While browsing through shops this morning, I found one that instructs you to do the following:

Purchase the video game from any store other than <<the client>> (for example, visit the nearest Walmart, Target or Best Buy). Please check to make sure the location allows return.

Basically you try to get cash without a receipt. I operate in my personal life on an old Jewish Law:

"One is not permitted to ask the price if one does not intend to buy."

While I have less difficulty where I am contracted to buy and return something, or take up time of a salesperson (and I have difficulty with that on a couple of levels), this one, unless the stores mentioned are cooperating with the client, is unethical.

Your thoughts?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/27/2014 02:01AM by whosear.

nothing wrong with that. People return stuff without
receipts all the time. Problem with doing to many
of these is you will get flagged since they all take
your ID and scan it. It then goes to a returns database
and if you get labeled a serial returner then no more
returns for you at any retailer that uses the database.

You try to get cash from their own stores. They just want to make sure that their employees do not accept it. The most unethical is the grocery chain that shops their competitors and you are supposed to go to the desk and say that you got a rotten fruit/muffin and ask for a refund without a receipt.

KateH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You try to get cash from their own stores. They
> just want to make sure that their employees do not
> accept it. The most unethical is the grocery chain
> that shops their competitors and you are supposed
> to go to the desk and say that you got a rotten
> fruit/muffin and ask for a refund without a
> receipt.


What do you mean not accept it? Most stores allow
returns without a receipt just need your ID and in
the case of stores like Best Buy, your fingerprint.

Get a refund when you're not happy will something should be not big deal. I use to work in fast food and it would get me when people would come in and said " I got a sandwich yesterday and it was not made right or I did get this or that in my order and I want my money back. No receipt, you didn't call and you want your money back today or more food. Sorry. not going to work.

I don't think that there is anything wrong with that and I don't think it is unethical. You are buying a game and bringing it to the store who you are hired by to return it. They know that when they hire you this is a return for an item bought from another store. So you are not doing any thing wrong or unethical. This is what they want you to do.

KateH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
The most unethical is the grocery chain
> that shops their competitors and you are supposed
> to go to the desk and say that you got a rotten
> fruit/muffin and ask for a refund without a
> receipt.

I didn't save the guidelines for that scenario. However, I don't think the shopper is to ask for a refund. I thought the shopper was to present that they got a bad apple, donut, or sour quart of milk. The client wants to know what the store response is. It could be an offer of replacement, or refund. Or, it could be that without a receipt or the return of the rotten product, there can be no replacement or refund. Even if the competitor offers a replacement or refund, there is no requirement that the shopper accepts it.

Well IMHO if you buy an item from store A and attempt to return same to store B (assuming that a & b are not the same chain) then you are guilty of attempting a fraudulent return. I would assume you could be arrested.

The first time I had a fingerprint taken was to cash a check in FL. The same bank did not require it in other locations. I had never had to give a fingerprint in any other state. As for the refund thing, I never had the red box or Walmart give me a refund or replacement without a receipt. I did have WF in the beginning but not anymore and I noticed it also depended how well dressed I was. I guess even at WF got smart to have each week someone coming with the rotten fruit or baked item or milk.

ces1948 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well IMHO if you buy an item from store A and
> attempt to return same to store B (assuming that a
> & b are not the same chain) then you are guilty of
> attempting a fraudulent return. I would assume you
> could be arrested.


"Attempting a fraudulent return" doesn't exist. You're just making that up. No, you cannot be arrested for trying to return an item without a receipt, unless it can be proven that the item was stolen.

If the issue is buying something from Target and attempting to return it to Joe's Bait and Tackle, as long as you have Joe's permission you haven't done a darn thing wrong. I'm wondering if the OP also has a problem with purchasing the item from Target knowing he or she is going to be returning it within an hour or so because Target it not involved with the shop in any way.

I have had an example when I made a ff purchase and it was just awful. I called and the manager said, come back and say xx sent you and we will replace your entire meal. Well, several days passed by and I remembered. I walked in saying 'hey, xx said I should just come back and mention her name" I had no receipt or other proof. And, they replaced my meal without question.

Okay, back up a minute. I'm not familiar with this shop but what OP seemed to be saying is that you were working for Client A. You were to go to Competitor B, buy an item, make sure you could return it for refund later. Then go to a store owned by Client A and attempt to return it for cash without a receipt. Now, there were some awkward sentences in the original post that muddy it up a bit, but this is what I think is going on because that is what would make sense in a mystery shop scenario.

