Also, explain how difficult it is to evaluate any stone in a setting properly; that should protect the employees in the lab. Improved procedures need to be addressed too. A very tricky situation. This conversation needs to be in person with the customer as well.

Jim D.
Kingston, NH

I wouldn’t worry about throwing the new sales manager under the bus — I would do it quickly, then back over him and run him over again. It sounds like Zach used to work for the competitors, maybe he hoped to block a sale elsewhere. Before running to test a stone, learn something about the piece, especially if you are new in a store. A couple of quick questions would have given him the necessary facts. Instead, Zach has created a crisis that could have devastating consequences for his new employer. Ashe needs to do some speedy damage control. There is not much that he can do about the competitor’s manager’s comments, but he needs to overhaul his own house experts. For a GG to make a mistake like that is inexcusable. If he had doubts, he should have asked her to return when Gail was there to give an expert opinion. Some people let their delusions of self-perfection distort reality, and in Zach’s case, it could be a permanent, if not fatal flaw.

Peter T.
Show Low, AZ

Ashe and Gail should have a discussion about whether Zach should be employed at Oliver and Ashe. Our industry is one of details. If a person doesn’t understand that, they need to look elsewhere for employment. Then they should approach Linda and explain that she has a beautiful, genuine ruby in her ring. It wouldn’t hurt to explain that with very good quality gems, it can be difficult to identify them as natural. And that sometimes even qualified people may get into a bit of a rush and not take the extensive measures necessary to qualitatively determine whether a gemstone is genuine or synthetic.

Drue S.
Albany, NY

The only way I would resolve this would be to pay for the ruby in question to be removed from the setting and sent to GIA for a certification. Therefore, you avoid the “he said, she said” situation. I would not approach the other jewelry store with the results. I would speak with my staff not to form opinions or make statements on a gem without me being present. Unfortunately, the reputation of the store is at stake, and this needs to be resolved in a professional way. GIA certification is the only answer!

The post A Client Is Mistakenly Told That Her Replacement Ruby Is Synthetic appeared first on INSTOREMAG.COM.

His buying event last fall had been the most successful to date and had felt more like a party, with many of his “regulars” taking the opportunity to get reacquainted, as well as lots of new clients coming in to sell their gold. It was so busy that Roger hadn’t even been able to talk to everyone who had come in. He was grateful for the help of a couple of friends who often showed up to lend a hand whenever he was expecting a big crowd for a buying event.

Several weeks after the event, Roger was delighted to see Cindy Sanderson come into the store. She and her husband Mike had been coming into the store every year for as long as he could remember. He had spotted Mike very briefly at the buying event, but he had never quite gotten around to saying hello. As he greeted Cindy, Roger noticed that she looked rather tired and worn out. He got the usual rundown when he asked about her college-age son, her older daughter and their beautiful granddaughter, but was taken aback when he asked, “So, where’s Mike today?” Cindy replied,
“I have no idea — but if you see him, let me know so I can be somewhere else!”

The expression on Roger’s face must have conveyed his surprise because Cindy said, “Oh — I’m sorry. I guess you haven’t heard …” She proceeded to tell him about Mike’s affair with a young assistant at his law firm and a very ugly divorce that had dragged on since last year. She said that the worst of it was that in the middle of all the fighting, someone had broken into her house and stolen all of her jewelry and several pieces of expensive art. She believed that Mike was behind it — as a way to get back at her for demanding a hefty settlement — but neither she nor the local police could prove anything. She said that while her insurance covered the financial end of the loss, the sentimental value of many of the jewelry items could never be replaced. Roger helped Cindy pick out a new watch and diamond stud earrings and let her know that he was very sorry for all she’d gone through. He reminded her that he would be available for whatever she needed and wished her well.

As soon as Cindy had pulled out of the parking lot, Roger went back through the receipts from the gold-buying events and felt his heart sink as he saw one with Mike Sanderson’s name on it. He saw that one of his friends had taken care of Mike, who had sold several gold bracelets, a couple of single earrings, a pair of platinum wedding bands and a diamond fashion ring. State law required that merchandise bought over the counter remain in the store for a full 30 days before disposition, so Roger was able to look at the pieces in Mike’s envelope. Despite his sincere hope to the contrary, he was not surprised to find the envelope filled with pieces that he had sold to Mike over the years.

Roger double-checked all the documentation and was relieved to find that the transaction was handled perfectly and every detail was in compliance with state and local regulations. Nonetheless, the whole thing left him with a queasy, uncomfortable feeling, believing that he had some sort of responsibility to Cindy — but not knowing exactly what to do about it.

Peter T.
Show Low, AZ

Mike sold stolen property. He is a thief. Roger should immediately report what he knows about the stolen property to both the police and to Cindy. This issue has nothing to do with “friendship,” confidentiality” or “loyalty.” It is an issue of decency, legality, and integrity. Screw Mike and all thieves like him.

Autumn A.
Old Westbury, NY

Roger was notified of a possible crime and discovered he may have purchased stolen goods. What’s there to debate? If this man has any sort of moral compass, he will immediately notify the police and let them sort this out. If there was a robbery, there would be a police report on file along with a list of the items stolen. I’d wager that many (if not all) of the items that were purchased at the gold buying event from Mike are likely on that list and should rightly be returned to their owner. If Roger does anything less, it makes him a coward who should not be in this business.

Leonard G.
Galloway, NJ

We had a similar situation. We decided to inform both parties we would not release any of their jewelry to either party. We demanded a copy of a legal settlement signed by both parties and both law firms before we released any property to anyone. We advised both parties that if a settlement could not be reached, then we would wait for a court order. Any monies we paid out would be returned to us. As it worked out, we received a signed settlement by both parties and the law firms involved. The jewelry stayed in the safe for a year and a half. We retained both parties as customers, and we were off the hook.

Kay D.
Andover, MA

Roger should not get involved because he has built his business on integrity and he has no way of knowing the entire truth of the situation (on both sides). If he were to report Mike to the police, he would risk not only losing Mike’s friendship and business but potential bad publicity as well. (One unhappy customer can be 100 times louder — in a very negative way — than 100 of your happiest customers.) If he wants to do something nice for Cindy, he can provide a nice discount on a future purchase.

