I had a McD in the spring where the wait in line was 6 minutes, not that it bothered me. I received an email from them asking if I might have been distracted by "my personal digital assistant" and asking me what I was wearing that day. I replied, telling them what I was wearing and I also told them I have never had a "personal digital assistant". I knew it was going to be bad news.
The McD's stopped appearing on my list of available shops. I emailed twice and they would not tell me why. Then MarketForce posts that they need Canadians to do them. I emailed them saying I'd be happy to, all they need to do is unban me. They did!
So it might be worth a shot if that has happened to you.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/2012 10:18PM by mistry.

Thanks

Glad to hear they give people second chances.

I got deactivated for not signing in for awhile. (Had health issues, then a baby, so not a priority.) I contacted them and they sent me an email with information to fill out and said they'd reinstate me after I updated my information. I really should send that email back some time. LOL I just get so darn busy with life and everything else that I keep forgetting...until times like now when I'm not in the mood to bother. One day, one day.

Mistry, you may want to edit your post and remove the client's name.

mistry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I had a McD in the spring where the wait in line
> was 6 minutes, not that it bothered me. I
> received an email from them asking if I might have
> been distracted by "my personal digital assistant"
> and asking me what I was wearing that day. I
> replied, telling them what I was wearing and I
> also told them I have never had a "personal
> digital assistant". I knew it was going to be bad
> news.
> The McD's stopped appearing on my list of
> available shops. I emailed twice and they would
> not tell me why. Then MarketForce posts that they
> need Canadians to do them. I emailed them saying
> I'd be happy to, all they need to do is unban me.
> They did!
> So it might be worth a shot if that has happened
> to you.

I might try that. I haven't see 2 fast food company assignments show up for me for 6 months too. Last time, I emailed them, they said, were trying to product my identity.

mistry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I had a McD in the spring where the wait in line
> was 6 minutes, not that it bothered me. I
> received an email from them asking if I might have
> been distracted by "my personal digital assistant"
> and asking me what I was wearing that day. I
> replied, telling them what I was wearing and I
> also told them I have never had a "personal
> digital assistant". I knew it was going to be bad
> news.
> The McD's stopped appearing on my list of
> available shops. I emailed twice and they would
> not tell me why. Then MarketForce posts that they
> need Canadians to do them. I emailed them saying
> I'd be happy to, all they need to do is unban me.
> They did!
> So it might be worth a shot if that has happened
> to you.

this is all likely due to shopper availability or the lack thereof. if they had other shoppers available, they would not have unbanned you. but since they didn't have other shoppers available, therefore they unbanned you. this is regardless of whether the company felt that you were actually guilty or not in the first place. they may not have been convinced that you were guilty in the first place, but the client's perception may have been that you were guilty.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/31/2012 08:02PM by vince.

@mistry: I am AMAZED you remember what you wore on that day. I once had to tell them what I was driving for the DT portion, so they can track it on camera - but that never changes. LOL! I would be in big trouble if they ask what I wear on any day except the current one.

Marketforce banned me, but sent this email just yesterday and I cannot log in - it says I'm not a registered shopper.

As a registered mystery shopper with Market Force, you have been selected to participate in one of our important research studies and we hope you can take a few minutes today to give us your input.

Thank you for your time. Please click on the link below to take the survey.

vince Wrote:
>
> this is all likely due to shopper availability or
> the lack thereof. if they had other shoppers
> available, they would not have unbanned you. but
> since they didn't have other shoppers available,
> therefore they unbanned you. this is regardless
> of whether the company felt that you were actually
> guilty or not in the first place. they may not
> have been convinced that you were guilty in the
> first place, but the client's perception may have
> been that you were guilty.


Guilty? Guilty of telling the truth, yes. They did not like the fact that the wait time in line was 6 minutes and I was not going to blame an imaginary "digital assistant".

cubbiecat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @mistry: I am AMAZED you remember what you wore on
> that day. I once had to tell them what I was
> driving for the DT portion, so they can track it
> on camera - but that never changes. LOL! I would
> be in big trouble if they ask what I wear on any
> day except the current one.


It was the same day or a day or two later, so not hard to remember. I also don't have a lot of clothes.

any007 Wrote:
----------------------
> I might try that. I haven't see 2 fast food
> company assignments show up for me for 6 months
> too. Last time, I emailed them, they said, were
> trying to product my identity.


Protect your identity? I wonder what they mean by that?
Is the other fast food "Chalet Suisse"? I don't see that one either, wonder if they stopped shopping it.

mistry, you do know that most ICAs prohibit us from identifying the MSC and its client(s) in the same post/thread, right?

mistry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Guilty? Guilty of telling the truth, yes. They
> did not like the fact that the wait time in line
> was 6 minutes and I was not going to blame an
> imaginary "digital assistant".

the client likely looked at the video to verify the time, perhaps mistaking another customer for you. then the client likely called the MSC, telling the MSC not to assign you to future shops. since the MSC didn't contest the issue, you were then banned without a trial to please the client for the remainder of the annual contract. then, when the MSC experienced a shortage of shoppers in your area, you were unbanned so that the MSC could meet it's quota.

vince Wrote:
>
> the client likely looked at the video to verify
> the time, perhaps mistaking another customer for
> you. then the client likely called the MSC,
> telling the MSC not to assign you to future shops.
> since the MSC didn't contest the issue, you were
> then banned without a trial to please the client
> for the remainder of the annual contract. then,
> when the MSC experienced a shortage of shoppers in
> your area, you were unbanned so that the MSC could
> meet it's quota.


