Are you the Owner of this Business? ×
BBB® Accredited Business Seal

Are you...?

If yes, click here to login.

Are you...?

BBB Accredited Business since

Rogers Jewelry Company

Additional Locations

Phone: (209) 578-1873 Fax: (209) 578-0445 PO Box 3151, Modesto, CA 95353 View Additional Web Addresses

BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.


In 1937 Harry Marks & Dr.Moon founded Rogers Jewelry. With vision, foresight & dedication, the founders built their company on the principles of providing quality jewelry, friendly service & credit while maintaining the highest standard of integrity.

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Rogers Jewelry Company meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.

BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.

Reason for Rating

BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for Rogers Jewelry Company include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 3 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business

Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

3 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 0 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 1
Billing/Collection Issues 0
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 2
Total Closed Complaints 3

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

0 Customer Reviews on Rogers Jewelry Company
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

BBB file opened: June 05, 2000 Business started: 01/01/1937 in CA Business started locally: 01/01/1937 Business incorporated 07/01/1940 in CA
Type of Entity


Business Management
Mr. Roger Marks, CEO Mrs. Lori Arnold, Human Resources Ms. Jayme Bond, Credit Department Mr. David Kirk, Store Manager Mr. Bart Marks, Vice President Mr. Robert Marks, President/CFO
Contact Information
Customer Contact: Mr. Robert Marks, President/CFO
Principal: Mr. Roger Marks, CEO
Business Category

Jewelers - Retail Jewelry Repair Jewelry Designers

Service Area
Central Valley
Alternate Business Names
Rogers Jewelry Company Inc.
Products & Services

Roger Jewelry Company is a jewelry store that specializes in custom jewelry design and jewelry repair.

Additional Locations

  • 3600 Sisk Rd Ste 6

    Modesto, CA 95356 (209) 527-8713

  • 8521 Bond Rd

    Elk Grove, CA 95624 (800) 877-4221 (916) 714-2590

  • 9217 Sierra College Blvd # 120

    Roseville, CA 95661 (916) 782-1505

  • 965 E Bidwell St

    Folsom, CA 95630 (916) 984-8665

  • PO Box 3151

    Modesto, CA 95353


BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.

Customer Review Experience Value
Positive Review 5 points per review
Neutral Review 3 points per review
Negative Review 1 point per review

BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.

BBB Letter Grade Scale

BBB Rating Value
A+ 5
A 4.66
A- 4.33
B+ 4
B 3.66
B- 3.33
C+ 3
C 2.66
C- 2.33
D+ 2
D 1.66
D- 1.33
F 1
NR -----
Star Rating scale

  Average Score
5 stars 5.00
4.5 stars 4.50-4.99
4 stars 4.00-4.49
3.5 stars 3.50-3.99
3 stars 3.00-3.49
2.5 stars 2.50-2.99
2 stars 2.00-2.49
1.5 stars 1.50-1.99
1 star 0-1.49

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.

Complaint Detail(s)

12/23/2013 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Ring priced at 459.00 for over 30 days. When attempting to purchase the sales clerk stated the tag inside the ring said 750.00 We visited rogers jewelers on several occassions which during the first visit over 30 days ago we spotted a ring for our 20th anniversary that I fell in love with. We visited rogers again a week ago for ring cleaning and once again admired the ring. On both ococcasions the ring was priced at 459.00 on a marker which stood soley in front of this one ring that stood alone from all other displays. My husband attempted to purchase the ring on 11/30 at which time the sales clerk stated the ring was 750.00 and that the price displayed was incorrect. He informed them this was false advertising of an item for over a month. They then stated the best they could do is knock off 100.00 for their error. Business ownera cannot advertise an item then change their mind.