Richard G.
Birmingham, MI

This is a very believable and sad story, but the question of Roger’s response should not be complicated by personal feelings. He has reason to believe that merchandise that he purchased was stolen. It is his obligation to report his concerns to the police. The story indicates that the police have already been involved; they should have a description of the stolen jewelry. If the jewelry purchased from Mike matches the description, then the police can take the jewelry, use it for evidence in a case against Mike, and return it to Cindy. Yes, Mike will certainly no longer be a client and may be mad, but Roger has acted honorably. And would Roger really want to keep a person who steals from his wife as a client?

Joseph V.
Austin, TX

I would be interested in knowing what the local and state laws are for KNOWINGLY buying and selling stolen merchandise. While the store owner had no prior knowledge of the alleged theft, he now knows that according to the spouse, the police were contacted about the stolen items. Therefore, it is the store owner’s responsibility to follow all laws governing “stolen merchandise.” When doing so, the store owner makes a reasonable effort to do what is right in the eyes of the law regardless of how long the client has been a customer. The last thing any store owner needs is to be implicated in the commerce of stolen property.

Josiah Z.
designsbynathan.us

I think you are asking the wrong question. Yes, there are murky moral issues concerning the relationships with Mike and Cindy, but those are overridden by Roger’s legal obligation to report his conversation with Cindy and Mike’s sales receipt from the event. Cindy clearly disclosed that the theft had been reported to the police, and Roger confirmed that Mike sold pieces at his event. If he suspects those pieces might have been stolen, he must report that to the police. Otherwise, he could end up hurting his reputation and get accused of selling stolen merchandise. He certainly can’t dispose of the jewelry even after 30 days if he suspects it was stolen. It is the police’s job to figure out who is telling the truth, not Roger’s. And making sure he doesn’t run afoul of the law is his primary responsibility. The rest should properly run its course with the police and the courts, who are already involved in the case and the divorce.

Timothy M.
South Boston, VA

If the items in the envelope that was purchased for scrap have been reported as stolen with a police report being filled out and with the insurance company issuing a payout, then yes, this information needs to be reported. Being caught between the husband/wife is one thing; being caught up in an insurance fraud felony case is even more detrimental. That could end a business in short order.

Megan C.
Poulsbo, WA

This is a very unfortunate situation! My advice would be to contact the police before doing anything else. As Cindy indicated, things had been stolen from the house. The store owner could have the police confirm that the jewelry brought to his store were or were not part of the missing items. If the store owner says nothing, and it comes to light at a future date that he bought back the items, it could be much worse. I feel integrity is at stake here even though he’s risking Mike’s privacy. Not a good place to be: Caught in the middle!

Ralph H.
Connersville, IN

Are you familiar with the saying, “You’re about to pay for your attorney’s grandkids’ grandkids’ college education?” What happened is sad, maybe criminal. You know absolutely nothing about this event. Likely, hubby got a case of the mid-life grubbies and found a new chick. Likely he’s a complete scofflaw. You don’t know! Know this: The minute you enter the fray, you attract the attention of attorneys on both sides and might be accused of criminal activity, even when you were completely honest. Treat the wife (and the husband) as customers, just as always, and don’t try to second guess someone’s life. If you see something obviously criminal, treat that just as you always would: Call your lawyer!!! You’re a jeweler; treat each customer with respect and let them live their lives.

Jo G.
Oconomowoc, WI

Let me get this straight, the question is, should he do the right thing or keep his money? Stolen property is stolen property, and you have no right to it, even if you purchased it with the best intentions. I would call the wife back in and show her the jewelry. If it is hers, I would then call the police and turn it all over to them to straighten out. I wouldn’t be happy about it, but it is the right thing to do. Years ago, I purchased a ring from a young man. I didn’t buy it as scrap because it was his grandmother’s ring, and if he didn’t pay his child support, he couldn’t see his kids that Christmas. I told him it was a loan and tucked it in my safe. A few weeks later, a woman emailed me saying she believed I had purchased her wedding ring when her roommate sold it. I called my police chief. He verified it was stolen, and I returned it.

Tim S.
Fairbanks, AK

This is the reason that there is a “state law required that merchandise bought over the counter remain in the store for a full 30 days before disposition.” It allows time to recover any stolen items after a crime. Even if there wasn’t a law to hold the merchandise for 30 days, you have a legal if not a moral responsibility to report it to the authorities. I don’t want a customer using my store to hide his misdeeds. That is the risk we take buying over the counter. If you don’t turn him in for selling you stolen items or merch that has been reported stolen, you are an accessory to the crime and can possibly be implicated as a money laundering scheme with him. Not to mention insurance fraud. There are all ways this can go bad for the store owner in this case considering his long sales history with the couple. The husband is a scumbag; he deserves to get caught!

Steve J.
Carefree, AZ

Roger should simply call the detective in charge of the Pawn/Precious Items Dealer section, that he is licensed under, and relate what he knows and possesses in his safe and let them deal with it. And, tell no one else.

Mary T.
Leavenworth, WA

Roger’s duty is to the law. He needs to remember that stolen goods (if that’s what they are) are stolen goods period. The insurance company will be looking for that merchandise and if Roger is put on the stand, he will have to admit he knew it was potentially stolen!

Paula H.
Concord, NH

Roger’s business has a 30-day grace period for a reason: to notify police of any strange issues with the jewelry that comes in during his events or any other time.

Yes, the paperwork was filled out correctly with Mike and Roger’s staff; however, the fact that Cindy stated a break-in, a police report and insurance claim filed, Roger owes it to the integrity of his business to do the right thing, contact the police. If the claim Cindy made is false and there are no police reports, Roger has his go-ahead to proceed with the transaction his staff and Mike made.

If, however, the police and insurance company have a detailed list of items to compare to Roger’s list, the police should take over, as they are supposed to review pawn shop and cash for gold operations. From that point on it is up to Mike, Cindy, the insurance company and police to settle this uncomfortable mess.