That's quite the imagination you've got, Vince. I think you'd be better off posting facts rather than what you imagine
And obviously I was re-instated because they needed McD shoppers in Canada. I made that clear in my first post.

mistry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> That's quite the imagination you've got, Vince. I
> think you'd be better off posting facts rather
> than what you imagine
> And obviously I was re-instated because they
> needed xxxx shoppers in Canada. I made that clear
> in my first post.

my, you're getting a bit defensive, if not snippy. this is not a debate forum. you don't make the rules here, especially as a new poster. you may wish to try being a bit more friendly if you wish to last long here. i hope that you've not been hardened by some of the other debate forums. we prefer to maintain a polite climate. you're professed reinstatement is well in alignment with my comments. any contradiction between my statement and yours only exists within your own imagination.

our goals here are to constructively learn from each other. it is preferred that you do not bring a spirit of contention from other forums into this one. if you do wish to debate with me, we can do it elsewhere. i am exceptionally skilled in that realm as well on virtually any topic conceivable, but we don't do that here. these forums moreso function as a learning place. the moderators have already established guidelines for the posters so that you don't have to.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2012 05:48PM by vince.

Mistry, I don't see anything offensive with what Vince posted. It's likely true -- the client (Who should NOT be named in this thread) mistook another customer for you, and you were not allowed to defend yourself before being banned. If anything, his post was sympathetic in tone. Many others have been there.

Please remove the chip.

Additionally, shoppers have pointed out three times in this thread so far that clients should not be named in this thread (since the MSC is named). Let's see if mistry listens to that and does what is right.

I also see nothing offensive in what vince posted. I do want to add my name to the list of posters who have requested that mistry remove the client name from the post. Naming a MSC's client violates the confidentiality agreement and the posting guidelines of our forum. Mistry, as several posters have requested, please edit your post and remove the client name ASAP.

mistry -

you have used the client's name with the MSC name in the same thread. please remove the client's name as per forum guidelines. a client's name and an MSC's name may not be used in the same thread. it is a contract confidentiality violation, and therefore also violates forum guidelines. three other posters, in addition to myself, have courteously asked you to remove it. we are glad that you are unbanned, but would like you to comply with both forum guidelines and your MSC confidentiality contract. in this way we may represent ourselves as professionals. we are in this together.

vince, don't forget to edit the posts that include quotes. When you quote a previous post it doesn't change when the OP edits theirs

LisaSTL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> vince, don't forget to edit the posts that include
> quotes. When you quote a previous post it doesn't
> change when the OP edits theirs

thank you for pointing that out. i've now edited the quoted post.

@ vince...she did sorta kinda gave you a compliment that you have a good imagination. LOL! No, I don't find what you posted as out of the realm of possibility.

cubbiecat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @ vince...she did sorta kinda gave you a
> compliment that you have a good imagination. LOL!
> No, I don't find what you posted as out of the
> realm of possibility.

sarcasm at best. somehow the realm of possibility became a personal issue for mistry, placing her on the defensive.

mistry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's quite the imagination you've got, Vince. I
> think you'd be better off posting facts rather
> than what you imagine
> And obviously I was re-instated because they
> needed xxxx shoppers in Canada. I made that clear
> in my first post.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2012 10:07PM by vince.

mistry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> any007 Wrote:
> ----------------------
> > I might try that. I haven't see 2 fast food
> > company assignments show up for me for 6 months
> > too. Last time, I emailed them, they said,
> were
> > trying to product my identity.
>
>
> Protect your identity? I wonder what they mean by
> that?
> Is the other fast food "Chalet Suisse"? I don't
> see that one either, wonder if they stopped
> shopping it.

yes that's the other company. I also don't see any of the restaurants from that family of chains. I email helpdesk in April when I stopped see that family of restaurants in Feb and the email said, yes they are still shopping that chain but it was to protect my identity. I had only done that chain for 4 months and I hadn't done very many yet, so I didn't understand the response. As for the chain that has existed for over 2 years, yes I did them every month and got the same response. As far as I know, both chains are still shopped by them. Only I no longer see either of them. I'll call in and trying speaking to someone next time. They have some policies that I don't understand. They once banned me completely, but after speaking to someone in QC, they unbanned me. I told them that the guidelines said sending in copies of receipts was optional (right in the instructions) so I never bothered to. They unbanned me and quickly revised the instructions for the shops the following month.


update: I contacted them again. They told me I made too many mistakes with the fast food company shops. As for the big canadian chain, I was told they haven't been doing them since January.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/09/2012 05:57PM by any007.