Since Client A told you to do it, you are not defrauding Client A.

Since Competitor B will eventually get the unused item back, with receipt, for a refund, per their own policy, they are inconvenienced but not defrauded.

So where is the moral dilemma here?


However if Client A tells you to go to Competitor B to buy it and to Competitor C to try to return it, then that is a different situation and I would agree it is unethical unless you are told to abort the return at Competitor C ("Oops, I just realized I bought this somewhere else. Sorry.". It would be wrong for the shopper to allow C to refund you for what you bought at B so that A can learn what from the transaction? This is only helpful to A if the attempted return is to one of A's stores. If A only wants to know if B and C will accept returns without a receipt as a matter of policy, that can probably be determined with a couple of phone calls.

Rarely do we know with certainty who our client is. If the instructions say "Buy from B and return to A" unless we ask we don't know if A, B, or some other entity is the client for whom we are working that day.

I have done the shop and know who the client is, it is Joe's Bait and Tackle not some competitor. Back when I actually performed the shop I can't recall if it was to attempt a refund for cash or some type of exchange. It has been several years.

For most of my shops I know who the client is and if it is a competitor shop. Many MSCs are upfront with the information and even if it is not listed will tell you when asked.

KateH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You try to get cash from their own stores. They
> just want to make sure that their employees do not
> accept it. The most unethical is the grocery chain
> that shops their competitors and you are supposed
> to go to the desk and say that you got a rotten
> fruit/muffin and ask for a refund without a
> receipt.

KateH, I have no difficulty with that at all because if given a choice I will ask for a replacement item and then conveniently 'forget' to pick it up. Our purpose is to compare their policies to that of the client. I too have a problem with basically taking goods or money from a competitor so would not accept a refund. Rarely do they offer a refund, but if they did I would find a way to duck it and suggest that 'I just wanted to replace the ____'. If they want to test their own chain, that is fine. They are welcome to give me free goods or $$ out of their own pocket.

LisaSTL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have done the shop and know who the client is,
> it is Joe's Bait and Tackle not some competitor.
> Back when I actually performed the shop I can't
> recall if it was to attempt a refund for cash or
> some type of exchange. It has been several years.

I'm not surprised you can't recall it after several years.......

This shop is not about trying to return but to get them to trade in the game. Their policy is they only trade in pre played games not new in shrink wrap games. They are trying to see what the employees are doing in this situation normally the employee is only supposed to politely say we do noyt buy new games but there are so many other things that can be done. They are just seeing if their policy is being enforced.

I was trying to be discreet, what I ended up being was unclear.

Basically, the instructions say buy one or two games or video at some other store, try to return it to their clients store, get cash, and if it is not accepted, we won't reimburse you and you then return the games/video to where you bought it.

So, use Walmart, Best Buy, etc merchandise, see if you get a refund from another store, if not, return it.

Means i bought merchandise that I did not intend to use except to make money, then return it. That's what is unethical.

Sorry for the lack of clarity.

You also have to remember that they need to be the same game.

Yeah I guess "attempting a fraudulent return" is not a correct legal term, I think it's actually something like " Obtaining a refund under false pretenses" as I was describing in my original post. Of course now that I understand the scenario that doesn't seem to be the case.

bgriffin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm not surprised you can't recall it after
> several years.......

Who are you again?

I don't see this particular shop as unethical, since the unopened game will be returned where purchased, still wrapped and with a receipt. I do, however, see this shop as a PITA, since you have to make a purchase, attempt a [presumably declined] return, and then make an actual return at the original retailer. It's like doing three shops for the price of one!

Mantis Wrote:

>
> "Attempting a fraudulent return" doesn't exist.
> You're just making that up. No, you cannot be
> arrested for trying to return an item without a
> receipt, unless it can be proven that the item was
> stolen.


I'm not sure what state you're in, Mantis, but in the state of Florida (I don't know about other states) there most certainly IS a statute that specifically makes a fraudulent return a crime. It's actually labeled "Fraudulent Refunds",and if you use a fake name and/or address to do it, you could *possibly* be arrested. Two elements would have to be met. First would be an ongoing, systematic scheme to make fraudulent returns. If you were recognized doing several of these shops, some officers may consider that element met. The second element would be if you use anything other than your own real name and address to do the returns. Of course, your defense would be that you lacked intent because you were working on behalf of the store, but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen - as far-fetched as it might seem.

I've seen worse.