The post A Store Owner Finds Himself Caught Between A Woman’s Plight and Her Ex-Husband’s Right to Privacy appeared first on INSTOREMAG.COM.

For generations, San Francisco has been home to a thriving collection of local businesses and community-focused nonprofits. The relationships between them offer a clear reflection of the city’s history, traditions and personality. This is the story of one special San Francisco business and the spirit of service that continues to leave an indelible mark on their clients, their city and our industry.

Co-owner Suzanne Martinez is a renowned jewelry historian, senior gemologist and appraiser, while co-owner Mark Zimmelman is a third-generation jeweler.

HISTORY

Lang Antique and Estate Jewelry was established in 1969 by Mrs. Jarmilla Lang, a native of Czechoslovakia, who brought her continental taste and extensive knowledge of all things antique and vintage to San Francisco, along with the finest selection of European antiques, objets d’art and jewelry the city had seen. Over her 20 years at the helm, Mrs. Lang saw the focus of her business shift almost entirely to fine jewelry. Owned for the past three decades by Mark Zimmelman, a third-generation jeweler, and Suzanne Martinez, a renowned jewelry historian, senior gemologist and appraiser, the company and its landmark store are still based in the heart of San Francisco’s historic Union Square shopping district. In addition to Mark and Suzanne, Lang employs 26 of the industry’s top professionals. Their iconic front window and dazzling showcases still offer an unparalleled selection of fine European and American antique, vintage and estate jewelry, but their clients now span the globe. As Maria Doulton wrote in The Jewellery Editor in November 2020, Lang Antique and Estate Jewelry is “one of the world’s most impressive and dazzling displays of fine antique and vintage jewelry under one roof.”

It only takes a brief look at LangAntiques.com — the award-winning website and e-commerce platform the company launched more than two decades ago — to see why Lang is known among San Francisco shoppers and aficionados across the globe for its vast selection of antique and vintage jewels and remarkable engagement rings, many of which date back to the Edwardian and Art Deco periods. It takes closer examination of the website, however, to learn the story of why, for many in San Francisco’s disadvantaged communities, Lang is also a symbol of hope.

The Lang Antiques team having fun with another local business owner.

SERVICE

As an integral part of their thriving community, Lang believes in doing what communities do — giving back — not as a way to draw attention, but as a way to make a real difference while involving both customers and employees. For more than 20 years, Lang has made significant donations to non-profits that serve in-need populations, with a focus on supporting local food resources, environmental initiatives and community development.

In mid-2020, when the pandemic made the need greater and resources more scarce, Suzanne, Mark and their team made an additional commitment to donate $15 per sale — regardless of size — to the efforts most in need of help.

Now in its third year, this effort has generated over $150,000 for a variety of organizations including San Francisco-Marin and Contra Costa-Solano Food Banks, National First Responders’ Fund, Wildfire Relief fund, St. Vincent DePaul Society, St. Anthony’s Foundation, Ritter House and Glide Memorial Church. In the past year, over $25,000 has been donated to Baby2Baby, a non-profit organization that provides children living in poverty with diapers, clothing and the basic necessities that every child deserves. In addition, Lang supports causes important to the company’s own employees, business partners and customers.

According to the Lang Antique website, “As a business with close ties to the LGBTQ+ community — our employees, families, friends and clients — we are proud to publicly stand as allies. In addition, we also feel it’s important to ‘put our money where our mouth is,’ so Lang donates a portion of our proceeds every June Pride Month towards advocacy groups like The Trevor Project and the Human Rights Campaign. The former is dedicated to the prevention of suicide of LGBTQ+ youth, while the latter strives to ensure that all LGBTQ+ people are treated as full and equal citizens across our country and around the world.”

Most recently, after the invasion of Ukraine, a Ukrainian business partner recommended that Lang direct a portion of their donation effort to Polish Humanitarian Action, whose team works to meet the urgent needs of Ukrainian refugees, providing food, clothing, hygiene items and other necessities.

To many in the jewelry industry, Mark, Suzanne and their team are treasured as an invaluable resource of priceless information and education. In addition to offering seminars and lectures at industry conferences and events and serving as an instrumental part of the local GIA Alumni Association, Suzanne established Antique Jewelry University in 2004 (antiquejewelryuniversity.org) in an effort to catalog all things related to jewelry history and to share the treasure trove of information that the Lang team has amassed over decades. According to Suzanne, “AJU started as a 1,000-entry glossary that I wrote for our first website. Shortly thereafter, it was developed into its own site, with a more ‘encyclopedic’ jewelry history goal. We invest about $100,000 per year in the site, working with a team that includes a dedicated writer and content designer.”

Appraisers, teaching facilities, jewelers, archivists, historians and lovers of jewelry from all over the world have easy and free access to this valuable resource, while Suzanne and the Lang team see it as a way to give back to another community they call their own.

LEGACY

On May 20, 2019, City Supervisor Aaron Peskin nominated Lang Antique and Estate Jewelry for inclusion in the San Francisco Legacy Business Registry, which recognizes longstanding, community-serving businesses that are valuable cultural assets of the city and that have contributed to San Francisco’s history and identity. On July 22, 2019, Supervisor Peskin’s nomination was approved by the city’s Historic Preservation Commission, making Lang only the fifth jewelry company to be honored with Legacy Business status — an honor that is richly deserved.

The post Underserved Communities Benefit from San Francisco Jeweler’s Efforts appeared first on INSTOREMAG.COM.

Julie started working with Childress Diamonds, a high-end, family-owned store in the Southwest, back in 2015. She came to Childress with a widely varied business and retail background that included several important management positions, but without any jewelry experience. Nonetheless, within a very short time, she appeared to be the perfect complement to the strong and experienced Childress sales staff. In fact, by 2017, with Julie’s help, Childress’ sales volume had doubled to nearly $4.2 Million.

