Thanks everyone, I appreciate your responses.

Ida and 1929, Yeah, I know, it is not a choice I would make for myself; but I was pretty sure, and I was right, that she would like it. I don't think anything else I would have found for that price would have been as successful* I even made sure to tell her, just so you know, this is not "real" jewelry. Even so, it should not break immediately.

Anglophilia, I had a bad experience with LV before, about 15 years ago. I sent a briefcase to be repaired for a broken strap. My secretary shipped it to their store in Short Hills from my office. They quoted a repair charge I thought was excessive for a 1yr old bag. I was mulling over whether/if to fight them on it, bought a new briefcase in a different style while travelling, and then never got around to getting back to them. A few months passed and I went into the store to pick it up. They didn't have it and I forget now what the exact story was, but I never got a bag. It was clear as day to me that an employee saw it unclaimed for a few months and just took it. I just hope for Karma.

* As an aside, I did also buy her this supercute bracelet on Ebay. She loves brands (okay some of that she got from me, but her friends are the same)

I pretty much agree with Jenn (sorry Ida!!). I do not understand paying an inflated price for items not up to par. Then again, I'm not into brands (I don't like advertising for someone). For me, it's quality over brand. This could be a good teaching tool with your girls!

I think my aversion to brands stems from vivid 80s memories. It surprises me that today's young women are into them, and I'm really not sure why it surprises me, considering what I've seen the few times I've idly flipped through a fashion magazine. Obviously, brands are still marketed in such a way as to be sought after.

I'm not averse to quality. I bought myself a diamond bezel Rolex a couple of decades ago with my first large bonus check, and it's a purchase I've never regretted. I think some things are simply classic, but today's younger generation may value things differently than I do. My watch may be "little old lady" territory in their eyes, so what do I know. ;-)

LV is notorious for bad customer service. And they rarely make repairs gratis. Their quality has gone downhill rapidly and my love affair with them finally ended last year when a brand new purse I had about bought for almost $3k started peeling at the corners in the first month. Their response was we will send it out for repairs and let you know what the charge will be. I was so angry I ended up consigning the bag and buying a Gucci, which is in perfect condition after a year and I don't baby my bags.

For leather goods, I prefer (used-on-eBay) Tods.

Here is the deal. Any necklace, no matter what you pay for it, should not break the first time you wear it. If it does, no matter who sold it and what you paid for it, it violates consumer protections.

I agree that the necklace is bad value to me, but it was not bad value to my daughter. We all have very subjective views about what things are worth to us, and that is fine. But that discussion (which would really be never ending) is not the point. The point is no one can legally sell faulty merchandise. At any price point.

I love the idea of a jewelry "Dowery "box for them. What fun to see it grow. And how sweet

Since your daughter seems to really love it, I would get it fixed and simply cross off Louis Vuitton as a jewelry option.

It should be really easy to fix--a lot of jewelry with that sort of assembly breaks like that, good jewelry and cheap. I wouldn't say it's badly made because these things do happen. So get it fixed, but not by LV, and do it for your daughter.

Then tear into them online. This is incredibly bad customer service. Some of their customers are only rarely able to splurge on these things and would appreciate being steered away.

(It's actually really cute, although I'd never buy it due to the logo. :P )

You're right, Mtn. The subjective views of "value" were not the topic and I apologize for bringing mine into the thread. I agree that faulty merchandise should not be sold at any price point, but I would hold "luxury" retailers to an even higher standard.

I hope you are able to satisfactorily resolve this issue.

Maybe you can handle it through your credit card company.

I think if it did not come with a guarantee or warranty (I never quite know what the difference is), LV can argue about whether then have to fix it or replace it from a legal standpoint. As crappy as that is.

I have very mixed feelings about retaliatory reviews on products, because they are so often retaliatory that I dismiss them completely, especially if they were obviously written when the person was on a tear, and the grammar and spelling are poor.

Is it possible that since this necklace went from "good value" for your daughter to "bad value" in one wearing, that she could figure out that there is a certain quality of Emperor's New Clothes about the brand phenomenon? (Because the subjective value here in reality is that it doesn't matter if you paid $4000 and can afford it, $400 and can afford it, or $40 and afford it, quality-wise apparently it's a real POS and they won't stand behind it.)

I understand that there is an awful lot of peer pressure, on her both because of her age and where she lives, and to some extent on you because of where you live and because you're a parent of a kid who is in a group of kids for whom this is the norm--and who have parents who may not do any critical thinking about this sort of thing like you do.

