Diamond filler found in engagement ring

[CZ1870]

This is a akward situation.....I became engaged to a man back in 3-00. He bought me the engagement ring at a pawn shop in Louisville KY. In Nov., of that same year, we called off the engagement.

In Jan of 2001, I pawned the ring for cash. Later that month, I received a small claims suit against me, by my ex, that he was sueing me for the amount of the ring. I returned to the pawn shop to buy back the ring, so I could return it to my ex. But, the pawn shop asst. manager said that the ring was destoyed by their apprasiors because it was found to have a filler in the diamond. The manager wrote a signed letter and statement that said that the diamond was tampered with which rendered it nearly invaluable and for this fact it could not be resold and was destroyed.

Now, to make a long story short, me and my ex are back together. I still have the apprasial of the diamond and the pawn shop valued it at $3,000. It describies the setting and list the diamond as a SI 2. Which was not true. With the pawn shop receipt,statement from the pawn shop manager, and the apprasial by the misleading pawn shop enough to take them to small claims to get the $875.00 back for the ring?

My boyfriend states there is no way we could prove this was the ring that was apprasied. But, there are discriptions of the ring on all of the documents, and they match. Is it to lare to sue also?

Please help!!!

 

[JETX]

First, you need to decide who you are going after....
The pawn shop for 'duping' you in claiming to have destroyed your ring, or that the original jeweler deceived you in his provided merchandise???

In any case, it certainly SOUNDS like you might have enough to prevail in court. Especially if the two descriptions are sufficiently close to convince the court that they are one and the same.

Considering the relatively low cost of Small Claims court, I would certainly consider 'taking the chance' and you have very little to lose.