In June of 2021, Julie married her second husband. Though the wedding was small, preparation seemed to consume all of Julie’s attention for months. Tom and Lisa Childress, the store’s owners, were a bit concerned by the sharp drop-off in Julie’s performance several months before the wedding, and they were alarmed at her willingness to use the store as a “control center” for her planning — but Julie had become a good friend, and they were glad to see her happy. They thought they could handle the short-term issues knowing that once the event was over, Julie would be back to full strength in the store. The rest of the staff rallied around Julie and agreed to help cover her so she could focus on her big day.

Several months after Julie returned from her honeymoon, Lisa began to notice that she was coming in late more often than not in the mornings, and that her lunch breaks were hovering around one-and-a-half hours as opposed to the allowed 45 minutes. Punctuality had never been one of Julie’s strong suits, but the problem had grown to the point where other associates were complaining. When Lisa confronted her, Julie blamed it all on the adjustment to married life. She apologized and promised to do better. Lisa accepted Julie’s explanation and commitment to improve, though she was a little uncomfortable with what she (and the rest of the staff) saw as Julie’s declining performance and increasingly negative attitude around the store. It seemed to Lisa that she had never quite gotten back into the swing of things after the wedding, and she spent a lot of time complaining and blaming everyone else for her lack of results.

In the months following their conversation, Julie’s sales performance did improve, as did her punctuality — though late arrivals and long lunches (along with a strange pattern of calling in sick on a number of Mondays) were still an occasional problem. Store sales continued to grow steadily though, and overall, the team appeared to be working well together.

Early last June, Julie was diagnosed with breast cancer. Needless to say, Tom and Lisa, along with everyone on the team, were very upset by the news and vowed to be as supportive as possible. Julie had no short-term disability insurance and had already used all of her vacation and paid sick days for the year, but Tom and Lisa agreed that it was the right thing to continue paying Julie’s salary for the two months her doctor expected she would be out of work. They assumed that she would be back in the store (at least part time) by mid-August in time to ramp up for the 4th quarter, so they elected not to hire a new associate to fill the spot.

Julie finally returned to work with a doctor’s release on September 1, but on the 10th, just a few days before the store’s big anniversary event, she told Lisa that she really didn’t think she was ready to handle the stress of the store just yet, and that she needed to take the rest of the year off. She was adamant in her decision but was very clear about wanting to come back to her job after the first of the year.

Tom and Lisa were in a quandary. On one hand, they wanted to be sensitive to Julie’s medical concerns, but on the other, Lisa, a breast cancer survivor herself, couldn’t help but feel that Julie was trying to use the situation to her own advantage. After all, she’d been seen at social events all over town in the past month!

While Julie did not ask for the store to continue funding her leave, she did cry to Lisa about not being able to afford to be out of work — the implication (and her expectation) being very clear. When Lisa stated directly that Julie’s paychecks would stop for the remainder of her time off, Julie looked surprised and not at all happy. In the meantime, the store was shorthanded, but with the employment situation tighter in town than they had ever seen it before, Tom and Lisa saw little hope of finding someone qualified (or at least mature and trainable who could be ready to go in time for the holiday season). For his part, Tom was concerned about the legal issues that surround replacing someone who has had documented medical problems in the past.

Jack L.
Lake Forest, CA

I would do two things. One, I would vigorously attempt to recruit Julie’s replacement, giving myself options depending on how the situation continued to evolve. Recruiting is tough these days, but worth the effort; if Tom and Lisa find no one, they’re no worse off. Two, I would have one more sit-down with Julie, impress upon her the pressures she is putting on management and team going into Q4, and, if she insisted on waiting till 1/1/23 to return, I’d insist on a doc’s note confirming her inability to work before then.

Elisa R.
Ocala, FL

As owners, we have to be the ones who make the unpopular choices, the choices that may seem unfair or mean. The owners have become “friends” with their employees, and now it looks like Julie is receiving preferential treatment to the affected staff. Develop policies and stick to them for the sake of harmony among the staff. Folks who are the victims of Julie’s inability to tell time become angry and feel as though they don’t matter to you. I also get the heartstrings that news of cancer can pull. While you can have sympathy, you cannot allow it to become the center of your operations. You cannot operate around Julie’s unfortunate circumstance. When Julie is on her game, she is great, but now she is not. It is not personal, it is BUSINESS. Hire a person to replace her. When she is able to return, offer her part-time work that does not affect operations or your staff. If the bad work habits continue, part ways immediately. Equal treatment is important to your staff.

Ursula P.
Naples, FL

Does this business have an employee handbook? If it does, the earlier and now newly arising issues would have been addressed.

Theresa L.
New Hartford, NY

First and foremost, it would be best to be honest with Julie and let her know she is a valued employee and both owners are there to support her emotionally and in any way possible throughout this difficult time, but that the store still has to be staffed according to the demands of the holiday season. Be open and honest and let Julie know that you will be hiring a replacement for her position while she is out so she can take her time getting herself better without the stress of feeling rushed. Furthermore, reiterate to Julie that once she is feeling better about coming back to work that there will be a position available for her, though it may not be the same responsibilities. There is still a place for her within the store. This allows the opportunity to get another employee up and running before the holidays, and then if Julie ends up not coming back, a replacement is already in place.

Amy C.
Grove, OK

Definitely need to set some boundaries with the employee. First, consult a lawyer or even a well-experienced HR person and find out what you need to do legally. After that, explain to her that the store has gone above and beyond to accommodate her illness. The extra pay for her regular salary is done, but she can work part-time until she regains her health or take the time off entirely. I would tell her that we would have to hire someone if someone comes along who fits the job, but we would consider taking her back full time later if no new one has worked out full-time. I am always happy to take back a good employee, but she needs to know that we need full time. Each store must stick to their rules on such matters because the next employee might expect the same and you might be legally bound to do it!

Heather W.
Des Plaines, IL

Julie’s situation is a terrible one, and they should accommodate her request for time off. She should submit a written request for leave from the store with the understanding that she is eligible for rehire when her condition allows. The store owners should immediately begin the process of hiring for the upcoming season, and when and if Julie ever comes back, address how hours will be handled at that time. In all likelihood, she won’t be prepared for full-time return for some time and may never choose to return.

