Carole
Santa Ana,#2Author of original report
Fri, February 16, 2007
I did write a response on the new situation with Montica two days ago and it has not been posted yet. Would you know why? Santa Ana, I am who put the first thread. Thank you
Carole
Santa Ana,#3Author of original report
Wed, February 14, 2007
My lawyers have been trying to come to a settlement with Montica, but again they have been playing games. Their lawyer Hugo Arza received the settlement proposed by Thomas Valentine law firm but kept changing their positions or even ignoring the date for the settlement to take place. They would come up with "I thought the diamond came with the mounting, therefore the price must vary, etc etc. I will in my next update send the emails sent back and forth. Since the begining Montica has not honored its policy and guarantee and now again have not honored their agreement to come to a settlement. Their lawyers have even sent out the proposal of a fair arrangement to a third party not at all involved in the matter! I am taking them to court for false representation and backing up again. We will see you in court along with Hearts on Fire. Santa Ana.
Carole
Santa Ana,#4Author of original report
Fri, June 30, 2006
Hello Aafes, Europe USA First of all, thank you for your comments. I have read a lot about branded diamonds. Let me tell you that the Hearts on Fire diamond has the same amount of facets as a traditional round diamond. The dream from HOF does vary in number of facets. HOF has market very well its product. This is the reason for so much overprice for their diamonds, they must pay millions in advertising. And they are not the most perfectly cut diamond in the world as they state. Example: The Eightstar is a much more perfectly cut diamond and existed prior to the HOF but does not use the same advertising strategy or does not pay the same amount. The eightstar was selling alot more in Asia from the States than within the United States at the begining, before being recognized as the first H & A perfect cut. You can read this in the Gems Consumers Labs web site and in many more sites. I believe in a way yes Montica should be the first responsible, but HOF too. Because when Mr. Strauss contacted me he knew Montica did not want to do anything about it and offer the refund for $ 28,800.00. If I ask for a refund with HOF, I would want it for the total amount of what I paid. HOF can then arrange with Montica for the mark up gained etc. Anyways they will have the diamond back and are going to make again a profit with it, it is not like they will throw away the stone or not be able to do anything with it. So this is between them. And if both companies advertises 100% money back guarantee, they should honor it. Montica will still be a retailer for HOF. Why did HOF contacted me on my cellular and did an offer like this?? They wanted to make it up for Montica, well they're still going to sell other diamonds with Montica. I would be willing to lose the money of the setting , but if they are going to get back the diamond and sell it again, they should honor the 100% money back guarantee they advertise, because I was within my 30 day guarantee and they will have the diamond back to sell. Montica states that it was a special order, but this is false too, how can all of HOF?s retailer have in store all of the HOF inventory listed diamonds in their stores? When Montica respond a BBB complaint they altered some invoices. First one exhibit contradicted a second one saying the item had been shiped where I told them too, but the second exhibit shows clearly the signature of the person who picked up the stone at their store!! And Mr. Strauss should about my complaint filed in BBB and RIPOFF report, because as a consumer I have a right to defend my refund I am entitled too and for them to honor their policy, either the HOF policy or their retailer's policy Montica. They should then force Montica to refund. What can you say about them HOF at first telling me the refund applied only on loose stones?? This is ridiculous. I feel they have been throwing the ball to each other. And today I found out that Mr. Rottmann, owner of HOF has a lot of legal complaints for one or another reasons. It seems they are a conflict company. Any comments are welcome as much as advise.
Aafes
Viernheim,#5Consumer Comment
Thu, June 29, 2006
There is usually a very healthy markup on diamonds and jewelry ranging from 100% to 400% over cost when you buy a diamond from a retail store. The HOF diamond is a "branded" diamond, a marketing concept developed several years ago with the goal of instilling "trust" in a name brand diamond to be offered at multiple retailers. The concept is not much different from different department stores carrying branded merchandise. The HOF diamond, similar to the patented H&A diamond is a particular cut of diamond, utilizing a cut with more facets than normal. This cutting process allows better reflection of light and brilliance of the stone. The polish and symmetry of these diamonds are generally more consistent than those of other precut or mounted stones offered by other wholesalers. With any diamond you will pay markup. The jeweler first of all must pay overhead and seek a profit. The amount of the profit they seek is a personal choice and one the market will bear. You can find a similar diamond (no two diamonds are exact) from another retailer at a lower price in ALMOST all cases. Especially if you go to the second jeweler and show them a price quote for the diamond you are considering. Most will undercut a competitor to gain a sale. They still make a profit. GIA certification, or other independent agencies, will provide an "average replacement cost" at retail prices with a certification. This is generally for insurance purposes and does not truly reflect the value of the diamond. The actual value of any diamond, true value, is wholesale cost or just slightly over. If you try selling it to a pawnshop, for example, you will get wholesale cost. If you find a jeweler interested in buying, you may get slightly over wholesale cost, as he is allowing room for profit after resale or remounting and resale. You must also consider the cost of the mounting, the material cost (gold or platinum) and the marketing costs. All of these come into the picture with diamond purchases. The HOF diamond is a specialty diamond or a "premium" brand. You paid more as you purchased a premium. As for the guarantee HOF offers this to the retailer (Montica) in this case. The price offered to you by HOF is very likely the price that Montica paid for the merchandise. Any additional you paid was for Montica's markup. It sounds as if your problem is with Montica, not HOF.