Connect with us

Real Deal

When a Client Asked to Swap Her Diamond for a CZ, Did This Retailer Do The Right Thing?

When a jeweler acts according to her conscience, she is sued for breach of confidentiality.

mm

Published

on

Tina Keller opened her studio more than 20 years ago. Over a relatively short period of time, the right combination of innovative marketing, great product instincts, a commitment to creating an extraordinary service experience and a superior talent for custom design made TK Creations the “go to” place for engagement rings and contemporary fashion jewelry in her town. Tina joked that she’d lost count of the number of engagement rings she’d personally sold over the years — and she thought she’d probably seen it all with the couples coming through her door.

ABOUT REAL DEAL

Real Deal is a fictional scenario designed to read like real-life business events. The businesses and people mentioned in this story should not be confused with actual jewelry businesses and people.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kate Peterson is president and CEO of Performance Concepts, a management consultancy for jewelers. Email her at kate@performanceconcepts.net

Several months ago, Tina took a call from the son of an old high school friend who had recently transferred back to the area to take a job with a growing tech firm. Derrick told Tina that he had met his soon-to-be fiancée Nicole while they were both in graduate school back east and that he was delighted she agreed to move back with him. He wanted an appointment to look at diamonds and to talk about designing a ring. He said that Nicole had some ideas about what she wanted, and that he needed to stay in the $20,000 range for the ring. The appointment was set for the next day.

The conversation began well enough, with Nicole showing Tina some pictures of rings she liked, and Tina showing a few models and sketching some concepts. When it came time to look at diamonds, keeping in mind the general type of setting Nicole liked and Derrick’s budget, Tina started with a mid-quality 1.50-carat. Nicole very quickly made it clear that the diamond was not at all what she had in mind, and insisted on looking at a minimum 2.50-carat. Tina could sense that Derrick was getting more and more uncomfortable as Nicole continued to make choices that raised the price of the ring well out of range. He made several references to expenses, budget and practicality, but Nicole went on with increasing her demands until she had settled on a diamond she could “live with” — right at 3 carats.

Tina agreed to hold the diamond for a week while she worked on finalizing design concepts for the couple to review. She prepared the designs with flexibility for diamond size, in the hope that Derrick might take the time to explain his budget concerns to Nicole and get her to make things a bit more reasonable for him.

When they came back in the following week, Nicole selected one of Tina’s designs and Derrick asked if they could see one of the diamonds they had looked at previously — just under 2 carats — to put into the ring. By the time Tina brought the diamond out, it was clear that Nicole was in full “persuasion mode,” explaining why she really did deserve the 3-carat. She looked at the smaller diamond, but after a lengthy (and miserably uncomfortable) discussion that included begging, pleading, smiles, thinly veiled innuendo and a commitment to contribute $5,000 toward the ring, Nicole talked Derrick into the 3-carat — and a $30,260 total tab.

Advertisement

Tina felt less than great about having witnessed the whole process, but she also recognized that her job was to deliver what her client asked for. The dynamic of the relationship — and the depth of Derrick’s savings account – were none of her business. She wrote up the sale (in Derrick’s name), putting a $5,000 deposit on Nicole’s credit card. When the ring was finished several weeks later, Derrick picked it up and left her a cashier’s check for the balance. He loved the ring and told Tina all about how he planned to present it to Nicole at dinner that night.

About a month after the engagement dinner, Nicole came to Tina’s studio alone and asked Tina if she could remove the center diamond and replace it with a CZ. Tina said it could be done, but suggested that if travel or security were issues, Nicole might consider having her make a high-quality silver and CZ replica of the ring and not compromise the integrity of the original. Nicole politely disregarded the suggestion, saying that she just wanted the diamond loose and the ring with a CZ in it at that point. She offered no other explanation.

Tina agreed to take the ring in and do the job, giving Nicole a due date of a week. As soon as Nicole was gone, however, she took it upon herself to call Derrick. After a minute or two of chatting (which gave Tina the impression that Derrick was still very happy), she asked if he was aware of Nicole’s request to take the diamond out of the ring. He was unaware and totally shocked. He asked that Tina not do anything with the ring till he could find out what was going on. Derrick called back the next day to tell Tina that Nicole came clean — that she was planning to break off the engagement, give him back the ring, keep the diamond and move back east. He was obviously devastated and asked Tina if he could get a refund on the ring.

Tina decided to make an exception to her “no refunds” policy. She refunded Nicole’s credit card and Derrick’s check and assumed it would be the end of the story … until 3 weeks later when she got notice that she was being sued by Nicole for damages related to breach of client confidentiality.

The Big Questions

  • Does Nicole have a case?
  • Who owns the engagement ring when both parties have some stake in paying for it?
  • Did Tina do the right thing by contacting Derrick?
  • Is it ever OK to follow your gut and NOT make a sale when you know it’s just not right?

Expanded Real Deal Responses

Robert L. New York, NY

Derrick gave Nicole the ring as “consideration” for her agreeing to marrying him. If she broke off the engagement she would have to return the ring to Derrick in any case and probably he would need to refund to her the $5000 she paid and take full ownership. If she had gone ahead and married him she would then own the ring.

Nicole has no case for client confidentiality. A jeweler is not a professional who has a personal responsibility toward clients to maintain other than ethically and honestly representing the products she sells. The fact that Nicole was going to perpetrate a fraud relieves Tina of any cause for concern for telling Derrick. In fact if she didn’t tell him she would be complicit in the fraud as it had to be obvious to a professional that she was up to no good. 

Advertisement
Sandra R. West Chester, PA

I would have done the same thing! In some states the ring belongs to the person who gave it and must be returned if the engagement is broken. If it went to court I would want to believe a judge would see that this women had intentionally tried to deceive everyone.

But who wants to have to defend themselves for doing the morally correct thing, the guy is lucky he didn’t marry her a divorce would have cost him even more. 

Marcus M. Midland, TX

Nicole does not have a case. In fact the police should have a case against her for conspiracy to commit fraud. Nicole is shady and her actions are down right criminal. She got her 5k back and needs to walk away from this situation before she finds herself in hot water. Tina definitely did the right thing by contacting Derrick. Can you image what would happen if Nicole got away with this and Derrick found out that Tina knew what was happening? That’s a whole new can of worms! Tina did everything right here. Even though she was uneasy about the situation to begin with she still couldn’t reject the sale. At the end of the day she really didn’t know the dynamics of the relationship until Nicole revealed her true conniving self. 

