I've worked with this particular MSC specializing in apartments (not EPMS) for the last couple of years and have not had any issues with rejections. However, I recently completed a targeted apartment shop which was rejected because I did not meet with the target on the appointment date. I'm just kind of venting because the shop had taken time and energy.

1.) Like most apartment shops, there were black out dates during the week. Basically all the dates except Monday and Saturday were blacked out. I scheduled my tour on a Monday with the leasing agent. The target leasing agent confirmed the appointment and said that "we'll" see you on [date of shop]. Naturally I assumed that I would be meeting with the leasing agent because she had confirmed the appointment and did not inform me that she would not be in the office. Also according to the shop guidelines, the leasing agent worked on Mondays as well.

2.) When I arrived for the appointment, the target agent was not in the office so I had to conduct the tour with another leasing agent.

I submitted the shop, but was it was rejected because:

1.) I shopped on a date that the leasing agent wasn't available. Apparently the leasing agent only worked on Saturday. However the guidelines did not state that, it included Monday as well. I also took a screenshot of the guidelines.

2.) I did not ask the targeted leasing agent directly during the phone call if she would be at the appointment. I had assumed that she would be at the appointment because she said that they would see me on the appointment date.

Well, my report was declined for those reasons. I contacted the owner with pretty thorough emails and have only received one or two sentence responses twice without much justification regarding the nonpayment issue. I also have left a voicemail which has not been returned. I feel slighted because I've worked with the company previously with good results, but he doesn't seem to care to answer all the points in my emails. I am just posting on the forum to ask what I should do. Was I wrong? Should I just drop the issue?

I definitely believe you are right on point #1. Point #2 is a gray area. I don't know this particular company as I have only ever done EPMS shops. I think I do know who the other (Sassie MSC?) is. Other shoppers chime in, but I would politely stand my ground, personally. One more question: when you made the phone call, was it on a Saturday? If not, that proves that the target was indeed working days other than Saturdays. If they value you as a good and reliable shopper, perhaps they will work with you on this.

Thanks for the input, JASFLAMT. Yes, I had called the target agent and reached her on a day other than Saturday.

For you to say that point number 2 is a gray area makes me feel a little bit better. More than anything, I wish the owner would reply or respond to my voicemail even if it is to confirm that nothing can be done.

Having completed my first three apartment shops, I understand how much time and effort goes into them. And for you to have to confirm that the target will be there is a "shopper" flag in my opinion. We should be able to trust our guidelines to be correct.

I've never had an apartment shop rejected for that reason. As long as I made the appointment with the target, was visiting on a date that the guidelines had the target working, and exchanged verbiage with the target that strongly implied that s/he would be available, I've been fine. There is one client who had been with one MSP not long ago and recently shifted to another that, according to my scheduler for the new MSP, can be difficult and will reject shops with minimal cause. On a recent shop with which I was struggling, I was given explicit instructions to do everything thoroughly and to the letter of the shop instructions.... I wonder if it's the same client.

I know that at least with one of the MSCs, you have to call that day to confirm with them. I hate doing it because it is a flag but that is what they want. I don't know what the companies rules are who you worked for so I would say if they never require you to confirm then they have to pay. Legal contracts work both ways. I hate targeted shops but will do them on occasion.

@NewEnglandShopper wrote:

I know that at least with one of the MSCs, you have to call that day to confirm with them. I hate doing it because it is a flag but that is what they want. I don't know what the companies rules are who you worked for so I would say if they never require you to confirm then they have to pay. Legal contracts work both ways. I hate targeted shops but will do them on occasion.

I read over the guidelines and it did not state that I had to call the apartment again on the day of the shop.

Also, the guidelines stated that it would be okay to shop a different agent if the target agent was unavailable.

Oh, well that is great then. Screenshot that info from the guidelines and e-mail it to a manger or owner. I would definitely not let it go if you have proof you fulfilled your contract. You can also contact the BBB and they can be helpful in these matters, if need be. Let us know how it goes.

I agree with you mostly. But that said, I would drop the issue. If I fought every time a scheduler did something totally messed up to me, I would not have the energy to get out of bed. It sucks, it's wrong, but it sounds like you're not going to change their minds on this one.

Aren't your call and tour supposed to be on the same day to avoid that problem?

I thought I knew who the MSC was until you said the email you received from them was two sentences. This MSC would have written a manifesto.

@donnashoppingca wrote:

I scheduled my tour on a Monday with the leasing agent. The target leasing agent confirmed the appointment and said that "we'll" see you on [date of shop].

I'm curious how far in advance you made the appointment? I have always called in the morning and made an appointment for the same day. I hope it works out for you and you get paid.

@HonnyBrown wrote:

Aren't your call and tour supposed to be on the same day to avoid that problem?

I thought I knew who the MSC was until you said the email you received from them was two sentences. This MSC would have written a manifesto.

No, according to the guidelines - this particular MSC wants you to call in advance of the scheduled tour so that you can reach the target and get the report in on time. I had called 2 days in advance.

@donnashoppingca wrote:

Also, the guidelines stated that it would be okay to shop a different agent if the target agent was unavailable.

That completely changes everything. You should be paid. You should not drop it. Be polite but persistent. As advised by NE Shopper, take a screenshot of the guidelines as proof.

Targeted shops can be a challenge. When you conduct the phone portion and make an appointment with your target it is okay (for my company anyway) to call the apartment just before you head out for the onsite visit (assuming it is a day other than the day you called) to see if the target is there. You can make up an excuse (I may be 10-15 minutes late, I forgot the directions, etc). In this case a call was made on a Friday and the onsite made on a Monday when the shop was to have been done Saturday only.