But maybe she will start to understand from this that there is a certain amount of pointlessness when it comes to brand chasing. I will shut up now.

LOL, no need to shut up. IDK if brand-chasing is pointless. It's not exactly laudable or logical, for sure. But it can be pleasurable, and not just in an obvious pecking order sort of way, which is what most people think of. But I think brands manage to make you feel special, even if it is something only you see, or a brand others would not know. I think that is part of the allure. Plus, the advertising makes it seem desirable; you want it without even knowing why.

Ida, No, no worries! It's a totally understandable progression when you read the thread, to start with "you paid how much for THAT", so I understand it!

Get on Twitter right away! Post a tweet w/ the right hashtags and a picture of that. Explain what happened. I've had tremendous luck complaining on Twitter. In one case, I fought with a company for four months to give me back $450 they had wrongfully auto charged me. Within 20 minutes of tweeting, I got a DM, was escalated to their "special" customer service and they fixed the issue.

Alternatively, call your credit card company and tell them you got defective merchandise and the company is refusing a repair or refund. My CC company has always been tremendously helpful to me in resolving such problems, I'm sure yours will be too.

Edited to add- I am sure a local jeweler could fix this. However, given that it is so obviously cheaply made, another link could easily break. Your DD is lucky she didn't lose it when the chain broke. It could easily fall off unnoticed and then the necklace would be lost w/o an option to do anything. That would be my big concern and I would probably return it just for that reason alone.

If you do return the thing, I would look for a local jeweler that does custom designed jewelry and let your daughter work with that jeweler to design a special necklace. She'll end up with something unique and higher quality. I've always done this with jewelry and it is a fun process as well as providing one-of-a-kind items.

(can I just say that the coco bracelet is freaking adorable! Now I want one)

Thanks Funky, I loved it too., and so did she.

Thanks again everyone for your advice/support.

I have made jewelry for years. That is an extremely easy fix. I could do it in less than 5 minutes with my tools. For them to handle this in this manner is the worst customer service possible. It's laughable. I also can't even begin to imagine how they can get away with selling a product so cheaply made for that price. Any one with good jewelry making and repairing skills can fix this for you but I will tell you it will likely happen repeatedly at various locations on the chain. It's just a cheaply made chain. I am all for letting everyone know what kind of quality they can expect.

I don't understand why they wouldn't just send you out a new one? That's what any other reputable retail store would do. Add me to the list of people that can't understand how they can sell such junk jewelry and then charge such a price for that. It looks like it would cost $5 at Family Dollar Store.

I would think twice about doing business with a company that clearly states that all merchandise returned for exchange, store credit or refund must be in perfect, sellable condition.....

Furthermore, the fact that they make a distinction between items purchased in a store vs. online is ridiculous to me.

But I do understand that you want your DD to be happy. As others have suggested your best option might just be to take it to a local trusted jeweler (which I am sure you have) for repair. Personally, I would not hassle with LV_at_all!

I agree with Raven -- that is a really easy fix. You could do it yourself if you had the tools, like these:

https://www.walmart.com/ip/6-Piece-Craft-and-Jewelry-Tool-Kit/12347617

Unless I'm not seeing it correctly, it looks like one of the links opened up?

" I don't think anything else I would have found for that price would have been as successful* I even made sure to tell her, just so you know, this is not "real" jewelry. Even so, it should not break immediately."

$400.Plus can buy "real" jewelry. If not, then I've got a bunch of junk in my jewelry box.

I think this is the perfect time to teach your daughters about real jewelry vs. name brand jewelry. IMO, what they're learning is to keep up with the Jones's over quality. All the "Jones's" thing does is it teaches them to brag. Unless it's designer jean's or something. ;) It's also possible she "loves" the necklace because of the label.

Take the necklace to the jeweler and get it fixed and don't order jewelry from them online again. If you like the quality of the other products, that's fine. Could your daughter have snagged the chain on a notebook or something? Even fine jewelry can break.

Not trying to be a jerk, but I'd really like to know what is meant by "real" jewelry. Is it based on workmanship, value of materials (gold, gemstones), uniqueness/rarity, or what? Some years back I bought a ring for my daughter for $500 and I thought it was a lot of dough, but it was for a special occasion. I've seen a lot of nice pieces in the price region of the LV necklace that looked pretty darn real to me.