Daniel R. Nashville, TN

Nicole does not have a case. There is no breach of confidentiality between the parties. Their relationship was that of consumer and business, no confidentiality exists at law. I would not have called, like Tina did. Nicole’s motivations were not of Tina’s concern. Nicole will not win. We don’t know what financial agreement the parties have as it relates to ownership. Looking at it on its face both parties have an interest in the ring. 

Bruce A. Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada

Tina handled this brilliantly and is a credit to our industry. She went miles beyond what was required when she refunded the full purchase to each of the two clients. No law has been broken unless Tina’s repair tag on the HOLD, tied her to a specified confidentiality agreement. I would never casually suggest a retailer use a court room to settle a dispute with a client but in this case, Tina needs to complete the journey under the umbrella of high professional standards by which she governs herself and her business. Tina should have her lawyer respond with an acknowledgment that TK Creations will defend this action by their client. 

Steve F. New York, NY

When doing the right thing becomes the wrong thing to do, the problems of our industry and our nation are far worse than i ever imagined. 

Advertisement
Joseph C.Huntington, NY

First off we would not change out the Diamond with out both parties being aware & we would of told Nicole to please have Derrick call us & to let us know he was ok with this first, store owner should of put Nicole’s back to the wall & she most likely would not be in a position to be sued or liable for her actions. I believe Derrick still has some owner ship & doesn’t fraud on Nicole’s part stand for anything, she convinced the store owner to be deceitful as Nicole was. Good lesson for the store owner, two parties came in to purchase so two parties should be on board. 

Michael B. Graham, NC

Yes, I believe Tina would be a participant in a case of fraud. Derrick was the majority owner, and since Nicole was going to break the engagement, she would be the one to return the ring for not completing the marriage contract. If Derrick had found out and had the courage to file a fraud case Nicole would have a felony conviction for fraud. 

Pam S. Boston, MA

Good job Tina..I think she did the right thing and after Derrick heard the real story from the slimy ex that she was planning on scamming him I do not see her case! Derrick you are a lucky guy to have gotten away from this horror. 

Adrienne R. Los Angeles, CA

Nicole has no case. In most states, if not all, there is no legal concept of breach of confidentiality between a customer and a retailer. Unfortunately Tina will have the cost of defending the lawsuit, even though she will probably prevail. (By doing so, she can gain Derrick’s lifetime loyalty and that of his friends and family.) Nicole no longer has a stake in paying for the ring, since her deposit was refunded in full. She is a fraudster, and in all likelihood will be treated as one in court. Tina did the right thing by contacting Derrick before compromising the ring, as she needed to be sure that he, her primary customer and the son of a long time friend, was authorizing this request.

The question remains if the ring was a completed gift, or if accepting it was a promise to wed.

In my opinion it is always OK not to make a sale when you know it’s just not right. 

Ira K. Tallahassee, FL

1st—-If the sales slip has Derrick’s name on it, the ring belongs to him.

2nd—-Yes, Derrick is the buyer of record and; of course, the son of a friend.

3rd—-Always correct to believe in your gut feelings. It might cost you a sale or two, but you’ll feel better by doing the right thing. 

Aubrey M. Norfolk, VA

I would tell her no way unless both parties come into the store to have this done. Never go against your policy even for one person. Happy shopping days. 

Jake J. West Des Moines, IA

Tina was in the right to alert Derrick as this transaction smelled of fraud. It’s very suspect when the blushing bride comes in wanting to swap out the center for a fake. Nicole should be arrested for attempted fraud. I would fire back a letter stating the store policy in this situation that both parties must be contacted to make sure one isn’t trying to commit fraud against the other, which would make the store party to an illegal transaction. While it is technically her ring, depending on state laws, the intention of returning the ring with a fake center without Derricks knowledge is where the illegal action takes place. In the future, Tina should alert Nicole to the policy that she needs to contact Derrick to make sure he has knowledge and is agreeable to it.

Chuck K. West Des Moines, IA

First, I’m not an attorney but I have been in the business of selling engagement and wedding jewelry exclusively for over 25 years. The correct answer to your questions varies from state to state. In some states, the engagement ring is the consideration in the contract to marry. If the man breaks the engagement, the woman gets to keep the ring because he broke the contract. If she breaks the engagement, he gets the ring back. In other states, the ring is considered a gift so the woman gets to keep it either way. But If the ring was sold to him and she was trying to pull a fast one by taking the diamond out without telling him, then she might actually be breaking the law. It’s called “Fraud In The Inducement” I believe. Again, I’m not a lawyer, but my gut tells me she doesn’t have a leg to stand on. It’s an interesting case study though and I plan to ask our company attorney about it. 

James L. D. Kingston, NH

Tina followed due process and protected the rights of Derrick, the owner of the ring. An engagement ring is not the bride’s property until after she says “I do”. Had Tina done as Nichole requested it would have been business suicide… Tina could lose her sterling reputation as word spread that she sold a CZ as a diamond and the ensuing legal suit for fraud. If I were Tina I would be advising Derrick to have Nicole arrested for her actions. 

Sid S. Albany, OR

She has not a leg to stand on! The ring belonged to both of them. 

Herman G. Cedar Rapids, IA

If she paid 5-figures for an item she wasn’t budgeted for and for nothing she needs for stock, max she should do is give in-store credit for amount paid. 

Gabi M. Tewksbury, MA

Tina had no right to call Derrick, even if it was the “right” thing to do. Although he had more stake in the initial purchase, Nicole is now Tina’s sole customer in this new job take-in. That being said, there was probably no “customer confidentiality”, so Nicole probably doesn’t have a case. She should have gone to another jeweler! 

Mark B. Wausau, WI

First it is my understanding that the ring is a commitment to marry, and if she brakes up with him she has to give the ring back. She is only entitled to the 5,000.00 dollars she put down on the ring if the store takes the ring back. I would never remove one stone for a CZ with out both people knowing what is going on. I feel Nicole has no case, and I would have let Derrick know what is going on. 

Etienne P. Camden, ME

It seems pretty simple to me in that the ring was originally sold to Derrick any work done to alter the original ring that was sold would void the warranty. For this reason, Derrick had to be notified.

I doubt that the lawsuit will be taken seriously in the courts. 

Everardo C. Santa Barbara, CA

Tina absolutely did the right thing, Sales are great but we have to also have morals and trust our instincts. In my opinion, the engagement ring ownership would come down to majority owner like a tradable company, whoever holds the higher “stock” will be able to make the majority decision in favor of Derrick. So I feel that it was definitely his call on what to do. Nicole was basically going for a money grab and basically was going to finess her way back home and pocket cash. Moral of the story- Think with your brain not your heart. I hope that Derrick will make better selective decisions in the future. 

