@dcrector wrote:

I have posted this once, but it bears repeating, although there are some who disagree but for Washington state, California and Oregon you can look up what you can not do if you are not a licensed PI.
Even if you do one of these shops, if the store takes action with an employee for not following procedures and it ends up in court (or an unemployment hearing) will you be compensated for your time? I would have an agreement before hand on an agreed upon rate for your time. Too many liabilities.

I disagreed with you, and sourced the pertinent details.

Certainly if you are right the facts will support itself and I am asking you to do so. I need to understand and I spent about an hour of time looking and nothing I found confirmed that. I gave you my work and linked what I read and the associated california supreme court cases so you can review it because what you were saying did not match up with my research. That's why I posted it.

I think its more important to make sure proper and valid information gets out and really do not care at all about who ends up being correct. Seriously, and I mean this. I don't care about proving you wrong, and I don't care that you disagree. I disagree for actual reasons that appear to be valid and this would require a change in what I do and am asking you to explain why. I don't want anyone doing assignments to face trouble because I dropped the ball and I sure as heck wouldn't' want shoppers to risk themselves.

I know for the shoppers who do assignments for any of the $250 piracy gigs ARE reimbursed for time and travel if it were go to court. No one has had this happen in the three years I have been involved and Taylor and Associates told me he has only had one person have it happen to to.

It's lottery odds, but it's there. When it happens, you've successfully found a stupid business owner

Good luck with that one manager who did not get the memo.....or the no manager in right now and a staff calls the police.... You go right ahead ....

@roxy1 wrote:

I worked for a retailer who was subject to these shops. Its NOT illegal, stop the misinformation about being arrested. And as long as you have the LOA, no store manager is calling the police because they are all well aware that these shops are being conducted.

jrossetti
Charges were never pressed against me
I sued the end client and the MSC about what happened to me.

The end client tried to have the case dismissed by arguing they did not hire me. Blamed the MSC.
The judge did not agree and we made a hefty settlement.

With the MSC they pointed to an arbitration clause in the IC agreement and had their portion remanded into arbitration.
They used a defense "we are only the middle man, we did not create the project"

The arbitrator made it clear he did not agree and told them they had responsibility to make sure the project was properly vetted and failsafe is in place before putting an IC in that position..

A hefty settlement was made there also.

On another note

Walesman had just posted in another thread that an MSC was not aware about proper releases in two party states.
There are still some lazy MSC out there not doing there homework.

This was not the hide the item in the purse scenario and it was not the PPV gig.

I have an unrelated but relevant note. I was shopping personally at my neighborhood grocer late one night. I know people there and they know me as a regular. This particular night for some reason all usual staff weren't there. It happened that I took a seat on the blood pressure machine and took an antacid that I had with me. I got up, continued along and reached the very unfamiliar cashier. She rang me up and hit the total. I gave my payment. Then I heard a voice. "And you can pay for that thing that you have in your pocket too!" I actually didn't hear all the words. "Excuse me?" "Don't 'Excuse me'! You know what you have!!" I said "I didn't hear exactly what you said, would you please repeat it?" "I said, 'You can pay for that thing you have in your pocket!'" "I don't have anything in my pocket." "You took a medicine! You have a medicine in your pocket!" I reached into my pocket where I had one remaining loose antacid tablet and pulled it out. "I have an antacid in my pocket." He gasped and recoiled and apologized saying someone told him I had taken a medicine. I was stunned. Where is everybody? The cashier was claiming to be the superior. It could have been a much worse scenario.

The point is that we can't control who will be in the crucial place when we are doing something. But in this case they were planning and carrying out a supposed entrapment to see if I would present an item to them that they believed I was hiding on my person. I never saw that security guard again but the cashier is nothing like anyone's superior and she works like the others. Why She was the one in charge, I don't know.

@jackaroe wrote:

jrossetti
Charges were never pressed against me
I sued the end client and the MSC about what happened to me.

The end client tried to have the case dismissed by arguing they did not hire me. Blamed the MSC.
The judge did not agree and we made a hefty settlement.

With the MSC they pointed to an arbitration clause in the IC agreement and had their portion remanded into arbitration.
They used a defense "we are only the middle man, we did not create the project"

The arbitrator made it clear he did not agree and told them they had responsibility to make sure the project was properly vetted and failsafe is in place before putting an IC in that position..

A hefty settlement was made there also.

On another note

Walesman had just posted in another thread that an MSC was not aware about proper releases in two party states.
There are still some lazy MSC out there not doing there homework.

This was not the hide the item in the purse scenario and it was not the PPV gig.

Haha, nice! It IS their job. Walesmaven's situation occurred to me with a slight variation. I was requested to do an audio recording in Illinois to be used to transfer the details to a written report. Didn't know better at the time and I was told by tons of people. That's when I spent a lot of time verifying things like that. Ultimately ignorance is no defense of the law and we're the ones on the hook as the shopper.

I'm glad things worked out for you on that one. Overall was it worth the time you had to invest in handling it? I don't cadre if there's nonsense like that if I'm well paid for it haha.

The settlements with each were six figures.
The initial shop was $50

I see the shop is still being offered and now on its 4th MSC since I did it.
The shop fee is now $200 with some structural changes

`

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2015 05:23AM by MelanieOR.

@jackaroe wrote:

The settlements with each were six figures.
The initial shop was $50

I see the shop is still being offered and now on its 4th MSC since I did it.
The shop fee is now $200 with some structural changes

@#$%& yeah that sounds like it was worth it.

