Rant about hallmarks!

whilst browsing ebay for silver padlocks, I came across someone selling those tiffany spring ones who claimed they were guaranteed silver as they had a 925 hallmark. I asked them if they meant if they meant a 925 stamp or if they were actually hallmarked. They said they were stamped 925 but they could hallmark it for an extra cost. I then suggested that they were misleading the public because a hallmark is struck at an assay office. They then countered by saying it wasn't misleading and it was a hallmark. It makes me fume the way some sellers continue to conflate hallmarks and 925 stamps. I would have thought that a large seller of findings in Birmingham should be so offing ignorant! :(| [/rant]

Grrrrrrrrrr......makes me cross!! Maybe a visit from their local friendly neighborhood assay office might be in order? Have you been in touch?

with BAO? no. I did reply saying that they should know the difference between a 925 stamp and a hallmark and that not only are they misleading by claiming a 925 stamp is a hallmark but by conflating the two they are diminishing the importance of hallmarks. I suggested they contact BAO for clarification. I think I'm possibly being a bit OTT but it cheeses me off no end.

not OTT at all. Thank you for waving the flag :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by medusa

whilst browsing ebay for silver padlocks, I came across someone selling those tiffany spring ones who claimed they were guaranteed silver as they had a 925 hallmark. I asked them if they meant if they meant a 925 stamp or if they were actually hallmarked. They said they were stamped 925 but they could hallmark it for an extra cost. I then suggested that they were misleading the public because a hallmark is struck at an assay office. They then countered by saying it wasn't misleading and it was a hallmark. It makes me fume the way some sellers continue to conflate hallmarks and 925 stamps. I would have thought that a large seller of findings in Birmingham should be so offing ignorant! :(| [/rant]

---

Could someone briefly clarify the point of law here, please? I don't know the weight of the item in question, but my understanding was that if you are selling an item of silver that is below the 7.78g limit, you can stamp 925 on it yourself as an indication of purity, but this does not constitute any official endorsement of standard and certainly not the endorsement of a hallmark, which only an Assay Office is licensed to issue. The absence of the hallmark, however, on an item under 7.78g need not legally prevent a seller from claiming the item is sterling silver, though whether the buyer believes it or not is up to the buyer.

In this case, clearly if the item the Ebay seller is selling is over the weight limit, then he has already committed an offence in offering it for sale whilst not having had it hallmarked. But is he also committing an offence if the item is under the weight limit and the seller claims, as here, (whether out of ignorance or intention to deceive) that a 925 stamp is a hallmark, or subsequently claims that whilst a 925 mark is not the same as a hallmark he can hallmark it himself if you want him to?

Since a silver item does not need to be hallmarked if it is below 7.78g, and no item can ever be self-hallmarked, if the seller does stamp the item himself with an anchor, say, in addition to the 925 mark, would the offence be as grave if the item was underweight as it would be if the item exceeded the weight for obligatory hallmarking? And if the seller merely claims he can hallmark an item below 7.78g himself without actually going ahead and doing it or selling it to you, is that too an offence? I'm assuming the item is actually sterling silver in the first place.

People confuse hallmark with branding all the time. I'm pedantic about correcting the error on international forums as it irritates me massively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pearlescence

People confuse hallmark with branding all the time. I'm pedantic about correcting the error on international forums as it irritates me massively.

---

heh, I'm glad I'm not the only one! I was starting to think I was being unreasonable.

No, you're not being unresonable atall. They have definatly commited an offense by claiming the 925 stamp is a hallmark, regardless of the items weight. I would report to trading standards x

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keia

They have definatly commited an offense by claiming the 925 stamp is a hallmark, regardless of the items weight.

---

What offence exactly though? That was more or less the whole point of my post. Telling a potential buyer a 925 stamp is a hallmark is not the same thing as selling an unhallmarked item that is over the weight limit or counterfeiting a hallmark and striking it yourself on an item.

Telling a potential buyer that a 925 stamp is a hallmark is a misrepresentation. Steve will no doubt give the definitive answer, but the 925 stamp has no legal status in the UK.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aurarius

What offence exactly though? That was more or less the whole point of my post. Telling a potential buyer a 925 stamp is a hallmark is not the same thing as selling an unhallmarked item that is over the weight limit or counterfeiting a hallmark and striking it yourself on an item.

---

My comment was soley aimed at OP. It is an offence to claim a 925 stamp is a hallmark as it's misleading your customers and will fall under trading standards rules, likely under item not as described. You will also damage your own reputation as a crafter/seller. People don't buy from liers, never underestimate the power of word of mouth.

p.s sorry if that came out a wee bit abrupt, it's not meant to. I don't get as much time as I'd like on here and my replies are normally very rushed. Please accept my apologies if it came out a bit nasty =) x

It's no problem at all, Keia. Your answer was fine. People who abuse the hallmarking legislation are no friends of anyone - neither of the customers they sell to nor of the bona fide craftspeople who do things the right way and take pride in doing so.