Daniel S. Cambridge, MA

My understanding is that engagement rings go back to the purchasers if the engagement is broken off. Admittedly the woman paid a small percentage of the cost but the bulk of it was paid for by the gentleman. The ring should have been returned to him by his fiancee and he should have given her the $5000 she put in for it . However I don’t think that’s what is going on here. I think she was taking him for a ride from the beginning. She obviously planned to screw him out of the diamond so he couldn’t get back the $25,000 and she figured she could go sell it and make a profit on his misery. She was a gold digger and what she was doing was stealing from him which is illegal. He should be bringing a suit against her for attempted theft of property, The jeweler should have an attorney tell hers this is what was going on and she has no role in it except to prevent a theft from happening. 

Kent C. St. Simon’s Island, GA

It’s Derrick’s property. The store was not involved with the gift to the gold digger.

A judge will rule, I don’t know how the store could do anything different.

It’s unfortunate the store will have to defend itself and unlikely recover court and attorney expense. 

Jay F. Apple Valley, MN

There is no confidentiality here. Instead it is solid good business and etiquette to be confidential until a crime is involved. Nicole was about to fraud Derrick, he could have called the police upon finding out she did not return the ring whole. He could also sue her.

There is implied confidentiality but it is not a legal one. I would counter sue Nicole for distress and her intent to involve Tina in a crime. 

Amy C. Grove, OK

Tina shouldn’t worry about this. Get a lawyer to fight first, then relax. The confidentiality seems to cover all three people in the situation together. I can’t picture a judge allowing her a privacy cover for what is essentially a deception. She did the right thing for all, especially that poor man who nearly married the wrong woman. He should be a customer forever! 

What’s the Brain Squad?

If you’re the owner or top manager of a U.S. jewelry store, you’re invited to join the INSTORE Brain Squad. By taking one five-minute quiz a month, you can get a free t-shirt, be featured prominently in this magazine, and make your voice heard on key issues affecting the jewelry industry. Good deal, right? Sign up here.

Kate Peterson is president and CEO of Performance Concepts, a management consultancy for jewelers. Email her at kate@performanceconcepts.net.

Advertisement

SPONSORED VIDEO

Wilkerson Testimonials

When It’s Time for Something New, Call Wilkerson

Fifty-four years is a long time to stay in one place. So, when Cindy Skatell-Dacus, owner of Skatell’s Custom Jewelers in Greenville, SC decided to move on to life’s next adventure, she called Wilkerson. “I’d seen their ads in the trade magazines for years,’ she says, before hiring them to run her store’s GOB sale. It was such a great experience, Skatell-Dacus says it didn’t even seem like a sale was taking place. Does she have some advice for others thinking of a liquidation or GOB sale? Three words, she says: “Wilkerson. Wilkerson. Wilkerson.”

Promoted Headlines

Real Deal

A Client Wants a Refund and Their Trade-In Back — But It’s Already Sold. What Should the Owner Do?

The client is threatening legal action.

mm

Published

on

JEFF MILTON, OWNER of Infinity Jewelers, loved his new location. Just eight months ago, he and his brother Andrew moved their third-generation store from its 25-year home in a dying mall to a great corner spot in their town’s newest outdoor lifestyle center. Though a number of their longtime customers flatly refused to make the move with them, the new location came complete with great visibility, walk-by traffic and exposure to a whole new clientele.

ABOUT REAL DEAL

Real Deal is a fictional scenario designed to read like real-life business events. The businesses and people mentioned in this story should not be confused with actual jewelry businesses and people.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kate Peterson is president and CEO of Performance Concepts, a management consultancy for jewelers. Email her at kate@performanceconcepts.net

Jeff and Andrew worked hard to make the most of their new visibility and took care to create attractive vignettes in the display windows that dotted their storefront. Since the move, they’d actually made several significant sales to first-time customers whose interest was drawn to Infinity’s windows on their way to the coffee shop on their left or the women’s fashion clothing store on their right.

One morning in early July, Joel Greer, a prominent local attorney, stopped at one of the windows as he was walking past the store and looked at the magnificent ruby and diamond ring Andrew had just put on display. Mr. Greer had never shopped with Infinity before, but he was impressed by the bright, rich color of the ruby and he thought the ring would make a perfect 25th anniversary gift for his wife. When he went inside to take a closer look, Jeff explained that the ring was 18K white gold, and that it contained a 2.10-carat Burmese ruby accented by two oval cut diamonds, both G color and VS2 clarity, weighing 0.75 carats each.

The price on the ring, $27,700, didn’t seem to bother Mr. Greer, but he did ask if Jeff would consider taking an 8.00-carat diamond bracelet his wife no longer enjoyed wearing as a trade-in. Jeff agreed to look at the bracelet, and Mr. Greer brought it in the next day. The bracelet had been purchased at a reputable local competitor and was in keeping with Infinity’s quality standards, so Jeff agreed to take it in trade for a $6,000 credit toward the ruby ring.

A bit concerned about his wife’s track record of not liking his jewelry gift choices, Mr. Greer asked about Infinity’s return policy. Jeff explained that it was Infinity’s policy to take the best possible care of their customers — and that if Mrs. Greer were unhappy with the ring for any reason, he could bring it back for a refund or exchange. Satisfied that he was making a good choice, Mr. Greer left the bracelet, paid the difference and took the ring home.

Nearly five months passed, and it was just before Christmas when Mr. Greer and his wife came back into Infinity, complaining that Mrs. Greer was not at all happy with her ring. The diamonds looked dull to her and the white gold mounting had begun to yellow. She had taken it to another local jeweler (the one who had sold her the bracelet that Infinity had accepted in trade), where she was told that “good quality white gold” should not be changing color, especially so soon after purchase. She was also told that the reason for the diamonds’ dull appearance was that they were inferior in color, and the manufacturer failed to polish the setting under the diamonds. In addition to all of that, Mrs. Greer really did miss the diamond bracelet her husband had traded in. It was a present for their tenth anniversary, and though it was much smaller than the jewelry she typically wore lately, it still held a good deal of sentimental value for her. Though she and Joel had discussed the possibility of trading it in before he bought the ring, she really wasn’t ready to give it up. She wanted her bracelet back.

When Jeff explained that the Infinity return policy covered the purchase for 30 days, Mr. Greer reminded him of his stipulation during his sales presentation that if Mrs. Greer was not happy with the ring, he could bring it back for a refund. He noted that there was no mention of a specific time period associated with the refund policy, and since he was given nothing in writing to spell it out, his request was well within the bounds of reason.