Desired Settlement: We are seeking to purchase the ring as the price advertised for over a month. 459.00

Business Response: Initial Business Response
The "advertising" the customer is referring to consists of a piece of clear plastic tape with a price written on it that is then attached to a display element containing several rings, some of which are also priced in a similar manner. Salespeople are instructed to be careful to place rings back in the proper slot after showing them. Inevitably, however, human beings make mistakes. It is almost unavoidable that in the course of normal business at the store level some item somewhere will end up next to a sign indicating a price for different piece, sometimes higher priced, sometimes lower. I recently had a similar experience at Home Depot. I was shopping for a Webber BBQ and found one I knew was worth $700 next to a sign that said $299. Of course the sign had been inadvertently placed next to the wrong BBQ. Home Depot apologized for the mistake, but did not agree to sell me the Webber for $299, nor did they offer me any accommodation to make up for their error. I could buy the $299 BBQ for $229, or the $700 Webber for $700. When Rogers officially advertises any item as a company, we have the opportunity to double check for errors. Even so, we still make occasional mistakes. In our Christmas catalogue last year for example we listed an item at an incorrect (lower) price. In that case we honored the lower price because the catalogue was mailed to our customers homes and represented official advertising. Some people may have visited our store because they saw that particular item at that particular price. But those kinds of mistakes are rare and avoidable. There is no doubt we should have caught the mistake. It is impossible to avoid mistakes at the store level, however. We can't have eyes everywhere. Suppose a salesperson were to accidentally set a $10,000 ring behind a sign that said $299? Would we then need to sell the ring for $299? The store manager acknowledges that the wrong ring was placed in the $459 slot, but insists that the error did not continue for anywhere near 30 days. Regardless he did offer a generous and reasonable accommodation to make up for our mistake, deducting $100 from the correct ticketed price of the item. The customer's husband initially accepted the offer, but then his credit card was declined. There is unfortunately nothing we can do about the decline of his credit card. That issue is between him and his credit card provider. If necessary we can provide a record of the declined transaction.

2/19/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Got ring sized .50 carat E in color VVSI 2 quality on a 18 k white gold traditional setting to size 4.5 when I got it back there was a huge visual black inclusion and tiny other ones around it. There were no visual inclusions on it before I brought it in. They said they're not in the market for a marquise and will not help me. Product_Or_Service: ring sized Account_Number: XXXXXXXXJ

Desired Settlement: DesiredSettlementID: Replacement Same exact diamond I had before I brought it in to get it sized

Business Response: Business' Initial Response
The diamond returned to Ms ****** is the one originally given to us by her. Before we will take in a repair job, we always ask our customers for the value of their jewelry to make sure it is consistent with its actual worth. We will not work on an item with an inflated claim of value. The size, clarity and color that Ms ****** is now claiming for her diamond does not match the $900 in value she attested to when she left it for sizing. "0.50 carat E color VVSI2" is a considerably inflated estimation of her diamond and in no way describes the one she left with us. The diamond we returned to her was the one we received from her.

Consumer's Final Response
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The above statement is true I did agree that is worth $900 but that is because I didn't know at the time the value of the diamond. The lady behind the counter suggested the amount and I agreed. But the thing they did not do was look at the diamond and plot it out on the receipt. I think this is a tactic they use to scam people. It doesn't make sense that my diamond would come back with a huge black inclusion on it when there was none before I brought it in. I did not expect them to do this. I trusted them so I went along with what the jewler suggested because I never thought my diamond would get switched. I found out later the value of my diamond from my mom who gave it to me. They should've plotted out my diamond before taking it in to size it.