I see a few companies taking over casino jobs and now there are no gaming reimbursements. Some even go so far as to ban you from spending your OWN money (Citing a bullshit reason I might add). Most of these in my area are now the way of the ikea report from hell if only for no other reason there is absolutely chance of anything worthwhile. None.

A new shopper will be like YAY casino....then get sucked in. One and done. Since it sounds like a cool job that everyone talks about doing...they will line up like ants on the ground after a backyard bbq, mindless and driving on, unsuspecting until the job crushes them with it's size 12 boot....sigh. If only I had saw there was no gaming reimbursement first.

Sorry, feeling a little salty about a job from tonight. Can you guess what it is?

I must confess, this thread more piqued my interest than dissuaded me. I think that it had something to do with the anticipated adrenaline rush during the moment of truth at the register. I finally found myself in an area today with one of these left, and I did it. I had the LOA, but I also told a trusted individual where I'd be and how to access some funds in case I needed someone to come bail me out.
Didn't need either.
The shop was a breeze. Plus, I had two moments of truth, so it was double the rush.
I had squirreled away the smaller item in an outside pouch that didn't close. Should have been extremely easy to find or even just feel. However, when I took the item(s) to the register, the associate said that he'd get me a brand new one from the back instead of one that had been on the shelf. I said that it wasn't necessary, but he insisted, and away into the back went my item(s), and out came a pristine item. Before he rang me out, I said I'd actually like to see if it matched any of the accessories as well, so off I went to place the same item in the same pouch with the new bag.
I could see the outline of the object, but the poor associate didn't find it. He emptied the inside pockets of all packing paper and security tags, but never touched the only outside pocket the darn thing had.
Oh well, I reported it like it happened.
The return went without a hitch. No questions, and only a "don't worry about it" when I also said that I accidentally left one of the accessories in it (BTW, the accessory was $129!)
I'll be doing these again.
And I'll be pondering the reaction of the customer who gets the bag from the back with the $129 surprise inside.
(Hopefully someone will read my report before that happens.)

I do the large item under the cart grocery stores quite often and it has never been an issue. I simply say I forgot it was there, as stated in the guidelines, and then I pay for the item. The cashiers don't even blink. I would never do the $40 integrity shop, however, because it is 200 miles away in a town I have already been arrested in (non-mystery shopping related).

I looked up California. Here is the link: [www.leginfo.ca.gov]. Look at 7521.

When Grey (or Gray) Davis was governor he did pass a bill that basically says "mystery shopping" does not apply.

Doing these piracy shops does fall under integrity.

@dcrector wrote:

I looked up California. Here is the link: [www.leginfo.ca.gov]. Look at 7521.

When Grey (or Gray) Davis was governor he did pass a bill that basically says "mystery shopping" does not apply.

Doing these piracy shops does fall under integrity.

Please point to the exact language, as "basically says" isn't actually saying.

@scanman1 wrote:

@SunnyDays2 wrote:

@reneelec wrote:

I have not but I have done carwashes where I had to leave cash in the console.

Hopefully pennies Or, if you had to leave quarters, I hope they reimbursed you if the employee got sticky fingers

I know a car wash owner, and there are days that the vacuum coin trap can almost make more money than the tip jar.
If the money is inside a cup holder or obviously in plain sight, they are NOT to vacuum it up.

If the coins are on the rug on the floor or inside the seat crack, then they will do a VERY thorough job and will even attach the small nozzle wand and clean the crack in the seats. If the guy doing the vacuuming is sucking coins as the car has not been done in a long time, he will hear the coins being sucked up and the "drying people" will do an extra good job on the outside and slow down so he can hit all the nooks and crannies.

This is standard practice. The coin trap is a serious money maker and some car washes actually take a cut of it before they let the employees split it as the tip box.

I wonder how much $$ they pull a day from sucking coins from under your seat

More than once I have really forgotten that I had something under my cart and left the store with it. I just go back in the store and tell the cashier and they ring it up. I'm sure it happens all of the time.

@dcrector wrote:

I looked up California. Here is the link: [www.leginfo.ca.gov]. Look at 7521.

When Grey (or Gray) Davis was governor he did pass a bill that basically says "mystery shopping" does not apply.

Doing these piracy shops does fall under integrity.

The court case that was ruled on said observations were a task that didn't require a pi
License or special training because working a camera or recording what you see requires no special skill set. So I guess observations. People are literally reporting on what was seen.

Depends on the court. If a shopper is sent to a bar, or any establishment, with the intent on seeing if an employee is stealing, then that is where the problem lays. If a shopper is sent in to monitor customer service and happens to see funds being manipulated then it is just an observation. You have to be very careful in the wording of the instructions and questions. I know of one case, and I don't have the time to look it up, where there was an unemployment hearing in Washington where the employee was fired because he took money for a drink and put it in his tip jar. The "shopper" was subpoenaed to testify and when challenged if he was a PI he had to say no. The ex-employee won.

The problem with vague legal references is that they can cause confusion. Beyond the paragraph 2571, if one takes the time to read, is a specific exemption of those engaged in work such as ours. Find it and see if you agree.

You make a good point about this particular type of shop. It is fraught with uncertainties. However if you are authorized by the company to perform the task described, then it is not theft. However it could be perceived as theft particularly if you are on video putting the item in. So between the discovery and clarification up the food chain, there is the possibility that you will not be believed. It would be a time consuming and emotionally charged process. I would be curious how the investigating police officer would handle this. My first guess is that if the store management wanted to press charges, then one may be arrested until the matter is cleared up.