Jeff felt that he needed to defend the quality of his merchandise, especially after learning in conversation that Mrs. Greer did wear the ring daily, including during the two hours she spent each morning swimming in the health club pool. In addition to discussing the impact of chlorine on gold, he also had to explain that Mrs. Greer’s bracelet had been sold out of Infinity’s estate showcase several weeks ago.

In an attempt to resolve the already dicey situation, Jeff offered to take the ring back and refund the Greers the full purchase price by check.

The Greers were not at all interested in Jeff’s explanations or his offer. All they wanted was to return the “inferior quality” ring and to get their money — and Mrs. Greer’s old bracelet — back. Mr. Greer stated emphatically that Jeff had no right to re-sell the bracelet, as his offer of a refund was left wide open. He demanded that Jeff contact the customer who purchased the bracelet and get it back, threatening to marshal his resources in legal action and in community influence if Jeff did not comply.

Stew B.
Natick, MA

And this is why I have my return policy on an 8 x 11 engraved plaque, clearly printed on my receipts and printed under the signature line on the credit card slip. Had the store done this, they’d be able to point to the agreement the client signed. Now it’s “he said-she said.” But, the scenario got me thinking. I have to develop a written policy to reflect the disposition of trade-ins used as tender and print that on store receipts as well.

Barbara W.
San Diego, CA

I am so sorry, Mrs. Greer, that you are not happy with the purchase and trade-in deal your husband worked out five months ago. I wish you had brought it to my attention sooner.

Let us make a new setting in platinum. The metal will not yellow and we will let you look at the mounting before setting the stones to ensure it is up to your standards. Please feel free to come in at your convenience for inspection and cleaning of the ring whenever you feel like it, as diamonds are natural oil and dirt catchers. Even hand lotion can dull a stone. I was not aware you were a swimmer. What a great way to exercise.

Secondly, as there is nothing we can do about the bracelet since it has been sold, I would love to get similar bracelets in to look at, so you and your husband can pick one together. I will work out the financial aspect with your husband. We both want you to be happy.

Ira K.
Tallahassee, FL

The sale is gone.

Joel and his wife are unreasonable to think that the trade-in will sit in a vault forever, and Jeff’s offer for a full refund is as good as it will ever get. In fact, it’s more than he had to do.
In the future, when buying off the street (and yes, trade-ins are considered a buy by the police), the owner signs off the rights of ownership when the jeweler fills out the proper paperwork.

Stan G.
Charlotte, NC

No obligation of a refund here. One bad “customer” isn’t going to ruin their reputation. As far as a repeat situation goes, I wouldn’t do anything differently to avoid that. Touchy situation with the trade-in (and resold) bracelet, but:

1) If someone threatens legal action, I would say “see you in court, now please leave my store.”

2) Five months passed … what do the Greers expect? If she really loved the bracelet, the idea of a trade would never have happened or she would have been in the store to recover it immediately if he had acted without her knowledge.

If the Greers were decent people, I’d bend over backwards to “rewind” the deal and offer a premium credit or refund to the buyer of the bracelet and get it back. Since they are not decent people, anyone they know probably already realizes that and I’d let three generations of happy customers stand up for my reputation versus one miserable couple.

Drue S.
Albany, NY

First and foremost, they must have the return policy printed on their receipts. We do and that eliminates any customer coming in after 30 days. If a client is being very difficult, we may allow an exchange after 30 days, but only if the piece truly was not worn. We stipulate that on our receipts also.

In this case, I think it’s unreasonable for the purchaser to expect the store to hold the bracelet indefinitely, and unfortunately, since it’s been sold, now what? The owners put together another bracelet and give the money back? Also, since the ring shows wear and tear, the clients are being unreasonable.

This one is a puzzler! And one that may require a lawyer. Do any of us get to borrow a car or any other large purchase for six months?

Bruce A.
Sherwood Park, AB

This issue pivots around the sales receipt provided to Joel Greer at the finalization of the original sale. It should have indicated the two distinct parts of payment, cash and credit for the bracelet, with the latter succinctly covered by stating that it was now the property of Infinity Jewelers. Jeff is being more than reasonable with his offer of a full refund, well over what his state may require under their consumer laws. Worrying about defending the quality of his merchandise is a battle not worth fighting; however, battling this unreasonable customer is! If it means a day in front of a judge, Jeff should step up to that plate. If it is the Better Business Bureau, his very reasonable offer will stand him in good stead, as will a social media response if the Greers choose to go that direction. He needs only to tell his incredible offer in the same reasonable tone that he has employed thus far.

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

Jeff is not obligated to refund these animals and there is no way he can save the sale, but he can definitely save his reputation. This clown “Mr. Greer” is an unreasonable bully who is using his attorney power to intimidate Jeff. Jeff should stay firm in his return/exchange policy and with the sale of the bracelet to another customer. This jerk is trying to get him to cave and Jeff needs to show some backbone and stay strong. FIRE THE CUSTOMER! Mr. Greer might threaten a lawsuit, but I really don’t see how he has much ground to stand on. From now on, though, Jeff and Andrew are unfortunately going to have to put everything in writing. It stinks that this is what business has come to, but it’s because of bullies like Mr. Greer.

Barbara P.
Conroe, TX

Oh, how many scavengers are out there today. In my opinion, Jeff has no obligation whatsoever to refund anything to this man who touts that he is an “attorney.” The ring has been worn for five months, whether she swam in it or stuck it in a box in her closet. It can no longer be sold as new. And as far as the bracelet, he had no obligation to sit on merchandise that was traded in, as he has to replenish his merchandise as well.

I would not accept the ring back. I would not offer to try to sell it for him because it’s a losing situation. If he knew his wife loved the bracelet so much, he should have just bought her the ring and left the bracelet at home.

I would tell the guy, “I’m so sorry you made the decision to bring in your wife’s bracelet to trade. I was not required to hold the bracelet, and that was not in writing, either.”

Alan P.
Wilmington, NC

He messed up by not explaining the return policy. He will never forget it again. He should make a new bracelet and offer to give that to her or try to buy back the old one ASAP.

Joe D.
Columbus, OH

Unfortunately, the retailer sounds like he’s going to eat this one. He made an exception to the standard return policy as a condition of the sale. So he is right to take the ring back. As far as the bracelet is concerned, however, I think you could easily argue that they accepted the bracelet’s value as part of the sale as well, and there was no promise of returning it as part of the return. So writing them a check for the full sale amount (including the trade-in value of the bracelet) is correct. They might want to contact the buyer of the bracelet and offer to replace it with a new one of comparable quality at no charge to get out of this mess, but depending on what they sold it for, that could be an expensive remedy, just to save themselves from the bad reviews.