Business' Final Response
We have a 75 year reputation for taking good care of our customers. No diamond of any size or quality is more valuable to us than our reputation. What Ms ****** is accusing us of defies logic. Of what use would her marquise be to us anyways? Marquises are not even popular today. Of the 1,247 items we sold last year with ½ carat diamonds in them, only 5 had marquises. We currently have 30 ½ carat marquises in stock, 24 of them are VVSI to SI in clarity. It will take us years to sell all of them as it is. It wouldn't make much sense for us to steal a ½ carat marquise when we already have more than we can use. Furthermore, we have 120 employees. If we had a strategy to steal from customers, as Ms ****** accuses us, it would be known by our employees and could not be kept a secret. Any employee or former employee could testify of our malfeasance. Because of our many years in business and sterling reputation, we had $25 million in sales last year. Why would we throw that away? We did not switch Ms ******'s diamond. We would never switch anyone's diamond. That would be reprehensible! Assuming this is an honest complaint, what are the other possibilities? 1. Ms ******'s mother was honestly mistaken about the quality of her diamond, and Ms ****** did not notice the inclusions until after the ring was cleaned. (This may not be the case, but I mention it as a possibility because her description does not match the value of the diamond we received.) 2. The diamond's setting had been previously re-tipped. This was notated by our jeweler on the job tag and Ms ****** has informed us that she recently had the diamond re-set. This creates the possibility that the diamond had been replaced after MS ******'s mother gave it to her but prior to our receiving it. When and where was this work done? What can be done to help resolve this? 1. Ms ******'s mother's statement of value should be verified with a receipt or appraisal, if available. 2. The diamond can be matched to the statement by measuring the size of the diamond now in the ring. The complaint is that the diamond now has spots, not that its size is any different. Though it was not measured at the time, the diamond we took in appeared to be much smaller than ½ carat, possibly no bigger than 1/3 carat, unless it is unusually deep. This can be verified by measuring the diamond. 3. The BBB can expand their investigation to include the work done to set the diamond prior to our receiving it. If the diamond in Ms ******'s ring is not the one from her mother, then I truly feel sorry for her. She has been wronged and suffered a loss. But we are not the cause of her loss. Her accusations are misplaced.

12/13/2012 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: I bought a ring from the company that caused a severe allergic reaction to my girlfriend's finger. Returned ring and they are stating "repossesion" I bought a ring in June 2011 for my girlfriend.It was a 5 diamond stone ring and a band that I was told was only palladium in it.Signs of irritation began showing in October 2011 and escalated to the point of her finger getting open sores, dead and cracking skin and discoloration of her finger by March.She stopped wearing the ring thinking she may have had a reaction to a lotion mixed with the ring or the ring being too tight.Her finger began to get better. She tried wearing the ring again and the condition worsened.We got the ring tested by another source and were told that it contained nickel and zinc (something I was told did not get put into the ring).Went to the doctor in May 2012 and was put on medicated ointment and was advised to not wear the ring.This was reported to Rogers.They stated that the band, when extended originally, had a piece that contained nickel among other products. Therefore, the ring provided was not what was paid for. I stated that I would like a refund and to return the ring.I did not want to make payments on a ring that she could not wear.Their "solution" was to redo the band in which I agreed originally thinking it would be okay, but when retested, traces of the other products were once again found.I told Rogers of this information and I reitterated that the dr advised not to wear the ring under any circumstance and I could not make payments for a ring that cannot be worn.Rogers company took that as I could not afford the ring and that is the only reason I wanted to return it.They took the ring back and reported two months of late payments and a repossesion to the credit agencys.I did not miss any payments and willingly gave the ring back, they did not have to "reposses" it. They just had to take back a product that was sold to me under false pretenses.Regardless if the original piece was correct and the extended piece was the issue, the final product I was provided was not what was agreed upon.Even after voicing these concerns to them, their last solution was to provide me a store credit that can be used ONLY if I buy a product that is double the amount I had paid for the ring of $1752.Not only have they seriously damaged my credit score, cost me money having to pay for medical ointments, antibiotics and dr visit copays, but now they are trying to provide a "solution" that is going to cost me more money! They stated that they could not resell the ring since it was used and they had to break it down to try to save any minerals that they could and that is why they cannot refund me and have it listed as a repossesion. When I told them AGAIN the reasoning for returning it, all they could say is "well technically, we did take repossesion of it." That is true, but technically, they did also provide a ring that caused severe damage due to negligence on the company's worker that extended the piece. On top of that, even if I had kept the ring, my girlfriend was not cleared to wear ANY sort of band on that finger until early November. Therefore, I again would have been paying for months on a ring that she wouldn't be able to wear. I really tried to work with the company but after so much time and effort and the only solution being offered is one that would cost me at least $1750 more, I find it unacceptable and need help in getting a fair deal. I am trying to get an engagement ring for my girlfriend and this issue is keeping me from getting any sort of financing from other companies as it has dropped my credit score 177 points.

