Saks Fifth Avenue Sues Customer Over Mis-Priced Jewelry Sale

Saks Fifth Avenue is suing a customer, over thousands of dollars worth of mis-priced jewelry.

Emily Pickering is being sued by the retail store after two clerks sold her diamond earrings and a diamond broach as a set for $28,000.

Turns out, the earrings and the broach weren't a set -- and should have been sold for $76,000.

The store's General Manager called Pickering, told her of the mistake, and asked her to either return the jewelry or pay up at a discounted price.

Court documents show Pickering refused.

Now Saks is suing her for the price of the broach and its lawyers' fees.


You must be logged in to post comments.

Username:
Password (case sensitive):
Remember Me:

Read Comments

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
  • by funnylee Location: work on Feb 15, 2009 at 07:42 AM
    Not just one but 2 untrained employees sold the jewelry. Saks needs to count it's lost and move on. Spend the money on making their employees more familiar with their merchandise which makes for better customer service all around....... The customer did not steal nor cheat and in this case she is RIGHT!!!!!!
  • by vicki Location: midwest on Jan 16, 2009 at 04:22 PM
    Based on the flimsy details, legal or not, it is plain wrong for anyone to take advantage of another - business, person, animal - whatever - that is called ABUSE OF POWER. Seems to me the customer took advantage (abused their power of knowledge) and knowingly stole that jewelry because a person who doesn't know the value of diamonds doesn't 'generally' go shopping for them - especially at SAKS. You just have to forgive the sales associate for being stupid. A settlement would be in order because the store is responsible for hiring a stupid person or for not training that person properly. The store shouldn't take a total loss. I hope this suit shakes out FAIRLY for all.
  • by Jeff Location: California on Jan 12, 2009 at 06:52 AM
    It's interesting to see everybody attacking the retail store. There are no details I see and just maybe the retail store can show the customer pulled tickets or can show fraud on behalf of the customer. It is always easiest to blame the store. What if you were the associate and the customer scammed you?
  • by Jessica Location: PA on Dec 8, 2008 at 05:41 PM
    Saks has no case here. I think in Business Law, this is called a solitcitation of offer. Price was put on the table as an offer, customer agrees to it, Saks accepts. Done deal. End of story.
  • by Miggity on Nov 24, 2008 at 11:47 AM
    I think Saks should just have to eat their mistake. But, I remember learning in Business Law, something about the buyer would knowingly have to know it was the wrong price. If the buyer purchased the goods in good faith, or something, then they were not at fault. I'm not a lawyer and I don't remember the details. I think the buyer will win. I'd love to hear how this plays out though.
  • by Jessi Location: Youngstown on Nov 22, 2008 at 04:47 AM
    The same thing happened to me with an item from a local store. The employee brought the wrong item out to my car. I questioned him about it and he told me it was right. The store manager called me 9 hours later saying they would press theft charges on me! I went back to the store the next day and the police were called. I was told that I had to pay the money so i asked to return the item. I was told that I could not return it because it hadbeen used already. I had to pay an additional $120.00 to keep from this store from trying to press charges. They didn't even offer me a discount. I don't shop there anymore.
  • by tom Location: panama city, fl on Nov 22, 2008 at 02:08 AM
    this brings to mind two old sayings; "finders,keepers,losers,weepers" and "possession is 9/10ths of the law". emily "found" a bargain and she definitely has possession of that bargain. if she were to re-sale them, to a trusted friend or family member, for even one dollar, she would no longer be in possession of them and saks would be up that proverbial creek. take your lumps, saks!!!
  • by Mike Location: Michigan on Nov 21, 2008 at 05:08 PM
    Saks better watch it. Maybe Emily can sue them! Wouldn't that be an ironic twist. They have no case. None! Customer was quoted a price and agreed to it - retailer accepted customer's money. End of story. No where for this to go.
  • by Sharon Location: Lynn Haven on Nov 21, 2008 at 01:12 PM
    Wow. I would think that the clerk would be fired or somehow forced to make up the difference. I can't believe they're going to sue the customer. I can't wait to see what happens, either!
  • by Lyle Location: Chipley, FL on Nov 21, 2008 at 09:28 AM
    It is not her fault. She paid what the clerk said she owed.
  • Page:
8195 Front Beach Road Panama City Beach, FL 32407 Station: 850-234-7777 News: 850-230-5221 Fax: 850-233-6647
Copyright © 2002-2016 - Designed by Gray Digital Media - Powered by Clickability 34874009 - wjhg.com/a?a=34874009
Gray Television, Inc.