You can buy what I consider "real" jewelry, in a casual/costume vein at Tiffany & Co. for $500 and under, including a few pieces in 18 carat and a lot of sterling. So it's something that has the logo/Tiffany appearance to it, but it isn't gold tone or brass. So I think that's what Oakley means by "real". And if you weren't going for brand or logo recognition you could get more in real gold or real silver at prices like this.

Possibly of interest to nobody else here but me, but I have a great affinity for Navajo jewelry, particularly pieces by contemporary artisans. I love the unique designs, and can attest that these folks really pour their hearts and souls into their creations and stand behind what they make. I feel really good about supporting our country's indigenous artists and helping to keep the tribal tradition of silversmithing alive. This beauty, for instance, is priced at $850. To me, that's real value, and this is my idea of "real" jewelry.

Here's another favorite of mine by Navajo artist Jacob D. Morgan. His work is out of my price range, but I think it's stunning.

Ida, those are lovely, a strand of "Navaho pearls" is something I covet and hope to have someday, now I'm going to have to get a cuff bracelet too.

Mtn, I wasn't trying to derail your thread but the comments about "real" jewelry just compelled me to share those pieces that I hope others enjoyed seeing. I'm pretty passionate about Navajo jewelry - definitely a guilty pleasure of my own -- well, actually not even a guilty one. Not a style that appeals to all, but it definitely has a widespread fanbase. I was surprised to learn how popular this type of jewelry is in Japan!

Lake, I was just admiring this photo a few minutes ago. I follow quite a few Instagram accounts that feature this type of jewelry so I'm never at a loss for exquisite pieces to drool over.

d_gw, I get what you're saying. I hope I wasn't being a poopy head asking about what "real" jewelry means. Known designer? Price? Quality of materials? At this point I'm still unclear. Is other jewelry considered costume (I never understood what that means)? Unreal?

I think "Costume" also has to do with appearance. This Tiffany by Jean Schlumberger piece is $12,000, but has a casual, costume-y appearance. It has a high gold content and the diamonds are real.

I think this actually would be a fun topic for a new thread ... Sharing pics of our favorite jewelry, either our own or things we gravitate towards.

Linelle, you aren't a poopy head! :) think we can all agree that Queen's crowns are "real" jewelry. And probably agree on many other pieces of important jewelry as well. But there is a point where it gets subjective and people's definition of real jewelry will differ.

My MIL wears a giant vintage Cartier panther bracelet. It's solid gold, weighs a ton and has sapphire eyes. Most people that look at it probably think it is not "real" but people that know my MIL will know that it is real.

If someone here was paying $500 for logo jewelry and not paying their rent, I'd probably speak up. But Mtn obviously does not fall into that category.

Agree on being upset, but if you can't get anywhere with then, I'd either go through a jewler, or do it myself- it's a very simple fix.

I am kind of surprised by the questions regarding "real" jewelry. Maybe my allergy to nickel which takes pretty much anything not "real" gold or "real" silver off the table makes it more clear to me... but I certainly know others who use the same terminology and do not have a metal allergy. I have a few higher end costume, "not real" gold necklaces that I can wear ONLY with turtlenecks-- and despite their cost (200-400), they still do not look like real gold to me. It doesn't make them less interesting or attractive-- but still, they aren't real.

Mtn set the context very clearly-- she is building a dowry jewelry box of timeless high quality jewelry for her daughters. In this context, something that is gold plated is not "real"... her daughter loves it today and that makes it the perfect gift-- but she's unlikely to pull it out with her other iconic and/or timeless pieces in her dowry jewelry box in 10 yrs.

Here's an Anna Beck necklace-- longer than the one above but it is also gold plated. No iconic flower. No designer/brand name... $500.

I always thought "costume" meant not a precious metal. But, I see what Pal is saying.

I would assume a huge broach or bracelet would be costume jewelry, but others might travel in circles where this is the norm.

I always use "costume" to differentiate between pieces using real gold and jewels vs. fake gold (or low carat) and rhinestones or semiprecious stones.

From the dictionary: "Costume jewelry definition, jewelry made of non-precious metals, sometimes gold-plated or silver-plated, often set with imitation or semiprecious stones."

In looking it up, I also see a reference to "fashion jewelry" which I think the op's necklace falls under (vs. "fine jewelry").

I think the pieces Pal shows are definitely costumy, but I would never consider something that genuine and expensive costume jewelry.