Megan C.
Poulsbo, WA

We have had situations where we’ve funded employees’ personal health issues, which thankfully have been short-term. Open communication has helped us manage expectations on both sides. It’s always difficult to navigate a professional path when emotions become more of a deciding factor than what is best for the business.

It seems that good intentions were applied, but the precedent was set placing the store in an unhealthy and unprofessional position. My advice at this point is to make a decision that’s best for the store financially, have it in writing, then convey that to Julie. Consult a lawyer preemptively who is familiar with local and state employment law. We’re in an at-will state, so I can let an employee go who isn’t performing their job duties. I have to be clear on how I’ve accommodated their health issue though.

I believe that even though the job market is TOUGH, when the door is fully open and clear for a new staff person, they will be found.

Jo G.
Oconomowoc, WI

I take it there is no employee handbook; lesson learned. I would sit her down and explain that I understand from my own health experience the burden of cancer on a body, but that business is a separate issue. Let her know if she is unable to work (by her own decision, not that of a doctor), you will have to accept her quit notice, but if possible, you would love to have her back in the future if she would like to return, provided there is a position available, but you cannot leave the position open indefinitely. If the doctor says she cannot work, she must file for Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which provides certain employees with up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave per year to hold her job.

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

I’m not an attorney or the head of an HR department, but I do have a BS detector and it’s going off right now! This woman’s health issues are unfortunate, but at this point, she’s just milking the cow for all it’s worth. I’d tell her she has a position if she comes back in January, but I’m not paying her another dime until she returns. That’s super fair and puts the ball in her court. I bet she won’t come back, and that is why you should look to replace her immediately. Seeing the fact that she’s been seen bouncing around social events and the way she started behaving once she got engaged and then married tells me this girl takes advantage of people and they need to put a stop to it.

The post When a Salesperson Wants More Time Off for Sick Leave, the Owners Find Themselves in a Quandary appeared first on INSTOREMAG.COM.

After a great end to 2021, Jessie was able to put the finishing touches on her new “Diamond Dream” line. She had traveled to Los Angeles and worked with several designers to come up with a small signature collection of fashion-forward diamond jewelry for the store. In fact, one of the rings she chose — a uniquely crafted platinum eternity band set with 4 carats of various-shaped diamonds — was impressive enough that Jessie had the designer make it in her size so she could wear it as a sample.

In late June, Adam Cohen, an infrequent but regular customer, came into J&J Lambert and asked specifically for Jessie. He said that his wife, Laurie, had been in several days earlier and had tried on an eternity band that Jessie had been wearing. He said it fit Laurie perfectly, and with their anniversary just a few days away, he wanted to buy it for her. Jessie showed him the ring and suggested that it might be best to simply order a new ring from the designer, since the sample had been worn for several months. Adam looked at the ring carefully, even asking to see it under the store’s microscope. He said that he really didn’t want to take the chance that it would not arrive in time for his anniversary. He insisted that he wanted to buy Jessie’s sample, since it was the one that Laurie had seen, provided that Jack could do a good job of polishing the band.

Against her better judgment, Jessie agreed and sold the ring for $12,300, including tax (reduced from the regular retail of $14,000). Jack refinished the ring, and after ensuring that the ring met his standard, Adam paid with his debit card and was handed a receipt clearly marked with the J&J Lambert Return policy: “J&J Lambert does not offer cash or charge refunds. We offer exchange or store credit only, within 30 days of purchase. Special orders and customized items are not returnable.” As with every sale, the return policy was pointed out to Adam as he took the receipt along with his ring and appraisal. Three days later, Laurie came in raving about the ring and thanking Jessie and Jack for making it happen.

On a busy Friday morning in mid-July, Adam brought the ring back to the store. He claimed it was defective and demanded a full and immediate refund. The ring had obviously been abused. The mounting was nicked and badly scratched, and two of the smaller diamonds were cracked. Based on Adam’s vague answers to her questions about Laurie’s habits while wearing the ring, Jessie sensed that this was more about money than it was about the ring. She explained that the purchase was not refundable. She apologized for the difficulty Laurie had apparently had with the ring, and as a courtesy, offered to send the ring back to the designer for repair. Once he realized he wasn’t able to trade the ring back for cash, Adam agreed, and the ring was sent out that day. The following Monday, he came back into the store and said that he’d changed his mind. He insisted that he did not want the ring repaired — that all he wanted was his refund. Jessie once again explained the policy and told him that she had already stretched for him by offering to have the damaged ring repaired. Adam got loud and belligerent to the point where, in an attempt to diffuse a very ugly situation, Jack came out to the floor and offered to refund the price of the ring, less the cost of the repair and shipping, once the ring came back from the designer. After further conversation, Adam reluctantly agreed.

On July 25, a week after the ring had been sent off for repair, Jessie received an email from Adam, asking when he would see his $12,300 refund. Jessie replied by re-stating their previous agreement and letting him know that per the manufacturer, the cost of the repair and shipping would be $1,470. She told him that she expected the ring back within the week and would issue a check to reimburse his debit purchase in the amount of $10,830 and mail it to his home. On Aug. 1, the Lamberts received the repaired ring from the designer, and Jessie immediately prepared a check for Adam and sent it out for next-day delivery. The check was received and was cashed two days later.

On Aug. 6, Jessie and Jack received another email from Adam, this time claiming that he and Laurie had suffered “personal harm and emotional damage” because of the way J&J Lambert had handled their return and demanding the full refund of the remaining $1,470. He threatened legal action for recovery of the money and all associated fees, as well as a large-scale review and social media campaign to expose the “unacceptable business practices” of J&J Lambert.

Jessie and Jack both realized that while refunding the money would be the easy solution, there was more at stake than just $1,470. They had come to believe that the damage to the ring was likely done in a deliberate attempt to initiate a cash refund, and they refused to be victimized by a bully with an apparent cash flow problem.

