Howdy, The Wards have my sympathie, I think what is happing
is a disgrace and speaks poorly of the insurance
industry(espically State Farm). I suggest that if you are doing
business with State Farm that you stop immeditally. Also I
think all who care should boycott State Farm and let them know
why. This may or may not help Mr. Ward, but it will let State
Farm know that we, as an industry, will not tolerate insurance
companies who do not stand by their word. Who wants to do
business with a Ins. co. who, when given a claim tries to
weasle out of paying by blaming an innocent person? I don't and
would hope you wouldn't either. If we stick together, we may be
able to make a change in the way ins. co. handle claims, don't
underestimate the power of the dollar. Hit them where it hurts
the most, the pocket book. I have written a letter to State
Farm telling them I would never do business with them, because
of the poor treatment Mr. Ward has recieved. I hope everyone
esle will do the same. thanks for allowing me to put in my 2
cents worth jerry
Fred Ward replies:
Thanks for your comments. Obviously this case is having a large
impact on people. Several have called or written to me to say
they had canceled their home insurance policies with State Farm
because of this.
Sorry to hear about your legal problems. I wish that I could
help and just maybe I can by offering another person.
Maybe another gemologist could do a better job? Why don't
you give Martin Haske at adamas@gis.net a try. I would trust
his judgement over just about anyone, even the GIA!
Fred Ward replies:
Thanks Lance. Marty has been in touch with me and we are
corresponding. At the moment there is no way to get in any more
testimony by anyone.
Fred Ward
I am not a professional jeweler. I do however think that
this case has been handled poorly by the court system. It
strikes me, however, that when you are selling a 3+ carat
emerald, that you would have it catalogued and inspected by GIA
or some other third party. Get pictures, and inclusion maps,
and all that stuff. That way, when this idiot psychiatrist
person whacks the very fragile, fracture-prone natural (or even
unnatural) emerald, you have your ass covered. I know that
hindsight is 20-20, and that what I say or think is mostly
irrelevant, and that none of this helps Mr. Ward, but I think
when you are dealing with such a costly and fragile stone, it
is best to cover your butt!
Fred Ward replies:
During the custom ring fabrication process my partner and I
suggested to the buyer that she have a GIA lab report on the
emerald, for her safety and for the benefit of the appraiser she
had hired. The customer refused. We even offered to package the
emerald and send it via FedEx to GIA for her. She refused. The
typical practice in the retail gem trade is that the buyer of a
gem gets a lab report if one is desired. Retailers typically do
not buy reports. Often diamonds some from dealers to retailers
with lab reports. We were following the typical retail routine,
and it may be outdated now that customers come back to sue foro
something they broke.
hi fred, i've been following your case
with pretty intense interest. let me say first that i admire
you immensley for giving this apparently mendacious case a
standup fight. unfortunately, one can't be truly be judged by
their peers. if you had twelve gemoligists on the jury, well,
maybe just one or two that could grasp the concept of gem
treatment, you (and the gem industry) wouldn't have had mud
slung all over your life. obviously, the plaintiff whacked her
stone and that is her fault. what are the chances of one
impacting a stone directly on a filling if it was filled? (not
likely). after the plaintiff whacks her stone, a jeweler
installs sizing beads, causing her fracture to walk (become
longer) from the thermal shock. the jeweler then uses the
filler material. first,she caused the damage and second, the
jeweler made the situation worse. it is most certain that
filler material would exist between the bezel and stone if the
gem was filled while mounted. why hasn't this been made an
issue? it is much easier to believe that cap beasley missed
this filler location than the three principle defendants (you,
the one you purchased it from, and the appraiser). not even
including the three others that inspected the stone, it is
overwhelming testimony in your favor. it appears to be
collusion between the plaintiff and the insurance co. rather
than collusion between two past presidents of agta and the
appraiser. is cap beasley's credential that of the director of
the ags gem lab? if so, how can ags members have confidence in
this relatively new lab of theirs? what is the criteria for
establishing that the crack was an inclusion that existed at
the time of cutting? did he mistakenly see drag lines? yes, i
believe in full disclosure as you, agta and others profess. i
also believe that undisclosed gem treatment is hurting the
industry. but you are a victim (so far anyway, and i pray for
your vindication) of a witch hunt. the plaintiff and you will
'never agree to facts' (as a lawyer put to me that he didn't
care what was true) as to who put the sizing beads in the ring.
your own knowledge and conviction of what you know to be true
is your exoneration and will cause you to prevail in this case.
Fred Ward replies:
If I had had a jury of my gemological peers (such as the
arbitration in diamond bourses), there would be no emerald case.
Gem peers would have seen through this case in an instant.
There is NO gemological evidence anywhere that hitting a stone
causes its filler to “reverse.” Research shows that only heat and
acid cause a filler to alter or leak or separate. The impact
“reversal” is a Beesley creation. Every lab I have checked with
over the past month has laughed when I read what he said about
“reversal” and about the emerald being fractured from birth and
came from the ground in Colombia fractured… and was filled at
the mine with Opticon. One astute lab owner asked if Beesley and
God were there watching the emerald as it was birthed. He said
that would be the only way for anyone to know when a fracture
occurred.
Dear Fred: I must agree that your case sets a bad precedent
for the jewelry industry. State Farm is the shadiest of all the
Insurance companies, and you should be ever cognizant that
they will use any means necessary to win in court once they
have denied a claim. It seems like a classic case of jury
manipulation, doesn't it? Subversion of the jury process by
legal expertise. I'm afraid that you're only hope is a
sympathetic judge or two on the Appeals Court or Supreme Court,
as you well know. I personally am of the opinion that what
State Farm has done in your case and so many others in natural
disasters, accidents, etc. is illegal under the RICO Act as it
applies to corporations and that the Justice Dept. of this
United States Government should be investigating the company's
dealings. A lot of people think that RICO is a law on the
books for organized crime figures like John Gotti or somebody.
They should read on. Think about it like this- State Farm
agreed to insure the ring for your customer against damage, no?
They are liable, simple as that. They are doing everything they
can do to place the blame somewhere else by whatever means
necessary. They are obviously enticing witnesses to perjure
themselves on the stand.It seems to me like maybe someone at
State Farm made a deal with your customer to come in on her
side in order to get out of paying off or being sued by her- an
all around win for S.F. I would bet that S.F. is also paying
all the legal fees for her.(Which they re-coop in the event of
your paying a judgment) I can't believe that the judge let them
do it, but, well, after all it is an oligarchy we live in and
strings are pulled in courts and legislatures, and even our
Congress and Executive branch. RICO describes exactly this sort
of behavior as illegal under Federal law. It is no less than Al
Capone and Chicago all over again except that these guys hide
behind their 'respectability' and their business front. In the
end result they are all the same thing. They should start a
defense fund for you because as it stands no jeweler can be
safe from similar behavior in the future if this stands the
Appellate test.Good luck!
Fred Ward replies:
You bring up fascinating points that I have not read here
before. Thanks for your observations. Interestingly there are a
number of people in the gem trade at the association and
coroporate level who also believe that this case would be a
terrible precedent, know that it should not be allowed to stand,
and want to help financially with an appeal.
Fred Ward