The term used for the very showy stuff that Pal posted is, I think, "statement" jewelry. Not costume, which yes, to me, means non-precious metals and or imitation anything.

Thanks all for your opinions concerning what you consider real, fake, costume, etc.

I agree that the Crown Jewels of England are real. If a mere mortal wore a tiara of rhinestones, whether it fooled the eye or not, I'd consider it "not real." If I were to learn that it contained authentic diamonds and was valued at a small (or large) fortune, I would consider it "real."

.....And then to blur the distinction there's always 'bridge' jewelry....the in-between costume and fine jewelry.

I think "statement" is probably a good way to describe the pieces I showed from Tiffany. I picked those because I believe they were probably mostly designed during the golden era of costume jewelry, in the mid century (Schlumberger died at 80 in 1987), but I think it was a misstep to post the pieces with real stones, even though they look costume-y.

I think you have to go back to some extent as to How or Why it is worn. I don't think this is something that can be separated out by price, because there is so much discrepency in the distribution of assets and for a smallish proportion of people, the cost of their "casual" "fashion" or "costume" jewelry is going to far outstrip the cost of most peoples' "good" jewelry.

Let's look at the Tiffany Schlumberger pieces without any jewels:

I have one or two patients that wear stuff like this. I don't know that it's Tiffany for certain but it's this, essentially a set of jewelry that is coordinated and is meant to be worn with casual outfits. --I mean I know they have it because they have worn it to a Dr's appointment, and they are going out for lunch or something after.

It doesn't matter that the whole set may have cost $5000 or in this case almost $40,000. This is not to be confused with their "good" jewelry. They are not spending $5K or $40K on enameled jewelry instead of an engagement ring, they have that, too. What I would call "the Rings" are the "good" jewelry, although this could also include the diamond or other gemstone earrings. bracelet and maybe a really good watch.

No rational person is going to spend $40,000 on the above instead of buying what the vast majority of people would consider "good" jewelry. The people who buy the above already have the good jewelry. So in essence it is very expensive, "real" jewelry worn as costume jewelry--and it's just another one of those things that points out the (ever-widening, it seems) disparity in the distribution of assets. I am not judging, really. But Tiffany can only make $30,000 enameled bracelets because people can afford $30,000 enamel bracelets

Oh dear, now there's "good" to consider. I'm just gonna say they're relative terms and highly subjective.

I think the enameled pieces, even without gemstones, are both good and real. Not my taste, but that's okay.

Now I want to go jewelry shopping.

ETA: Ida et al, I don't mind hijacking of my threads, ever. The only downside is , now that they do not have a limit, they can get unwieldy. I think we had a fave jewelry thread before (did KSWL start it?). That might be fun. I like a little diversion and I like seeing the broader group posting about the same ole' and not just about current events.

I also don't mind people questioning the purchase (I knew that would happen, but unfortunately the price is part of the equation here). It is just that it is a fruitless discussion with no answer, really.

I wanted to say I appreciate what d_gw said about respecting our differences. One of the things I really love about "us", this group, is our differences in perspective. And that comes from differences in almost everything; geographical, socioeconomic, race, culture, religion, most definitely political, educational, age, etc.

For what it cost LT and the profit they're making, I'd insist on a replacement. Mtn, I'm guessing you've been a good customer of LT and for them not to stand behind their product is both enlightening and disappointing ... and to think I was considering purchasing a LT bag. Not any more

1991 NYT article on jewelry repair

I love Hermes bracelets, esp. the clic and the enamel. They are technically costume jewelry and not inexpensive, but I love stacking them with my Cartier Love Bracelet.

For costume jewelry they actually hold their resale value because of the brand. I am sure LV jewelry does too.

I hope you get a replacement Mtn.

any chain with links can break, I really don't see how LV or any other company for that matter would automatically replace a necklace with a break like that, it's up for repair and the customer should pay for that repair, whether it broke after one time or after 6 times of wearing it, accidents happen. If Mtn had received it already broken that would be a different story , although it would have been hard to prove.

I wasn't "wagging my finger" about the price and I hope it didn't come out like that. I agree that we all have our indulgences. My point was about brands. And of course, it's my opinion. LOL we could have a whole other discussion!

What confused me was defining jewelry as "real" compared not real. I never use that term. If jewelry ever comes up IRL conversations which it hardly ever does, I simply say "jewelry" or "my good jewelry." I keep both separated.