Desired Settlement: I would like the late payments for a ring that could not be worn taken off of my credit report. I would also like the "repossesion" report taken off of my credit report. In returning the ring, I was NEVER notified that it would be reported as a repossesion, I just found out when I looked at my report Friday November 23, 2012. Lastly I would like a refund of $1752 (the amount I paid for the ring). The reasoning being that for the full time I had the ring, it was not the product I paid for due to the elments in the extended piece. I paid for only palladium and was provided that in addition to nickel and zinc. Any agreements that were entered should have been void once they provided the product that differed from what I bought. The only reason it was caught months later is because that's how long it took for her finger to react. All I want is a fair deal and I do not think that is asking for too much. My parents (***** and ****** ******) have put in a lot of money into their company and I was going to follow suit but this whole ordeal is really starting to change my mind.

Business Response: Business' Initial Response
Contact Name and Title: ****** ******, President Contact Phone: (209) XXX-XXXX x241 Contact Email: ***** There are a few points of fact that need to be considered regarding this complaint. ****** ******' payment history is not completely represented by his statement. Mr. ****** purchased the ring on 06/25/11 with his first monthly payment of $355 due on 07/25/11. He called on 07/18/11 ask if he could skip this month's payment since he thought he was going to get three checks this month, but did not. We accommodated Mr. ****** by delaying the start of his payments to 08/15/11. However, we still did not receive our first payment from him until 09/14/11, almost two months after the first payment was originally due. He continued making $355 monthly payments in arrears until he missed another payment in February, 2012, making him $781 delinquent. To his credit, he began making up for the delinquencies by paying $450 in March, $400 in April, and $360 in May. When we were informed that Mr. ******' girlfriend was having an allergic reaction to the ring, we were able to determine that the wrong sizing stock had been used. We corrected the problem by re-shanking the ring with the proper stock. It is somewhat surprising that the ring would test positive for nickel again. I suspect that the testing equipment was contaminated. However, I have sent the ring off to be tested again using state of the art equipment, just to be certain. After Mr. ****** picked up the ring, he informed us that he just received a pay cut and wanted to return it. We agreed to take the ring back. Given the history of delinquencies on the account, I can see why the return was viewed as a repossession. However, I personally disagree with that decision. I can see why Mr. ****** was frustrated and surprised to find a repo on his credit history. After all, we did size the ring improperly which made it unwearable and that should have been taken into consideration. Consequently, I have removed the repo and the delinquent payment history from his credit file. Normally, we do not offer any credit for repossessed merchandise. In this case, we offered to treat the $1,752 he had paid into the ring as a trade-in and allowed him to use it toward the purchase of a $3,504 item. I can see why this was viewed by us a generous offer, but again I must disagree with that decision. In my opinion, the ring should have been treated as an exchange, not a repo, and Mr. ****** should have been allowed to use his credit toward the purchase any item, not just one costing double the amount. Furthermore, if we had truly failed to fix the problem, we should have cheerfully refunded his money. Mr. ****** has asked for a "fair deal" and I do not believe we have given him one. Consequently, I would like to offer Mr. ****** $1,752.63 in credit for use in our stores. If he cannot find anything he likes, or he simply wishes to never do business with us again, then I will "sadly" refund his money. "Sadly", because it means I will have failed to correct our mistakes to his satisfaction and he will have indeed "changed his mind." Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I am sorry I did not hear of it sooner.

Consumer's Final Response
I originally bought the ring at the Sierra College Blvd location and worked with ****** there and at the Folsom location. In addition to working with ******, I worked with **** at the Folsom location. I would like to point out that they both were very helpful and did all they could, unfortunately, they were constricted by the "Head of the department"

Business' Final Response
I do not know if this matters for your records, but I just received back the report for Mid-States recycling and Refining on the metal content of the ring. There is absolutely no nickel in it. It is comprised of: 75.65% Gold 9.69% Copper 12.63% Palladium 2.03% Zinc I can send you a copy of the report if you desire. ****** ****** President Rogers Jewelry Co.