Jack L.
Lake Forest, CA

Back in the day, we would have stood our ground. We look at it differently today because of social media. The financial loss to J&J is minimal; they have the ring back and can sell it again at a fair profit. The damage that can be done by untrue, unfair reviews, though, is scary and very hard if not impossible to recover from. Get past this one and choose another hill to die on.

David B.
Calgary, AB

Mistake number one was to offer a bully any refund. A lot of you will say cut your losses and run, but there is also a point where your self-esteem and honest approach need support. This seems like an attempt to reconcile personal money problems the client has. Why should a store have to pay for the client’s personal issues?

Second issue is the threats on social media. Send them a note that they can put the facts as they see them to social media, but if there is anything defamatory, the store will take action. If the social media even comes, answer it with facts and honesty. Everyone has a bad review somewhere. How you respond is what matters.

The payout of $1,400 isn’t much, but the personal harm and suffering suggest that the client may want even more. Stop the cash bleeding now and deal with the social media if it comes.

Anne H.
Mechanicsburg, PA

When someone threatens legal action, you must immediately refuse to discuss anything further and refer them to direct all communication to your lawyer. You have an email from Adam admitting his plans for a smear campaign if he doesn’t get his way. It’s a terrible situation, but Jessie and Jack are holding all the cards here. If Adam didn’t hand over the ring AND agree to send it for repairs, the Lamberts would have had nothing to send back to the designer. That action was proof of his agreement to proceed as they discussed. Also, is there really any such thing as compensation for “emotional damage”?

Joel M.
Chapel Hill, NC

As retailers, we all need to learn to separate business from personal. It sounds like this is a personal problem of the customer. They need money because they bought something they cannot afford. I would not have given them the refund in the first place. I would have offered to repair the ring at no charge once.

Dianne H.
Eldon, MO

Having had a similar situation (less $$), we refunded the entire amount on a custom piece. The lady still wrote us a scathing Google review that we cannot get off our listing. My husband says, “You cannot argue with stupid.” I doubt this particular customer would proceed with legal situations. He is simply mean. The store owner did all he could at first to have a happy customer. Finding this impossible, they should await the lawsuit (never happen) and let it play out in favor of the jeweler!

Peter T.
Show Low, AZ

Jessie’s first mistake was to violate their policy and give a return. The customer damaged the ring. Even if they had a cash-return policy, a damaged ring is not returnable. Jessie might have pointed out that if Adam bought a new car then ran it into a tree, he would never have gone back to the dealership for a refund. Since the Lamberts already screwed themselves by offering the return, nothing good will come from not paying the trivial balance. But they should do so with the understanding that neither Adam nor his wife will be allowed back into the store for any reason. Running a small business can be an uphill struggle; the last thing a business needs is customers like Adam.

Paula H.
Concord, NH

I think all of us could take a lesson on caution and being more descriptive with our sales slips.
Adam, for whatever reason, only bought this ring as a temporary piece of jewelry for his wife to show off. Adam should have signed off on a ring he had inspected twice, as this was a previously worn ring. Like an appraisal, this ring should have been photographed as part of the inspection. Adam’s sales receipt needed to be much more involved. Copy to Adam and a copy signed by Adam for the store to retain. We have the same return policy and stand by our 30-day return for store credit only. If the piece has been worn or damaged, a fee is charged for restoring the piece. I think the fact that they refunded all but the repair was wonderful, also giving Adam a discount on a perfectly beautiful ring. Let it rest, you owe him nothing.

Carolyn H.
Jackson, WY

I too have extremely high-end demanding customers. In fact, in the last two years, customers have become obsessed with being belligerent and demanding; they come in with this attitude of “it’s their way or no way.” I have the same exact return/refund policy as Jessie and Jack. NO, they should stand on their policy! The only thing I do is make the customer sign my invoice above the policy as we explain it to them. Any petty lawyer that would take such a case is a crook; the Lamberts have more than bent over backwards to please this customer. Perhaps they should threaten the customer back with harassment and mental anguish charges. I do believe their theory that the ring was purposely damaged — especially with broken diamonds! The age-old theory that “the customer is always right” does not fit into today’s society of customers!

Amy C.
Grove, OK

First off, NEVER give cash refunds on a card. I am pretty sure it goes against rules of credit card companies and old-fashioned ethics. The store would not get back any of the processing fees either. If you think they might just be trying to evade normal policies and you want to keep them as a customer, certainly, refund the customer minus the repairs — but put it back on the card. It would be hard to want a customer who seems to be scamming, though. If you stick with forcing the customer to keep the sale, you might end up losing from a chargeback. I hear some stores manage to win that fight, but it has never been my store. Document EVERYTHING just so you have a chance of winning that fight.

Mark Y.
Oxford, MI

Expensive as it is, I would let it ride, then when the slander campaign begins, find a highly aggressive trial lawyer and sue them for fraud and defamation. The general public has no barriers today, so you have to slap them back into reality.

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

These customers are real a-holes! The easiest thing would be to give them the full refund amount, but then you’ll feel defeated. And you’ll feel like your integrity took a hit. I hate people that threaten retailers like this who just tried to do the right thing. I had some customers come in and ask us to size a newly purchased wedding band online and to reset her diamond in a newly purchased mounting online, and when I said no, they gave me a two-star review because I wouldn’t provide a service for them on something they bought elsewhere. Some people are just dirtbags. Anyway, you can take the easy route or stand your ground and let it play out. You’ll feel better about your integrity if you stand your ground, but the outcome is unknown. This is why retail isn’t for the faint of heart. And a no-refund policy is definitely a necessity these days because some people will try anything to screw you over.

Susan B.
Metairie, LA

I think the store did all they could do to satisfy the customer, and I personally would not refund anything. I would only give store credit; he was told that from the very beginning.

Bruce A.
Sherwood Park, AB

Jessie and Jack have already shown the true meaning of great customer service. Let the bully make his threats because they are standing on very high moral ground. When he hits back through social media or BBB, they will have the opportunity to state their case and easily win over anyone reading their response to his onerous claims. They can turn his threats into a very positive public relations win. I would buy from them if I read both sides, as would anyone else!