Buddy B.
Merion, PA

The customer is always right. However, in this case, the client is dead wrong. There is no jury that would find the jewelry store liable; I would defend to the end.

Gregory I.
Johnson City, TN

The receipt must have in writing the return policy. Also, a clear dialog with the customer about how long they will hold the trade-in piece in case the purchase is returned; usually the length of the return timeframe.

Gabi M.
Tewksbury, MA

If there isn’t a return policy and no customer signature on said return policy, then there is no argument. Even when a business has a perfectly clear policy list, customers still try to find loopholes. There’s no excuse to not have one in this day and age. If I was in Jeff’s position, I would do my best to get that bracelet back, issue a refund, and take the loss. After that, I would create a thorough policy list and make sure it gets printed and signed with every future transaction.

Dennis F.
Poughkeepsie, NY

Jeff cannot go back to the purchaser of the bracelet. Did he refund the original price of the ring less the $6,000 credit for the bracelet or the full amount? Jeff should request the matter go into mediation. If that fails, he should get a good attorney. This is a classic example of balancing giving a customer too much information versus not. He definitely should have discussed and written his return policy and made it clear that the bracelet was going to be resold.

Tim W.
Yorktown, VA

I believe that the store owner was well within his legal rights to sell the traded bracelet. It was obviously held long enough to cover any normal return and sold to recoup the money that was not paid for the ring. We would have returned the entire purchase price and this was right thing to do.

Now, he could find a diamond bracelet that was equivalent to the quality that was sold and offer it for a price that would not generate much profit to try to satisfy the new client and try to keep it close to the traded value. The customer could use the traded money received to buy it back. In the end, he was refunded more than what was paid, so there is not any loss on the customer’s behalf. We would never contact the estate customer and ask to buy it back.

Steve W.
Clearwater, FL

Obviously, the jeweler in this case did nothing wrong and the client is being totally unreasonable. For him to expect the jeweler not to sell the trade-in bracelet is unreasonable, and furthermore, no one would ever contact the client that you’ve already sold the bracelet to and ask for it back. I think he went above and beyond just to refund the ring after six months. On his receipts, he should have his return policy clearly printed out.

Ralph H.
Connersville, IN

The key word here is “attorney”. Hire this bozo to file a major libel suit against your competitor and make that part of the deal. He’s already given you all the evidence you need to prove financial loss and loss to your reputation (and the competitor lied). Whether or not you are required to comply with these ridiculous demands depends on the law in your state and how much of a fight you want. The bigger the sale, the more important the “notice of policies.” Better put up signage, and add your “policies” to stationery, sales slips, repair envelopes, etc. and have customers sign them, especially on a big sale. Of course, this is not “right,” but we all screw this up sometimes; hindsight’s 20/20. Oh, and can this customer mess you up in court? You better believe it. Good luck; maybe this is not such a friendly town after all.

What’s the Brain Squad?

If you’re the owner or top manager of a U.S. jewelry store, you’re invited to join the INSTORE Brain Squad. By taking one five-minute quiz a month, you can get a free t-shirt, be featured prominently in this magazine, and make your voice heard on key issues affecting the jewelry industry. Good deal, right? Sign up here.

Continue Reading

Real Deal

When A Bride-To-Be Threatens To Pull the Couple’s Business, How Should The Owner React?

The husband-to-be has been a loyal and good client.

mm

Published

on

SHIRLEY JONES WAS born and raised in Abingdon, a small New England town. She loved the town and couldn’t remember a time when she’d regretted her decision to leave the world of corporate finance and buy Pruet Jewelers from her retiring great uncle. As she sat at her desk one bright, sunny January day, she remembered the three admonitions her uncle left with her the day she took the keys:

ABOUT REAL DEAL

Real Deal is a fictional scenario designed to read like real-life business events. The businesses and people mentioned in this story should not be confused with actual jewelry businesses and people.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kate Peterson is president and CEO of Performance Concepts, a management consultancy for jewelers. Email her at kate@performanceconcepts.net

1. Always let your passion drive your business.
2. Protect your name and fine reputation at all cost.
3. If you look hard enough, you’ll always find a way to make even the most difficult, most obnoxious customer happy.

Then, she looked again at the letter that had just come in the day’s mail:

Dear owner,

I am writing to request you remove my fiancé, Devin Hines, from your mailing list. I have requested he no longer purchase jewelry from your store, and instead do business with Moeller Jewelers in Westgate.

I am satisfied with the quality of your jewelry and with the selections he has made. I am extremely dissatisfied, however, with your customer service. Recently, one of my channel diamond earrings fell out of my ear and was lost. Rather than have me go without it, Devin insisted on replacing it so I would once again have a matching pair. I insisted he have it replaced “at cost,” considering how much business he does with Pruet’s. Otherwise, it wasn’t worth it to me to replace it. Unfortunately, he was given a mere $50 discount on a $500 earring (he paid $1,000 for the original pair). I find it disconcerting to know that your establishment benefited from our misfortune.

I have inquired about the practices of other local jewelers who all indicated they would have treated Devin with more respect and provided him a much better deal to encourage his future patronage. Because he wasn’t treated with this level of consideration, I insist he no longer shop at your store. He realizes how strongly I feel on this matter and has agreed to honor my wishes.

Hopefully, our circumstances will encourage you to reconsider your policy.

Sincerely,
Jenna M. Sheely

Advertisement

After getting past her initial anger at the arrogant and manipulative tone of the letter, Shirley pulled up Devin Hines’s file and found that he had indeed purchased a number of items over the past six years, including a strand of pearls, diamond stud earrings, the diamond hoops in question and an engagement ring. All told, he’d spent over $15,000 with the store. She also noted that, per store policy, Devin had been given an insurance valuation document with every item on which he spent $500 or more. She clearly remembered taking care of Devin when he came in for the earring replacement as well. While he asked if there might be some sort of a “break” on the price, he did not object to the 10 percent discount. She believed that he appreciated the $50 “break” and recalled that he even commented on her willingness to sell him just half of a pair.

As angry as she was with Jenna’s letter, Shirley hated the thought of losing even one customer. She picked up the phone to call Devin, but put it back down as she realized that she had no clue what she would tell him. Her first instinct was to apologize for putting him in so difficult a spot and to offer to refund part of the earring price. Good sense told her, though, that doing so would bring the value of everything else Devin had purchased into question, and would also demonstrate that Jenna’s brand of extortion was a viable strategy.

The Big Questions

  • Should Shirley even acknowledge the letter at all? If so, should she deal with Devin, or with Jenna?
  • Short of questioning Devin’s good sense in even considering a lifetime with a woman so demanding, what should Shirley do?
  • Is there any strategy that might help save Devin as a customer and repair the situation?