There are two different issues here, one relating to the hallmarking act, and the other relating to "trade's descriptions" and reading these threads it would seem that everyone is right! Of course the number 925 means absolutely nothing on its own.....it's only an indication of the fineness of an item when it appears alongside the rest of the hallmark.Attachment 5709 If it were any other way then I hope you'll like the picture of my "silver" train attached...it must be silver as it has "925" stamped on it!!!

So obviously the number "925" is not a hallmark, nor can it be described as such on its own.

If the "silver" item is under the 7.78g then it does not require hallmarking, and can be described as silver. However, if challenged, then it is the seller's responsibility to prove that the item is silver, and the "925" stamp on it again is insufficient on its own. Conversely, if it's over 7.78g then it will require hallmarking, and again the "925" stamp on its own is insufficient and does not constitute a hallmark.

Remember though that the millesimal fineness symbol - the "925" - is really two symbols in one. It's a three digit number within a shield shape, and in the case of silver it's "925" within an oval shaped shield. As the "925" stamps you see on lightweight silver are never in an oval shield (if they were, then we may possibly talking about counterfeiting a hallmark under certain circumstances which does come under the hallmarking act), then anyone can stamp any three digit number on anything!

What I'm trying to say in this long ramble, is that the "925" stamps you see on lightweight silver mean nothing really, (and cannot obviously be described as a hallmark) and the only stamps on precious metal that mean anything at all are the complete hallmark.

Thanks for your answer, Steve. I suppose my remaining unanswered question is "Is merely describing a 925 mark as a hallmark an offence?" In other words, if a seller is selling an article below 7.78g of what he can verify is genuine sterling silver and this article bears only a 925 mark, would the seller be committing an offence merely by describing the 925 mark as a hallmark? A prospective buyer can easily verify by reference to the legislation that a self-stamped 925 mark is not a hallmark, so presumably the offence, if it is one, would be a relatively minor one under the Trade Descriptions Act.

Yeah it's probably not an offence under the hallmarking act, and, as you say, it's more likely to be a trade's description offence, which would need to be taken up by the Trading Standards people.

Actually, you don't have to go to far on ebay (co.uk) the find infringements. There are plenty of dealers in Thailand, Singapore, China, and the US that will sell "silver" rings, necklaces and all sorts in bulk for resale on ebay. If the item is over 7 grams very often, it must be hallmarked before sale. but people don't. the fine i believe is around 5000 per item ?

I would love for the assay offices (police) to clean this up. After all it is hurting genuine sellers, and forcing prices down.

J

It's the trading standards departments that enforce the law Julian. The assay offices provide the expertise and technical know-how for the trading standards people. I absolutely agree with your sentiment though! There is such a grey area over on line purchases though as I believe it does also depend on the country in which the transaction takes place. I understand, for example, if you buy something on line from Hong Kong and the transaction takes place over there electronically, then the sale comes under HK laws and not UK ones.....
If it's in a shop in Britain its much easier to enforce and get convictions.
On line is good....but also bad....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveLAO

It's the trading standards departments that enforce the law Julian.

---

I stand corrected.

The problem I see more often that not is UK sellers reselling bulk items imported from the far east. I guess the truth is they just don't know

Julian

Some I'm sure don't know, although ignorance is no excuse in this case. Others don't care and think they can get away with it I'm afraid.
We have had some very major successes along with trading standards, but you're right, there is still much work to be done in this area.

I'm going to defend Hong Kong again Steve! Just as with in the UK it depends on who you are doing business with. Plenty of UK fakers too. I had some HK stuff with me and it passed wtih flying percentages. Of course the UK based sellers of far east stuff know that what they are selling is duff - the clue will be in the price they will have paid
Just as you won't get a real Tahitian pearl necklace for a tenner. No really .... you won't.
But there will always be those who think they are getting a bargain and we perfectly honest pearl sellers are ripping them off.

(PS I'm delighted that the coins pass for another year)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pearlescence

Just as you won't get a real Tahitian pearl necklace for a tenner. No really .... you won't.

---

say it ain't so!

Just as so as the real genuine cultured Majorcan pearls a customer was telling me about yesterday. She knew they were real cultured pearls because she got them at the factory....

hahaha, I'm not singling out Hong Kong.......there are plenty of fakers in the UK. My point was concerning in what country a transaction takes place and as a result under which country's laws the transaction is covered by....

You can transact with a country like HK but still do it under UK law. Depends on the terms of the contract. (Used to teach contract law to trainee lawyers)

Just to make you happy Steve - this was asked on another forum.....'Good morning all, I was wondering how you label items that you make with sterling silver or do you not bother? '
Hey ho

To be fair, I think the person asking that question was just talking about using sterling earwires or clasps with beads, rather than fabricating larger pieces.

Maybe. you can't be sure with some on that forum...

I know....we train and educate a large number of people every year, but there are always more people to talk to. I have to say though that the vast majority of them are simply ignorant of the rules and regs and aren't out to do anything wrong deliberately....still, it's the buying public who are the ones at risk whether intentionally or not :(