Kathy P.
Laguna Hills, CA

Hello NO! This guy regrets spending the money or didn’t have it to begin with. I’d fight him tooth and nail, and if he tarnished our business online, I’d sue him for defamation. He threatened legal action? Bring it on!

Stuart T.
Reisterstown, MD

At some point, nothing you do is good enough for a customer. You then have to decide whether to give in or fight back. I would speak to a lawyer about if the customer’s threat to slander the jeweler is actionable by the jeweler against the customer (i.e., blackmail). If they could take legal action against the customer to recover the already refunded monies, since the customer breached the agreement with the store owner. If the store owner doesn’t stand up for themselves at this point, it will seem that they are in the wrong.

Ragnar B.
Vancouver, BC

This is so preventable with a money back guarantee. If the customer damaged the ring to assure a refund, that would never happen. If the customer is a chronic returner, we mention at time of purchase a 15% restocking fee.

Mark S.
Plantation, FL

In my opinion, they should have never refunded the purchase price of the ring. The client was never going to shop in their store again, so why refund any money. They tried to be nice, and we all know where that got them. Now it’s best to refund the balance and have them gone from their lives.

Mary Jo G.
Oconomowoc, WI

Clearly, while still fresh in your brain, write down all the notes so you have clarity if this takes months to get to court. Then leave it alone. A lawyer will cost far more than the compensation they are looking for, so highly doubtful they will go any further. They were open and clear with the client, so besides not selling a used ring in the first place, there is little the customer has to stand on.

Brad L.
Duncan, BC

I believe that sometimes good intentions can be a retailer’s best friend and worst enemy! Hindsight is easy to make suggestions, and I am sure that in the future, this drastic mistake will never happen again, but from the beginning, Jessie made mistake after mistake, all against her better judgement. The reason to have a store policy is that it defines what you will and won’t do in the unfortunate situation that a return is desired. Bottom line, the client inspected the purchase before he paid and then returned a self-inflicted damaged product. I would never agree to a refund, perhaps give them a break on the repairs (but after the deceit, perhaps not) and definitely counter anything that they might try and post or review negatively, make our store’s position and the manner in which this client tried to intimidate perfectly clear.

James W.
Chicago, IL

The client receiving the ring signs the receipt listing the fact it was a used ring and understands the return policy at point of delivery. End of story, owner sticks to their guns. Any large or small social issues is a lawsuit on the client. Not the owner.

Andrew R.
Miami Gardens, FL

Wow, these store owners sure went above and beyond to accommodate this customer. “Give someone an inch and they’ll take a yard” is proof that the best efforts are laid bare when the policy is there for this exact reason. Firstly, damages needed to be recorded by photos. Then surveillance video of the attitude/confrontation of the customer needs to be preserved. Lastly, witnesses (nearby customers) need written statements of events or at the least be named for the validity of the video in a lawful process. All acts with customers needed to be in writing to avoid misunderstanding. Finally, the result is do you have a future with this customer or not. Regardless, policy is key to maintaining a successful shop. Also, the repair price is insane, by the way.

The post Despite The Store Owners’ Attempts at Appeasement, a Customer Continues His Unreasonable Demands appeared first on INSTOREMAG.COM.

After another week of visits to the store to carefully inspect the three “finalists” as he called them, Cole settled on a 2.39-carat, E, VS1, XXX natural diamond. He knew Julia would want to choose her own setting, but it was important to him to surprise her, so at Rachel’s suggestion, he agreed to have the diamond set into a simple solitaire – which turned out to be not so simple after all. Cole’s mom had lost her 4-carat diamond from its setting several months before, and he was very concerned about the security of Julia’s diamond, even in the short term. Despite knowing the setting was temporary, Cole was as meticulous in choosing the ring as he was the diamond, settling on a heavier weight platinum ring with solid construction and even calculating the millimeter width he believed he needed in the shank and shoulders of the ring.
Cole loved the finished product when he picked up the ring two weeks later, and his beachfront proposal went off perfectly. He called Rachel and made arrangements for Julia to come in the following week while he was off on another business trip to choose her permanent setting.

When Julia came into the store, she showed Rachel a picture of the ring she wanted. Rachel was immediately concerned when she looked at the picture of a “whisper” eternity band — about 1.5mm wide at its widest point — with diamonds also set in the 4-prong head. Rachel asked all the right questions about Julia’s lifestyle and how the ring would be worn, and Julia assured her that she was more of an “indoor girl” and didn’t do any work that required her to even damage her manicure. Still, Rachel felt the need to suggest rather strongly that Julia reconsider her choice, especially in light of the effort Cole had put into selecting not only a large, high-quality diamond (much larger than the diamond that would fit in the pictured ring) but also a temporary setting that was up to his standards for security and durability. Julia flatly refused, insisting that while she loved her diamond, she seriously disliked the bulky solitaire setting, and she told Rachel that her regular jeweler (Peale’s most significant competitor) had assured her that it should be no problem at all to set her diamond into the ring she wanted. Still uncomfortable, but wanting to keep Julia happy, Rachel brought her designer in to begin the process of creating a model that would please Julia while still holding the diamond securely.

After making a number of modifications to the first CAD design — all to make the ring thinner and “more delicate” — Rachel asked to meet with the couple together to review the updated design before having the new ring made.

When they came into the store, Julia was thrilled with the look of the render and the printed resin model, but Cole was clearly not. He remembered that Julia had mentioned liking the new “ultraskinny” ring trend, but he trusted that Rachel would know better than to try to set an important diamond into so impractical a mounting. He was more than a little surprised by what he was seeing. Diamonds set into drilled prongs? He didn’t think that any jeweler who knew anything about metal properties would even do anything like that!

He expressed his concerns to Julia, who quickly became defensive. She was fiercely adamant in stating that the design they were looking at was the only ring she wanted and refused to look at any other options. Rachel could only watch as the discussion between them became heated. When Cole finally refused to do anything with the ring —even suggesting that they return the diamond and start over at some later time — Rachel jumped in and proposed that they might be best served by putting a hold on the conversation for a day or two. She suggested that they take the weekend to talk about what was most important to each of them, and that they meet again in the following week to work on a solution that would make them both happy.