But the OP wrote that the agent worked on Mondays as well, according to the guidelines. She clearly wrote in her original post that the guidelines stated so.

I really can't go into specifics but the shop was only to be done Saturdays even though the target works other days. There are reasons for this.

@dcrector wrote:

I really can't go into specifics but the shop was only to be done Saturdays even though the target works other days. There are reasons for this.

I'm dropping the issue because it's not worth the relationship with the company. I enjoyed working with them in the past and believe this is a one time thing.

However, the guidelines were incorrect and listed Monday as a possible shop day. I have the screenshot and have sent it to the company. I had followed the shop guidelines regarding the allowed shop dates.

I learned my lesson about arguing with schedulers or editors about my shops. Even when I've followed the guidelines to the letter.

I asked a scheduler to do their job, according to the directions on the shop, and was deactivated.

I had an argument with an editor about a situation in a restaurant shop with the server taunting and harassing me and my guests, I reported it, and I answered the questions about the quality of the food honestly. I was told by the editor to change it, and I did, but I still reported how I was treated by my server and the manager. I was deactivated there too.

And, even though I followed ALL of the rules, to the letter. I had a manager complain about me and lie to the MSC I was working for about me, I was deactivated. It was one of the MSC's that does movie theater checks, I was doing an ad check on all of the screens in the theater, according to the instructions. The owner/manager told me that I wasn't going to find what I was looking for (not looking for anything, just reporting on video quality and what ads were playing before the trailers). And that he isn't going to sign anything no matter what. And he told the MSC that I was watching the movies without buying a ticket (I was not). It was a big old mess and the lady from the MSC said to just report that the manager refused. So I did. And the next thing I know I was deactivated.

I no longer argue. I do what I need to do and I get out. If they say it's not good enough, it isn't. I cut my losses and move on.

Well I guess we know who the MSC is now.

Yes but if she does in fact have snapshot proof that this is not what the guidelines said and it listed the day she went as an option, then legally you have to pay her. It wouldn't be the first time a company failed to double check their own instructions. Integrity is everything and shoppers are the reason your company has a business so I hope the right thing will be done if what she says is correct.

Any company worth working for will not deactivate you when you have written proof that you did as you were supposed to. You have a right to be paid. Dropping it is why companies take advantage of you to begin with. I have continued to work for companies I have had to report. They had the integrity to admit they were wrong and paid me. We moved on and kept working together.

I am with you, NE Shopper. The OP doesn't want to rock the boat and is willing to forget about it and forgo rightful payment due out of fear of deactivation. I think that's terrible that an MSC would compromise their integrity like that by not paying a shopper who has proof that they performed the shop correctly according to the guidelines. I will never sign up with them and I would hope that other shoppers who are not already registered with them will follow suit, and those of you who are signed up with them might want to think twice before doing any more shops for them. It could happen to you, too.

I noticed that the shop has been reposted, but the incorrect guidelines are still there. They need to be changed so whoever shops this apartment next won't have the same issue as I did. The guidelines still state that the target does not work on Sundays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays which means that Mondays and Saturdays are okay to shop.

*Edit* It's now corrected on the guidelines.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2016 02:28AM by donnashoppingca.

That's just wow. That's poor management all the way around. First, to not even acknowledge that you are right and should be paid, not investigating your claim to discover that the guidelines are incorrect, and then to repost the shop with the same incorrect guidelines! And then to have the brass to come into the forum and acknowledge your post but not address any of your issues--well that just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

And now they have updated the guidelines, so they clearly realize there was an error, gray area, and misinformation out there... -_-

Sure. this Doug person from NW Loss Prevention came into the forum and posted several times, so you know he came in later and read the OPs post about the shop being reposted with the guidelines incorrect. Instead of addressing the issue like a decent moral person would do, he made sure that the guidelines were changed but did not address the issue of payment for the OP. In my opinion, he should come back in the forum and tell us that he will pay the OP and admit that NWLP was in the wrong. I will never, ever shop for this company. The situation stinks like rotten fish.

@clinen11 wrote:

And now they have updated the guidelines, so they clearly realize there was an error, gray area, and misinformation out there... -_-

I've always though Doug was fair and a stand-up guy. Now that NWLPC has updated the guidelines, I hope he comes back to further explain his earlier posts and acknowledges that the guideslines were wrong and they are now fixed so that it makes it clear to the next shopper what day the shop should be completed. And I hope the OP gets paid, because it sounds like NWLPC's guideliines were a problem to being able to complete the shop correctly.

JASFLALMT, we cross-posted. It's clear we have the same idea. By posting a response to the OP, who did not identify the company Doug identified his company. By now he has clearly realized that his instructions were wrong and he has fixed them. I am hoping he has contacted the OP even though he has not posted anything here. Having watched Doug Rector post over the past years, I have always believed he was fair and honest with shoppers. I hope the OP comes back to tell us that this was resolved, even if Doug does not come back and tell us anything.

You know, I had read in the forum from other posts that NWLC was a good company. I will go back and edit my previous posts in this thread if Doug pays the OP, even if he doesn't post in the forum to let us know that he paid the OP--though he should swallow his pride and take care of his dedicated shopper who is willing to overlook the MSC's error to stay in good standing. Donna, let us know how things turn out, please.

*edited by poster to remove comments*



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2016 06:20PM by Shop-et-al.