Trust Mark: Is it better than Hallmark?

Recently The Gems and Jewellery Trade Federation(GJF) launched the Trust Mark program to help shore up the image of the industry and give consumers confidence.

The govt. proposed Hallmark was limited to purity of precious metals like gold and silver but what GJF proposes with the trust mark is an all encompassing program which goes beyond just hallmarking.

The trade body has proposed a list of criteria like adhering to Hallmarking standards, transparent consumer policies et al.

A few things stand out as one delves into it and compares it vis-a-vis hallmarking:

Confusion in consumers mind:

At the onset it is bound to create confusion in the consumers mind especially when they start thinking of it as equivalent to BIS hallmark ( and/or haven't read this post :) ).

Need for a common playing ground:

GJF has proposed 3 categories to involve the maximum number of jewellers in this program. They are: The top jewellers, the preffered jewellers and the reliable jewellers based on the number of years in the trade, turnover of the jeweller and area of the retail outfit. This choice of criteria is inappropriate.

Since this is a new initiative every jeweller should be given a common playing field. It would be more appropriate that jewellers be chosen based on their customer relevant policies. On the other hand it promotes a certain group of jewellers and has tried to divide the jeweller community based on their number of years in the industry.

We at Kathana pride in the fact that we offer a unique 30-Day 100% Money Back guarantee on all our off-the-shelf jewelry ornaments making us perhaps the only jeweler to do so. Yet with such unique customer centric practises we cannot enter the supposed hallowed circle of 'top jewellers' because we are relatively new to the industry and don't have the requisite floor area.

High fees would be a deterrent:

The fees are for the top jeweller, the preffered jeweller and the reliable jeweller is Rs. 6 lac, Rs. 2.5 lac and Rs. 25,000 respectively.

In fact, its quite ironic that the jeweller community had quite vehemently advocated against such high fees when BIS implemented hallmarking. Sure, the trust mark isnt forced as hallmark was but are these high fees justified.

Lacks teeth:

The GJF's disclaimer:

While stating that a member jeweler has been found to confirm to the strict standards prescribed by GJF under “Trust Mark”, GJF does not assume nor is GJF deemed to assume any responsibility whatsoever with regard to the purity, content or quality of any product sold by such jeweler.

Whereas the BIS clearly states:

Relies on clear rules, delegation of responsibilty, only to those who are certified by BIS and penalties ranging from suspension of license to heavy fines for clear and persistent violation of rules.

Only when the initiating body of such a program take a stringent stand against violating jewellers will this initiative gain public acceptance and hold credibility. Whereas BIS had specified strict guidelines/action against the violating jeweller GJF is relying on self-regulation.

So, to end, trust mark intends to go beyond hallmarking which is good but lacks the teeth in its enforcement . Also It should be a more democratic system keeping the gates equally open for everyone.

Related Article: An Exclusive Club & A Logo To Deliver Consumer Confidence

On a side note: There is a need for a body similar to Better Business Bureau of America so that it addresses all the trade and retailing sectors facing consumers offline or online.

Related Posts:

What is Hallmark Jewellery?
Hallmark Mandatory from Jan 2008...really?