Em D.
Peoria, IL

I had a similar situation last year for a big anniversary. The husband thought they were getting the third band for his wife’s set. Meanwhile, she thought they were upgrading her center diamond. You can imagine — it was a little awkward to manage. I heard each of their concerns/wants and tried to help them see where the other was coming from. The best thing about being in the middle of that situation was seeing that they both wanted each other happy, to celebrate their time together and the love behind their communication. Instead of siding with one or the other, I made the couple my client. I looked at my role as a set of unbiased ears and a translator while emotions were at their highest. They slept on it, decided a week later, and two weeks after that they celebrated on their anniversary with a new ring, bigger center and her original band.

Sasha B.
Oakville, ON

As a salesperson, I would have asked that the couple come together to try to find a compromise between dainty and not-too-dainty. The uber-skinny trend has been here long enough that all jewelers and salespeople should know better than to suggest making a “barely there” setting work for a diamond, especially above one carat.

Darren K.
Las Vegas, NV

I have had many customers in a similar situation. First off, I suggest getting a great insurance policy so the diamond will be covered no matter what happens to the ring. I always say at that point to stop worrying and live life. Secondly, I have told people like Cole that he isn’t wearing the ring, and would he like it if she insisted that he wear something he wouldn’t like? They always say they wouldn’t like that, and they see the point very quickly. I always ask the Cole types, “Do you want her to look at that ring and be happy and in love with it just like she feels about you?” I ask that with the fiancée present, and they always tell the Cole types that is how they view the ring. The Cole types can be very overwhelming at times. Boundaries need to be set with these types of people.

Richard S.
Seattle, WA

We have been hand-fabricating in house these kinds of thin solitaires. For that size diamond, a 1.50mm diamond shank is pretty thin, but not as a safety issue so much as an aesthetics and proportion consideration. 1.70mm would look more balanced and have plenty of width to weld the peg into at the base of the head. If this ring were a casting, then I would be concerned about durability, but when drawing wire and hand-fabricating a solitaire with a very skilled craftsman and stone setter, there should be no security issues. Unless she does something traumatic to catch the top of the ring. Anything can happen, even to the heaviest of pieces. The diamonds set up in the prongs would be fine as long as you are working with a wire gauge that will have plenty of strength even after setting the stones.

Peter T.
Show Low, AZ

Julia’s “regular jeweler” was handling the situation properly — he offered the jewelry his customer wanted. If they want a flimsy ring that will likely fall apart, fine. You can’t train stupid out of a customer; you can only warn them, suggest insurance, and sell them have what they want. It’s never my job to “referee” an argument between a couple. After the customer knows the risks, they argue it out, and I take the view “Not my monkey, not my circus.”

Anne H.
Mechanicsburg, PA

Hah, we would punt to Julia’s “regular jeweler” so fast it would make your head spin! Let that guy be married to a wispy disaster of a mounting. Always do the right thing for yourself and don’t worry about what others have to say about it. Rachel needs to lose this one sale and maybe become the hero/oracle when the main diamond is lost or damaged. Although, it sounds like Cole and Julia may end up having a VERY short relationship.

Mark S.
Plantation, FL

Julia will never be happy until she gets what she wants. Cole will always have fear— and rightfully so — as to the strength of the setting. Rachel, if she listens to Julia, may lose Cole as a client. If Rachel listens to Cole, Julia will take the purchase of the setting to “her” jeweler. Rachel should offer to make the setting like Julia wants and offer Cole an insurance policy for the first year to cover any loss. This way, everyone is happy, and Rachel keeps both clients and both sales.

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

Both of these customers sound like a real pain in the bones. If Julia is so adamant about this setting, then can’t you just provide a jewelry appraisal for Cole, which you would do anyway, and tell him to get insurance? It’s not ideal to replace a diamond like this, but it seems like the solution to appease both parties in this situation. Especially now since Cole is talking about returning the diamond and “revisiting” this later. To me, that sounds like a breakup, and now you’ve really lost the sale. People like this are annoying. Good luck.

Jim S.
Kauai, HI

Responding to unreasonable requests is part of our job. This new trend in ultra-light mountings is an issue. I believe my job as a designer, craftsman and expert is to build a ring that will have long-term integrity that I can stand behind. If a customer insists on something contrary to that, I suggest they find someone with less integrity.

Troy L.
Irvine, CA

When it comes to style, it is really up to her, though finding the happy medium for both is why they are coming to the expert. Especially when you know the “whole story” working with both individuals. It is our job to make the couple happy by providing opinions and suggesting the very best options to achieve the perfect balance of safety and daintiness. Happy wife, happy life!

Alex W.
Torrance, CA

This is absolutely the time for Rachel to stay out of it. The issue has become one for the “happy couple” to resolve. At the same time, the business and Rachel need to brace themselves for the return of the ring and write off the many hours of work they put into it, as they have received a no-confidence vote from both Cole (Mr. Know It All) and Julia. Cole being shocked and upset that the jeweler would even consider doing the new ring and Julia mentioning the other jeweler. If (and when) the current ring and diamond come back, neither will become a future client, even if the relationship of the couple survives. Time to move on, in my book.

Michael J.
Port Charlotte, FL

This is a perfect example of “just because you CAN does not mean you SHOULD.” Since most engineer clients are ridiculously picky to start with, this will be an exhausting process for everyone involved. Cole isn’t likely to go forward with the ring Julia wants. I would explain to Julia that this ultra-skinny trend is just that — a fleeting trend — and her choice MIGHT be acceptable for a half-carat but not for the 2-plus carat that Cole selected. I would explain to her that I don’t feel comfortable setting their diamond into that fragile of a ring for X reasons and would likely turn down the job since I don’t want my name dragged through the mud to her friends when the ring eventually gets mangled and/or the diamond lost.

The post The Woman Wants a Delicate Setting; The Man Wants a Reliable Setting. How Should This Salesperson Handle It? appeared first on INSTOREMAG.COM.