Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:08/28/2024

  Type:Sales and Advertising Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I had an incredibly disappointing experience with Hawaii House of Diamonds, and I strongly urge others to be cautious, particularly with their high-pressure sales tactics. My fianc and I initially visited the store with the understanding that a placeholder ring could be returned for a $1,000 credit towards finishing the ring. When my fianc later went back, she made it clear that our total budget, including the diamond, was $10,000. The salesperson, *****, immediately attempted to upsell her, pushing our budget well over $10k. When we insisted on sticking to our budget$8,000 for the diamond and $2,000 for the settingLaura suddenly claimed they could no longer honor the placeholder ring credit. How is that not bait and switch?To make matters worse, we had friends who also experienced similar bait-and-switch tactics. They set a budget of $10,000, but when the fianc went back, ***** suddenly claimed the budget was $15,000. After paying $500 for a ring design, the final product looked nothing like what was agreed upon.Adding insult to injury, I've now found myself having to dispute an unexpected $23.08 monthly charge.

  Business Response

  Date: 09/09/2024

  Re: Response to Customer Complaint (Young Ho)
  
  
  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  
  We are writing to respond to the recent complaint submitted by customer Young ** regarding his experience with The House of Diamonds. We take customer feedback seriously and appreciate the opportunity to clarify the situation and outline our efforts to resolve this matter.
  
  Customer Young Ho purchased a ********************** and set it into a "temporary" solitaire ring in order to propose to his fiance. The solitaire ring was priced at $1000. It was mutually agreed by the customer and our sales person that the $1000 would be credited towards the new ring that his fiance would ultimately come back into the store and choose.
  He contacted the salesperson to make an appointment on 07.15.24 for the two of them to choose her new ring. On the day of the appointment, he cancelled the appointment. The salesperson kept the job card and thought he would reschedule at a later date. 
  
  Subsequently, we received notices from both Yelp and ****** on 08.28.24 that he wrote 1 Star reviews regarding his experience with the House of Diamonds and that he would be filing a complaint with the Better Business Bureau. He complained about not receiving his $1,000 refund for the ring which his diamond is currently set in. Additionally, he also complained about two $23.00 recurring credit charges on his credit card.
  
  The initial misunderstanding arose from the distinction between a refund and a credit towards a new ring in our agreement with the customer. Upon learning of the confusion, both myself and my salesperson promptly reached out to Young ** to clarify the terms and remind him of the original agreement and that there was a misunderstanding regarding the $1000.
  
  In good faith, we offered a refund of $1,000 despite the fact that the ring in question had been altered, which is against our store policy. We believe this gesture demonstrates our commitment to customer satisfaction and our desire to resolve the issue amicably.
  
  Additionally, we explained that the $23.08 reflected on their statement is not from The House of Diamonds, but from their credit card company (Chase ***** as a result of them choosing the "pay over time" option through Chase ***** Chase **** explains that on this page of their website: **********************************************************************************************************. We contacted the client to help clarify that those charges were from their credit card company, not the House of Diamonds.
  
  Young ** and his fiance ***** agreed to this resolution, and we informed them that the refund would be processed upon the return of the temporary ring. However, since that agreement, we called Young Ho several times and also texted them multiple times to facilitate the return and finalize the refund, and they accepted our offer.
  
  We are eager to resolve this matter as quickly as possible, as it is crucial for us to maintain our reputation, which we have proudly built over the past 40 years. We value our customers and strive to provide exceptional service, and we hope to restore Young Hos trust in our business.
  
  Our goal is to ensure that this situation is resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
  
  Thank you for your attention to this matter. We appreciate your support in helping us maintain our long-standing commitment to customer service.
  
  Sincerely,
  ***********************
  President/Owner
  House of Diamonds ******
  
  *****ATTACHMENTS: Screenshots of texts between the client (gray bubbles) & House of Diamonds (blue bubbles)