Speaking of lazy, I still contend that, sometimes, when editors have not kept up with the volume of reports, and get behind in their own work, rather than working to get the job done, they will do one of two things.
1) They may send a canned email requesting further information, without even looking at the report. The information may often, indeed, be addressed in the report. This buys them time, and they get to blame the shopper.
2) If there is not a procedure for 1) above, they may reject the shop, which is also faster and easier, and apply any number of reasons up the line. This eliminates the need for further, professional communication, and clears their work load, also blaming the shopper.
Not all requests for info are because of this, and not all rejections are because of this. But lately, in my experience, and because of the quality of correspondence I have received (or not), I believe this to be true. I know others may not, and that's fine. This is my opinion.
I also have reason to believe that editors or support staff sometimes accidentally delete photos, or edit and accidentally save over quality photos, so that, in reality, they don't have the quality photos, even though they were sent to them.
I keep track of those companies that utilize such editors, and rarely, if ever, shop for them again.