Opal ring.

Hermione_Granger

davidmcn wrote: »

They weren't being asked to provide the service of a professional valuation, they were being asked what they'd pay for it. Anything else they said is just their excuse to back up the offered price.

I agree with the first part of your comment but not the second.
If they were asked what they would pay for the ring and they simply stated a price then that's fair enough.
However, they offered a price and then justified that price by saying that it was opaline rather than opal, something that appears to have been incorrect.

If they had no clue as to what stones were in the ring then they should either have kept quiet or made it clear that their valuation was based on their not knowing what they were talking about.

pulliptears

Cash converters value everything from jewellery to old tech so they aren't going to have much knowledge on precious stones as they are only trained to weigh a bit of gold and look up sold prices of tech on eBay.
Works both ways though, someone clearly undervalued the Novation Launchpad Pro I paid a tenner for not long after they were released.

davidmcn

Hermione_Granger wrote: »

If they had no clue as to what stones were in the ring then they should either have kept quiet or made it clear that their valuation was based on their not knowing what they were talking about.

For a legal reason? Can you explain?

Hermione_Granger

davidmcn wrote: »

For a legal reason? Can you explain?

I think this would cover it.

Fraud by false representation

(1)A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a)dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b)intends, by making the representation—
(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2)A representation is false if—
(a)it is untrue or misleading, and
(b)the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

If the store staff were not qualified to be able to determine if a stone is opal or glass and were only guessing then they would or should know that their statement might be untrue.

This is exactly the reason why auction houses will describe certain jewellery items as "white metal" if they think but don't know for sure that it is silver, "yellow metal" for suspect gold, and "coloured stones" if they don't know if the stones are diamond, ruby etc.

davidmcn

Hermione_Granger wrote: »

I think this would cover it.


If the store staff were not qualified to be able to determine if a stone is opal or glass and were only guessing then they would or should know that their statement might be untrue.

This is exactly the reason why auction houses will describe certain jewellery items as "white metal" if they think but don't know for sure that it is silver, "yellow metal" for suspect gold, and "coloured stones" if they don't know if the stones are diamond, ruby etc.

Fair enough, though if they honestly believe their statement to be true then the intention isn't there, as they believe they're offering a fair price.