To demand a refund?

[BirthdayStress]

I bought a ring for 2.5 K at the weekend. I only wore it straight after buying it to get a coffee and then put it back in the box until last night. I looked at it with my phone light to look at the sparkles and I noticed it’s got a scratch on the band. I’ve emailed the company and they are basically saying that I must’ve done the damage and they can only offer a polish and the 18 carat gold is known to be fragile. I am saying that I would like a refund under the consumer rights act 2015 as I was made unaware that it was this fragile, although I’m pretty certain the damage was not done by me they are offering to polish et cetera but I am saying that if it is causes damage by this light use then I do not want the ring as I was made unaware that I wouldn’t be able to wear it for three hours or less without damage see photos they are claiming it was not damaged when it left the shop but surely it is my word against theirs and I myself did not notice the damage until actually my light on it. Does anyone here know that consumer rights please and could advise me on where I actually stand as obviously I don’t always trust AI thank you.

Partner

126 years. Wow how absolutely precious.

Apparently there can be such thing as almost like a “bubble” under the gold, almost like a blister waiting to be popped and wearing it lightly can then expose this. Manufacturing fault. I’m wondering if it’s that.

Such as this?

You might have divided opinions but that’s because people are giving you what they want the truth to be.

Under Section 9, goods must be of satisfactory quality, taking into account their description, price and all other relevant circumstances. However, ordinary scratching of a relatively soft precious metal through normal wear does not necessarily constitute a fault or a failure to meet that standard.

Section 20 provides a right to reject goods where the relevant statutory requirements have not been met. However, the short-term right to reject under Section 22 is not an unconditional 30-day returns policy. You must first have grounds to reject the goods, such as a failure to meet the satisfactory quality requirements under Section 9.

There is no general legal obligation for a retailer to explain every characteristic of a material before purchase. The fact that 18-carat gold is relatively soft and susceptible to scratching does not automatically make it unsuitable for its intended purpose, nor does the absence of a specific warning establish a breach of consumer law.

Section 19(14) establishes a presumption that a failure to conform discovered within six months was present at delivery, unless the retailer establishes otherwise or the presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the failure. However, this does not mean that any damage discovered within six months is automatically considered a manufacturing defect. There must first be an identifiable failure to conform to the contract.

You have acknowledged that you wore the ring after purchasing it and only subsequently noticed the scratch. While this does not establish that you caused the damage, neither does it demonstrate that the ring was defective or damaged when supplied. If anything it implies that the damage was done when wearing.

If the ring were abnormally fragile, had a manufacturing defect or was demonstrably damaged at the point of sale, you could potentially have grounds for a claim. However, on the information provided, you have not established that the ring fails to meet the statutory requirements, so have not established a legal entitlement to reject it and demand a refund.

Let them polish the ring, it’s your best/only option

There is no automatic right to return an instore purchase unless it is faulty. Even online purchases where you can’t handle the goods before buying only have a 14 day cooling off period.

It's true that gold ,marks very easily, but in the second photo it looks covered in scratches and surely that's not likely after just 3 hours of wear?

Sorry, OP, but I'd be wondering if it was actually new in the first place

Congratulations on your engagement and I'm sorry for the disappointment with the ring, I would be gutted as well, 2.5k may be small change to some mumsnetters, but for most of us, it's a heck of a lot of money. I hope your partner gets offered a replacement ring or a refund when he goes to the jewellers in person.

That’s one of the cheapest rings they do in that shop

Did you not look at it before you bought it? If not, why not?

Well, sure

So go and talk to them about it

First thing shouldn’t necessarily be demanding a refund

They might replace it for you if they think it’s a manufacturing fault

I would expect to be able to take back a dress that I found a hole in after wearing from 3 hours. It is clearly defective. I think the OP has a case. I’ve worn plenty of 18ct gold rings that haven’t marked like that, including the ones I inherited from my mother.

I cannot fathom how it isn't considered faulty if it can be damaged that severely by one days worth of normal wear.
Like why would some spend 2.5k on something that would damage that ridiculously easy? Or if they noticed that mark when shopping for it?

Nobody would accept that level of quality for that price surely? It's not up to expected standards! Especially if they allege it's brand new?

Take it to another jewellers ask them to check it then if there’s anything dodgy go to trading standards.

And they would too - they would have worn gloves, held it over a tray, turned it around all angles looking themselves and showing it to her, then they would have put it on her - there is no putting on yourself in that store.
They would then have polished before putting in the box at the point of purchase. It will all be on CCTV.

2 and a half grand on a ring! 😬

I’ve worn my 18ct gold wedding ring for 13 years and there’s not a mark on it so I would be furious too. I know it’s soft but that’s ridiculous.

How long everyone else's rings have lasted are irrelevant given OP has damaged this ring. Congrats on being more careful than her.

It's hallmarked 18ct gold, meaning an Assay Office has tested the contents of the metal to confirm quality.

It will polish up beautifully. Stop acting like an arsehole, let them sort it for you and take more care in the future.

I was stunned when I took my 18 carat wedding ring for resizing. It's just a plain band, £87 30 years ago, to replace is £1000.

Incorrect. If an item is found to have a fault there is a right to reject and claim a refund within the first 30 days.
Only after 30 days must you give the retailer the opportunity to repair or replace the item.

My thoughts in no particular order:

Surely you’d have spotted that if it was there when you were in the shop.

18k gold is quite soft and easily scratchable.

I’d be pissed off and wanting a refund too after spending £2.5k.

The original Philip Stoner was seriously hot.

But you wore the ring....

I often wear my grandmother's 100 year old 18ct ring and it's covered in minute scratches, but the photo you put up resembles more of a scuff to gold plating rather than gold. I take it that it's fully hallmarked for 18ct gold?

This is why I'm so grateful my darling husband bought my 9ct gold wedding band from a bloke selling them at the end of the pub counter. 30 years on, it's pristine.

I think you'll find most people are quite knowledgeable about water - the thing that comes out of our tap every day or fall on us every time it rains - and not that much about gold - the thing a few can afford.

Good shout
This entire exchange will have been on cctv
showing it being examined

Nope @BirthdayStress . No chance