My regular jewelry consists of gold plated, costume, beads, etc.

This is a first for me: Jean Schlumberger jewelry being described as "costumey"! It is some of the most beautiful "real" jewelry ever made. I've drooled over these enamel gold pieces and other of his gorgeous brooches now for over 50 years. No, I do not own any - WAY out of my price range, but a girl can still dream.

They were NOT made to imitate costume jewelry - they were made when Schlumberger and David Webb and a few others changed what "real" jewelry looked like. It had previously been platinum and diamonds, emeralds, rubies, and sapphires, and was only worn in daytime for the most elegant occasions. Schlumberger and Webb made pieces that women could wear anytime, anywhere. They incorporated semi-precious stones such a lapis, coral and turquoise, with diamonds and yellow gold and made some amazing pieces. This was mainly in the 1950's and 1960's and those pieces are still in great demand today and sell for very high prices. It was the "golden age" for spectacular daytime jewelry that was fun to wear. Of course, "daytime wear" in those days was NOT jeans and a hoodie and trainers; it was a suit or lovely daytime dress and most likely even a hat. Look at what Grace Kelly was photographed in at that time - it's how "ladies" shopped and travelled. I long for such days - SO tired of the "slob" look that celebrities have made the "look" today and that everyone has happily bought into.

BTW, "real" jewelry vs costume means 14 or 18kt gold, rather than gold metal or gold plate, and stones that are real, not paste or CZ's. It means the materials themselves have intrinsic value, not just the design. Today, price doesn't even factor in - Hermes bracelets are most often not "real" but the price is still very high - the price is for the design and name.

I find it sad that today many of the great jewelers of yesterday have gone to mass produced "real" jewelry - I call it 18kt gold costume jewelry as it is produced by the thousands. The Van Cleef & Arpels Alhambra necklaces are an example. They are very expensive and beautifully made, but just about every wealthy Asian woman walking down Fifth Ave is wearing one (no, I'm NOT being racists - Asian women are very attracted to "name" designers and are their best customers). Why would anyone want to own something of which there are thousands? It's one reason I adore estate jewelry - I don't want every third woman on the street wearing the same thing I am wearing.

Funny you mention the Alhambra necklace, Anglo. Last year when DH asked what I wanted for Christmas, I pointed it out (I have seen it advertised in the NYT a lot). Even though it was Van Cleef and Arpels, I would not have guessed it would be 15k, but when I went to the site to choose a length, there it was. It is gold, yes, but it is gold and mother of pearl (hardly precious). The Alhambra motif is popularized by VCA but hardly invented by them. I am still not sure if I would want to spend 15k on it or not; i do like it but I don't wear jewelry as much as i used to. I did post on this very forum to see if people had seen any good looking knockoffs. I also spoke to a jeweler who said they could make it in 14k for $2200, but I would want to see the craftsmanship in person first ... the detailing is very nice on the VCA. Then I saw a friend of mine with the earrings, and I am thinking i may prefer those, and they are "only" 6k.

Btw, it may not seem PC but all my Asian friends agree that Asians are particularly fond of luxury brands. In the NYC LV, which I 'd imagine sees a lot of tourists, I'd say more than half of the sales staff is Asian. It may be a sign of the burgeoning middle class ... nothing more bourgeois than mass-marketed "luxury" I suppose.

Anglo, you're a lady after my own heart. Your descriptions brought back great childhood memories of the late 50's-60's when my mother worked at a large bank in downtown Tulsa and she wore the most beautiful costume jewelry. Necklaces with matching earrings. That was when downtown's in large cities were thriving with clothes shops, good restaurants, etc. Mom would take me shopping downtown about once a month. We dressed to the nine's. :)

Thank you for the walk down memory lane.

Mtn, I mentioned in the Alhambra post my general lack of interest in jewelry excluded the Alhambra necklace. Should you find a decent Alhambra inspired necklace, please share.

This post had me scrambling for the magnifying glass. For many years I had a thing for estate/vintage brooches. For a long while they were so out of style so I could buy them up for a range of $1 to $12 each at garage sales and estate sales. My friends even started picking up pieces for me like ole brooch and earring sets. Anyway, I don't have a lot of enamel but do have some. Neither my husband or myself can read the small stamps on the back even with the magnifier. Some I know are just attractive junk. Some I'm not sure. However, I sure am going to look into collectible names.