Expanded Real Deal Responses

Ilah C.
Sudbury, MA

Sorry not sorry. It sucks to lose a good customer, but she already lost him to his nutterbutter fiancée. That is a fight that cannot be won with any amount of good customer service. Leave it alone and be glad that she is not your problem moving forward.

Davy D.
Williston, ND

I would reach out to the customer as soon as possible, apologize for the situation and ask the customer if there was anything I could do to fix it. If they said no, then at least the effort was there and maybe they won’t complain to everyone and blow you up on social media. If they say yes, then I’d probably do what they wanted this one time and then I would suggest homeowner’s or renter’s insurance for future issues of that nature. Sure, the store would lose money on fixing that for cost or a little above. Chalk it up to advertising budget to keep bad word-of-mouth from spreading. I think any reasonable person would allow you the chance to take care of the problem. Some of our best customers have had major customer service issues, and how you handle that can make or break your business. Take the ego out of it. Try not to fire the customer; let them quit, if that makes sense.

Mary-Beth T.
Alliston, ON

I find this statement incredibly sexist: “Short of questioning Devin’s good sense in even considering a lifetime with a woman so demanding, what should Shirley do?”

Although I don’t believe that many jewelers would offer the earring at cost, for the client to request a substantial discount is not a “brand of extortion.” Although purchased by the fiancée, if they have a joint household income, she has every right to question the money spent in the store.

I think for the owner to invite the engaged couple into the store together, she could demonstrate that she values both equally as clients. I would offer a gift card for the cost value of the single earring for future shopping.

I’m very disappointed to see how the woman is vilified in this story. An assertive female client shouldn’t be immediately marked as a problem.

Advertisement
Ursula P.
Naples, FL

Dear Ms. Sheely:

Thank you for writing. I regret the loss of your earring and appreciate your frank description of the stress you felt about the replacement circumstances.

Jewelry is meant to bring joy, especially if it is a thoughtful gift from a loved one. We always want to do whatever we can to add to and sustain this joy.

So, in order to find a solution, may I invite you to visit me at the store?

Perhaps, over a cup of coffee and honestly-shared information, we can find a mutually agreeable solution?

Please, call my mobile number if we may have this opportunity.

Respectfully,

Shirley

Ralph H.
Connersville, IN

You are a one-price store or you aren’t. The earrings were likely not defective, and the customer would likely have had insurance (you provided an appraisal). No matter how low you go, you would never make a dollar’s profit again with her, they’ll never respect you, and you can bet she’ll tell all of her buddies (your customers?) how she “got one over on you.” Don’t tell her your cost (then she’ll “know” your mark-up is too high). You might have given a “nice” gift certificate on a future purchase? Keep being nice and honest, and remember the customers who really trust you.

Ernie C.
Lawrence, KS

Our store’s policy is to charge approximately half the margin on the original sale. This seems to work for both sides: lower price for customer, and enough margin to help with the fixed cost of being open.

If she wants to change store policy for this situation, she may be able to keep the customer and still retain a good relationship. This problem comes up occasionally, in my case. We treat some situations as political. If we incur a cost to retain good relations, we think of it as an advertising expense. Try to put yourself in their shoes.

If Shirley wants to keep her policy, that’s her approach to business.

These are difficult situations. We believe helping with a lost situation is usually successful. We also ask if it is insured and if that could be a solution.

Gabi M.
Tewksbury, MA

Dear Jenna,

I’m so sorry that you lost your earring. Being in the jewelry industry for so long, my heart goes out to all the lonely earrings out there that have been lost over the years! Our jewelry is priced competitively and fairly, along with the value of each piece being honest and accurate. We do not price our pieces high enough to give any large discounts. I appreciate the bond Devin and I have created over the years, and I would hate for both of us to lose that. I would like to help you further if it interests you — I could turn the earrings into locking posts and backs, at no cost to you. That should protect you from another future situation that would otherwise cause them to fall out again. I hope to hear from you soon so we can resolve this.

Thank you,

Shirley

Walter B.
West Orange, NJ

Shirley needs to deal with Jenna as Jenna has shown herself to be the decision-maker. Shirley should let Jenna know that she has thought about the situation and appreciated the letter. Shirley can offer a gift certificate to Jenna to get her in the door and win her over. She has nothing to lose.

When couples get engaged and/or move, the decision-making dynamics change. Jenna is letting Shirley know that she is now in charge of the jewelry buying decisions.

David H.
Rose Bay, New South Wales

For the client to be motivated enough to write a letter, she must have been pretty worked up. When an earring is lost, there’s often a sense in the client’s mind that the jeweler is at least partly responsible; after all, they made the earrings.

The client is waiting for a response, so I would call the client, thank her for reaching out to me and ask what would they like us to do?

Any partial refund I would consider would be in the form of a credit note.

Advertisement
Marcus M.
Midland, TX

Jenna sounds like an entitled brat! We have had to replace several half earrings for people and have never had someone demand it at our cost. People who are civil and have common sense can accept that it is their fault for a loss like this and own up for their mishap. Shirley does not need to bow to Jenna’s request and should steer clear of dealing with her. Maybe Shirley can send Devin a $200 gift card to her store or to a nice local restaurant. She should include a note saying she appreciates all of his business, and since she couldn’t do much about the price of the replacement earring, please accept this gift. If he is loyal and trusts Shirley, then he’ll stay on as her customer. I can’t see this being a deal-breaker unless Devin has no backbone and won’t stand up to his fiancée.

Bruce A.
Sherwood Park, AB

Dear Ms. Sheely,

I wanted to thank you for taking the time to write your thoughts on our handling of Devin’s diamond hoop purchase. I have always felt a passion for each and every one of my clients, and it easy to tell that you are driven by passion as well. The world could use more of us, don’t you agree?

I was happy to look after Devin personally when he told me about your lost earring. I pride myself in sourcing and pricing our fine jewelry so that Pruet’s can offer the best jewelry value to all of our clients. The 10 percent discount was offered because of the unfortunate circumstances.

I am very sorry to lose your business. I value each and every one of my customers. Moeler Jewelers in Westgate are excellent competitors and I know they will welcome your support.

Please find enclosed a copy of a $200 donation that I have made in your name to Soldiers’ Agents. I hope we can meet someday.

Shirley Jones

President

Noreen M.
Rochester Hills, MI

It was certainly not the store’s fault that she lost the earring. The woman was totally out of line and should have filed an insurance claim. Probably not the first time she has used this tactic. Chalk it up to an irrational person and move on. It’s not in your best interest to contact him either.