Mert Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> KateH Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> The most unethical is the grocery chain
> > that shops their competitors and you are
> supposed
> > to go to the desk and say that you got a rotten
> > fruit/muffin and ask for a refund without a
> > receipt.
>
> I didn't save the guidelines for that scenario.
> However, I don't think the shopper is to ask for a
> refund. I thought the shopper was to present that
> they got a bad apple, donut, or sour quart of
> milk. The client wants to know what the store
> response is. It could be an offer of replacement,
> or refund. Or, it could be that without a
> receipt or the return of the rotten product, there
> can be no replacement or refund. Even if the
> competitor offers a replacement or refund, there
> is no requirement that the shopper accepts it.

Agree with Mert. I have done these shops for the Client and competitors. Even when Whole Foods offered me a replacement fruit. I smile, said okay, let me finish my shopping first. I don't pick up the fruit, pay for my items and leave.

I don't know that it is really unethical. People buy things and return them all the time. The store really isn't out anything if you do the shop and have to return the item to the original store. I guess if you see this as unethical, then all of mystery shopping would be since you really are not in the store to be a customer and you are taking up the time of a salesperson or whomever. Just keep in mind that the company that wants you to do the shop is authorizing you to do what is needed in the shop. I've done a few shops where I have to intentionally break the rules of the company to see the response of the workers. I was uncomfortable doing that the first time until I realized that it was an important test of the employees and how they do their job. It is not something I would ever do in my own life, but I was hired to test the employees and not doing so would be unethical.


whosear Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was trying to be discreet, what I ended up being
> was unclear.
>
> Basically, the instructions say buy one or two
> games or video at some other store, try to return
> it to their clients store, get cash, and if it is
> not accepted, we won't reimburse you and you then
> return the games/video to where you bought it.
>
> So, use Walmart, Best Buy, etc merchandise, see if
> you get a refund from another store, if not,
> return it.
>
> Means i bought merchandise that I did not intend
> to use except to make money, then return it.
> That's what is unethical.
>
> Sorry for the lack of clarity.

If the client is not the store, then I would not accept the assignment.

The grocery store where you go to customer service and tell them about the sour milk, fruit, etc.; allows you to retrieve another one at no charge.

They have never, ever asked me if I wanted the cash back.

I have no problem doing a purchase and return at a retail outlet if the client authorizes it. Same with car shops. I may be sympathetic with the use of time, but that is an issue between the dealer, car salesperson and the company.

This asks you to buy and possibly return (if you get cash for your games from the client, then you don't return and the issue is moot) from another store. That is what I consider to be unethical, unless there is some type of agreement between the stores. Perhaps it is understood. But there is nothing in the instructions that indicates this.

I conduct my ethical life by not stealing anything. While it is small, buying something that I want to use to make money, and then return it is a form of stealing. I have used the store's resources with no intention of paying for them. That is a form of stealing.

I guess it all depends on the ethics of the shopper. If it's within the policy of the big-box stores to allow returns, then you are not violating their particular policy, and their business model is set up to supply the resources that allow for returns.

It opens up a much larger question if the ethics of that bothers you, since most of MSing involves wasting a third party's time/resources in the name of evaluating service. All competitor shops should therefore be considered unethical. Me taking the time to waste the resources of an airline, the TSA, cab companies and my credit card supplier in order to evaluate an out-of-town hotel would be unethical. You can take the argument as far you want, but each shopper has to decide what is ethical for them.

I will say that in this particular case, the ethics of the client seem somewhat suspect, since they are clearly directing shoppers to waste resources of their competitors, rather than leaving it up to the shopper to make that decision. I would see a true independent contractor situation to be asking a shopper to simple "acquire" an unopened copy of the game. The pay for the assignment could then leave the shopper to decide how they want to go about that if they choose to take the assignment.

For myself; I would not have an ethical issue with conducting the shop as stated. I doubt that the shop would ever pay enough to get on my radar as something that is desirable, however. As a frequent traveller, I do draw the line at purchasing refundable airfare in order to access secure areas of the airport. That is such a blatant waste of resources, in addition to confounding travel delays, I cannot bring myself to do it.

I think the problem is you're seeing it as a return, when it's really not. The chain of stores you're working for sells used video games at a pretty massive profit margin. You're not trying to get a return from them without a receipt- which you see as depriving them of money- but you're actually giving them free stock. They may give you $5 for your game trade in and then sell it for $20. The point is they're supposed to check to see if the employees are the game store are following procedure when you do a trade-in.