What’s the Brain Squad?

If you’re the owner or top manager of a U.S. jewelry store, you’re invited to join the INSTORE Brain Squad. By taking one five-minute quiz a month, you can get a free t-shirt, be featured prominently in this magazine, and make your voice heard on key issues affecting the jewelry industry. Good deal, right? Sign up here.

Continue Reading

Real Deal

A Salesperson Discovers Her Store Owner Is Cheating Her Out of Commissions. How Should She Respond?

He lied to her about two huge sales.

mm

Published

on

ELIZABETH KRISTOF WAS A sales professional at Elegance Fine Jewelry, a successful family-owned store in a high-end resort town in Florida. Elizabeth had worked at the store for 12 years, ever since James Turner, the current owner, took the store over from his mother. Like all Elegance sales professionals, she was paid a base salary plus a commission equal to 5 percent of her personal gross profit production.

ABOUT REAL DEAL

Real Deal is a fictional scenario designed to read like real-life business events. The businesses and people mentioned in this story should not be confused with actual jewelry businesses and people.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kate Peterson is president and CEO of Performance Concepts, a management consultancy for jewelers. Email her at kate@performanceconcepts.net

In mid-January, Brad Fitzgerald came in looking for a special gift for his 20th anniversary. After Elizabeth had spent a considerable amount of time with him over several days, Brad selected a natural fancy yellow diamond ring that had been brought in on memo for him, and negotiated a price of $27,500. He asked Elizabeth for some time since he still had a few weeks until the anniversary, and he wasn’t prepared to take it with him that day. The ring was put into the showcase and quickly became a conversation piece with women who visited the store.

The following week, Elizabeth returned to the store after a day off and noticed that the ring was no longer in the showcase. She asked James about it, and he told her that the vendor had requested that the ring be returned. She reminded him that Brad was interested in the ring, but James told her that he’d checked with Brad, who had decided against the purchase, opting instead to take his wife to Paris for their anniversary.

In early February, James brought in two matched pairs of four-carat total weight round diamonds for Henry Askew, another local businessman and longtime friend who was looking to buy a pair of diamond earrings for his wife’s birthday. The diamonds arrived while James was away on a family vacation, so he asked Elizabeth to contact Henry and to arrange a time to show him the diamonds. He told her not to worry about the price — that he would work the details out with Henry when he returned. The next day, Henry came in, selected one of the diamond pairs and worked with Elizabeth to choose suitable mountings. He thanked Elizabeth for her time and said he would follow up with James in the coming week. When James returned, he told Elizabeth he’d contact Henry personally and take over from there. Elizabeth wasn’t concerned; she felt that the sale was solid, and store policy indicated that she would be entitled to at least half of the commission on the sale for her effort. A week later, when she asked James about Henry’s decision, he told her that Henry had learned that his wife did not want large diamond earrings and was thinking about other options. Elizabeth thought it odd that Henry would back out, as he’d seemed so committed.

Advertisement

With the fast pace and the high volume of in-season business at the store, it wasn’t long before Elizabeth forgot about both Brad and Henry’s transactions. Neither man’s change of heart had kept the store — or Elizabeth — from achieving monthly goals.

The following month, Elizabeth’s husband Joe, a well-known local artist, surprised her with tickets to the Children’s Hospital Spring Charity Gala. Elegance and the Turner family had traditionally been sponsors of the event, and over the years they had donated several spectacular pieces to the evening’s live auction. James had made it clear to his mother even before he took over the store, though, that he was not a “black-tie kind of guy” — so Elegance hadn’t had a representative at the Gala since 2005. Elizabeth was more than excited to attend the event for the first time.

At one point during the cocktail hour, Elizabeth spotted Brad Fitzgerald, Henry Askew, and their wives. As she and Joe approached, she was shocked to see that both women were wearing the pieces she had shown their husbands — the ones James told her had not been purchased. She managed to engage in the usual social small talk, keeping it very brief and making no mention of the women’s new bling. While Mrs. Askew’s diamond studs could well have been purchased anywhere, Mrs. Fitzgerald’s yellow diamond ring was very distinctive and was obviously the same one that had been in the store.

Elizabeth kept her suspicions to herself but decided to investigate. At the next opportunity, she looked up a few other important pieces that had been brought into the store over the previous year and had supposedly been sent back to vendors after customers lost interest. Along with the Fitzgerald ring and the Askew diamonds, several additional pieces had been noted in the inventory system as purchased from vendors. Some were later marked as “broken up” or “sold.” One was marked as “lost” and a few still showed as in inventory, though they were nowhere to be found. It didn’t take long for Elizabeth to conclude that James was selling merchandise “off the record,” altering the company’s books and denying her and other sales professionals commissions they had legitimately earned.

Advertisement

Although Elizabeth recognized that as a business owner, James could do whatever he wanted with his inventory, she felt disappointed and betrayed. In her view, he was undermining the integrity of the business while being horribly unfair to her and to her associates.

The Big Questions

  • Should Elizabeth confront James with her suspicions?
  • Since other sales associates were involved, do they have a right to know about the off-the-books sales?
  • Elizabeth have a moral obligation to report her concerns to local tax authorities?

Expanded Real Deal Responses

Bernie S.
Ephrata, PA

If she was hired as a commissioned salesperson, he OWES her. With interest. Stealing the sale is, in my opinion, illegal in that instance. And she should quit, because she’s working for a dishonest man.

Newton S.
Flowood, MS

Yes indeed! Confront him in a private, professional way. Stand firm if the policies described are really in effect. Always remember this warning I was given early in life: if someone will lie to you, they will steal from you.

Daniel S.
Cambridge, MA

Well I’d be pissed if this was me it was happening to. And she has good reason to be. As a store owner who used to have employees who were paid on commission, I can’t imagine anything more sleazy and disgusting than screwing the people you depend on in this way. Even if the guy is selling them off the books, the employees should still get their cut. How the guy declares or doesn’t declare sales isn’t their problem, but they should get paid. If I were her, I’d confront him publicly in front of the other employees with it. I’d tell him that if he didn’t pay up for all the missed commissions, I’d walk and go to the closest competitor and let all my regular customers know just what was going on. These days, the labor market is so tight, she wouldn’t have any problem finding another job. I’m on the fence about talking to the tax people as she doesn’t really know whether or not he’s truly hiding the income.

Bruce A.
Sherwood Park, AB

Yes, Elizabeth needs to talk with James. Her important discussion is a search for the truth and not rumors or suspicions. Clarification is the issue, and if it appears that James is moving items in order to bypass his requirement of paying commission, then Elizabeth is working at the wrong jewelry store. Without concrete paperwork, reporting this to the local tax authorities would not only be inappropriate, but could potentially leave Elizabeth open to legal action from Elegance Fine Jewelry.

Fred F.
Hyattsville, MD

As a second-generation owner/partner in our store, this totally disgusts me. Your staff is what makes you, and if you are going to use them like that and not share what is owed to them, then I have no problem with her giving her two weeks’ notice and finding another job in town. She has enough of a following to make her desirable to another store, and if she has proof of anything, she should contact the IRS and suggest that they audit him. If he is indeed cheating, then he deserves to be made an example of. It is owners like that that give our industry a bad name. I have no problem having a cheater exposed and punished. If she wants to confront him before progressing that is her decision, but the proof seems to be there, and why should she continue to be used and not compensated for her work? Hopefully this would be an example to others to stay on the right side of the law.

Bill C.
Ridgefield, CT

If I was Elizabeth, I would sit down with James. Explain to him what I saw at the Gala, then after some investigation, I noticed the earrings and ring were sold under the table, plus other inventory items over a period of time! Either pay me and the staff what is owed to us for commissions, or, I report you!

James, you own the business, we don’t, so you will be the one in trouble with agencies. Once he pays them, quit and take all of their customer book with them!

Jennifer T.
Oconomowoc, WI

She should ask him about these items. Not to confront him, but to find out why she was lied to and it was kept a secret from her. Maybe it wasn’t intentional on his part, maybe it was. Either way, piece of mind goes a long way.

Marc M.
Midland, TX

What an unethical POS James is! I mean I don’t know how you can go down for embezzling from your own company, but it seems like he certainly is. It’s very clear what has happened and Elizabeth has every right to confront him. Call him out! What’s he going to do? Fire you? You’re better off not working for a dirtbag like that anyway. Maybe give him one chance to explain it and tell the truth, but I don’t see how there is any other possible play out here. If he comes clean, then I would point-blank tell him that he HAS to pay everyone who helped with sales that he burned them on. If he doesn’t, then take it to the local tax collector. This guy is a bad character and needs to taken care of. There are no excuses for his actions and he can’t walk from this without repercussions.

Jim D.
Kingston, NH

Elizabeth is in a bit of a pickle, should she say something and possibly lose her job, notify the IRS and possibly lose her job but get the reward, or stay silent and hope the stuff hitting the fan doesn’t cost her, too? If James is cooking the books, it could lead to tax issues and potential store closure. Whistle-blower laws will shield her from certain retaliation.

I would suggest she should mention to James that she attended the gala and saw the yellow diamond ring … then see how James reacts. Hopefully he will come clean and do the right thing, but there are no guarantees in life and she needs to make sure she is protected. Elizabeth may also want to clue in her fellow employees to the situation, remembering that she needs to be ready to seek a new employer. From the sounds of it, Elegance may not be around much longer.

Taner A.
Istanbul, Turkey

Elizabeth should confront James about her suspicions. In my opinion, there were no other possibilities other than what she saw. James officially stole Elizabeth’s sales commissions. Because of this, others also have the right to know what is going on. She also should request from James her past commissions. If Elizabeth is convinced that everything will be recorded after she warned James, and if she still wants to continue working in the same place, she doesn’t need to report it to the tax authorities. However, she should inform the local tax authorities if she encounters a different attitude after the warning.

Advertisement
Gabi M.
Tewksbury, MA

Elizabeth should absolutely confront James. Although he is the owner, he agreed to her salary plus commission, so now he is simply stealing from her. I think Elizabeth should approach James “nicely,” simply letting him know that she is completely aware of his thievery. From there, I would hope that he would apologize and give her and the other employees the money they deserve. Then, I would expect Elizabeth to pay closer attention to any future sales so it doesn’t happen again. If James doesn’t apologize and compensate everyone for their losses, I would look towards legal action.

Michael J.
Port Charlotte, FL

Definitely sit down and have a meeting with James saying how much of a “coincidence” it is that she saw not one, but TWO wives wearing the pieces she showed. If James in fact sold them, she is being stolen from. To do that to loyal, hard-working employees to save a few bucks is bound to backfire, especially when the records are as telling as the ones she found! It’s one thing to sell it off the books, but at least pay the commission and explain why. If he admits to the back-door deals, I would tell him that the tax issue is between him and the IRS, but the commission issue will be discussed with other employees AND with his family (if they still have any stake in the company) unless proper compensation is made.

Marc F.
Houston, TX

Provided Elizabeth can absolutely prove that James did in fact do what is alleged, then she should arrange a meeting with James, his mother, and the company attorney to provide the evidence of what James was doing. She should also have her attorney present with a demand for the commissions that she was cheated out of, as well as a generous separation check with a letter of agreement of resignation. Elizabeth should not contact other employees about the matter, as it’s none of her business.

Shevvy B.
Louisville, KY

I think she should confront the owner about the irregularities. If he doesn’t face up to the fact, she should report him to the other employees first, and if it’s not corrected, commissions paid, and promised to stop, he should be reported to the authorities. What he did was wrong, illegal, and should not be tolerated.

Edward S.
Garwood, NJ

If she doesn’t mind losing her job. Of course, James may not want to lose her either, so this may be a bargaining chip for her. If she is brave, confront him with a figure for her estimated commission, and give notice, as working for a thief is an impossible situation. If he really wants to keep her, ask for a higher base salary to make up for his thievery.

Ernie C.
Lawrence, KS

First, I hope that James is really fictional. There is no happy ending to this story if he is truly this dishonest. Having said that, there are two sides to every story. My advice is for the salespeople who contribute the most, meet outside the store. They can discuss the situation and develop a strategy to meet with James. There must be a confrontation.

Very tough situation, salespeople could lose their jobs and their livelihood. James could lose his reputation and his income producers. Let’s face it, great salespeople are worth their weight in gold and they don’t grow on trees. They need total respect. What’s going to happen at the meeting? Not good. If James doesn’t have a reasonable explanation, he has to make some tough choices.

My idea would be to get some sort of mediator. I would suggest someone in the jewelry business. Meet with all parties, develop a plan to continue the business with a method to verify all practices. James must either come up with some sort of settlement or lose his people. He will need to sacrifice power to someone else. He will have to win back their trust; his family should be part of disclosure. This situation is messy and tough …good luck to all!

Continue Reading

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Subscribe


BULLETINS

INSTORE helps you become a better jeweler
with the biggest daily news headlines and useful tips.
(Mailed 5x per week.)

Latest Comments

Most Popular