Shopper didn't get out of truck to tour space OR Editor did not carefully read report!

As I logged in to read guidelines for a shop I am doing later today, I noticed in the notes from a shop I did last month for the same MSP with the following comment: “Shop being excluded without pay. Shopper didn't get out of truck to tour cube per guidelines.”

I was not contacted for clarification or to notify me that the shop was excluded. It was pouring rain, the associate that took me to look at storage units asked me to wait in the truck while he unlocked the two units I was going to tour. Can someone please tell me where that says, that I did not get out of truck to tour the unit?

I left a VM with the MSP this morning regarding this matter and will email scheduler after I calm down. Is there anything else can I do? I am doing two shops for the company today, both a distance away, after reading the comment, I do not want to do them, but will, the pay is good and the $20 bonus each is better!

MSPA Gold Certified
Undercover Essentials Video Specialist


Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/10/2016 02:46PM by beadzoo.

Create an Account or Log In

Membership is free. Simply choose your username, type in your email address, and choose a password. You immediately get full access to the forum.

Already a member? Log In.

@cindy55 wrote:

Non sequitur?

Hey! I always enjoy learning the meanings of words or phrases that I have not been familiar with before...you drove me to the dictionary. Now, not only do I understand what "non sequitur" means, I TOTALLY AGREE with you!!
Isn't that a cartoon?

@guysmom wrote:

@cindy55 wrote:

Non sequitur?

Hey! I always enjoy learning the meanings of words or phrases that I have not been familiar with before...you drove me to the dictionary. Now, not only do I understand what "non sequitur" means, I TOTALLY AGREE with you!!

Kim
beadzoo, thank you for the edit. The one liner you left this morning had me puzzled.
I'm assuming that somewhere in your report, you did explicitly say that you physically toured the units? So it seems yet another case of an editor not thoroughly reading a report. It wasn't very professional of the editor or someone else at the company to not contact you and ask for clarification and/or not to notify you that your shop was rejected.

Good luck; I hope you can direct them to the section(s) of your report that indicate you did tour those units! I don't understand, either, how your statement would indicate that you didn't. "Waiting in the truck while units were unlocked" doesn't equal "Didn't get out of truck once units were unlocked."

I learn something new every day, but not everyday!
I've learned to never trust spell-check or my phone's auto-fill feature.
@beadzoo wrote:

As I logged in to read guidelines for a shop I am doing later today, I noticed in the notes from a shop I did last month for the same MSP with the following comment: “Shop being excluded without pay. Shopper didn't get out of truck to tour cube per guidelines.”

I was not contacted for clarification or to notify me that the shop was excluded. It was pouring rain, the associate that took me to look at storage units asked me to wait in the truck while he unlocked the two units I was going to tour. Can someone please tell me where that says, that I did not get out of truck to tour the unit?

I left a VM with the MSP this morning regarding this matter and will email scheduler after I calm down. Is there anything else can I do? I am doing two shops for the company today, both a distance away, after reading the comment, I do not want to do them, but will, the pay is good and the $20 bonus each is better!
I'm not sure what was edited out of the original post so maybe I missed something. I am quite familiar with this shop and this MSC. Some clarification would be helpful.

1) Did the employee take you to "tour" interior or exterior units?

2) After the employee asked you to wait in the truck while he unlocked the two units, did you "tour" the two units from the inside of the truck or did you eventually get out of the truck and physically walk into the units?

3) How did you explain this situation in your report? I think you left out some details. If you worded it the way you did in your original post, it does give the impression that you never actually got out of the truck. You have to remember that editors are not mind-readers.

4) Rain should not be an issue. There are these cool inventions called umbrellas or rain coats. I have been offered a company umbrella while visiting these businesses on rainy days.
even if it was unclear by the wording, the appropriate thing for the editor to do was to ask the shopper to clarify...I would assume elsewhere in the report it describes the tour.

BUT, the OP did say "WAS GOING TO TOUR" that give me the impression the OP did get out of the truck and take the tour

The employee was showing good customer service by having the shopper wait in the car until the cube was open...and then get out of the truck with the umbrella

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/12/2016 05:24PM by jmitw.
@beadzoo wrote:

“Shop being excluded without pay. Shopper didn't get out of truck to tour cube per guidelines.”

I was not contacted for clarification or to notify me that the shop was excluded. It was pouring rain, the associate that took me to look at storage units asked me to wait in the truck while he unlocked the two units I was going to tour. Can someone please tell me where that says, that I did not get out of truck to tour the unit?

Can you tell us where it says you DID get out of the truck to tour the unit?

I agree with Birdy and Sybil. I think your narrative is very unclear. Getting out and touring the unit was a requirement but you do not say that you actually did it, only that the associate asked you to wait in the truck while he unlocked it. You were very clear about being asked to wait while he unlocked the unit, but you do not then say anything further. A lot of things might have happened after he went to unlock. Maybe his key didn't fit. Maybe he decided the rain was picking up and it was raining too hard, so he told you never mind, to stay in the truck. Maybe the unit was flooding because of the rain and he declined to show it to you after unlocking the door. Or maybe you got out of the truck and toured the unit. Did you make additional comments that you did not quote here that make it plain that you got out of the truck and went into the unit?

I also am surprised the editor did not contact you for clarification, but it does pretty much sound to the reader like you didn't tour the unit.
I am not familiar with this shop personally, but I do know that in the past I have done shops for MSCs who did not allow for extensive narrative (or any) and had a limited amount of allowed characters per field. OP, could you provide the forum readers with some sort of clarification on this?
@jmitw wrote:

BUT, the OP did say "WAS GOING TO TOUR" that give me the impression the OP did get out of the truck and take the tour
"WAS GOING TO TOUR" and actually taking the tour are two totally different things. I WAS GOING TO take the day off of MS'ing work on Wednesday. IN REALITY, I performed 8 shops after I got out of my FT job. The first scenario gives me a night off of writing reports and catching up on NetFlix. The second scenario gave me a late night of writing reports and a triple digit income for the day. See, two totally different things!
Actually, the phrase "was going to tour" reads to me, like he did not tour. He was going to, but he didn't. He intended to do it, but it just didn't happen. When I do something, I don't say "I was going to go to the store" to mean I went to the store. I say "After I locked my bike, I went in to the store." Or "I went to the store." If I say "I was going to go to the store," it means I didn't end up doing it, i.e., "I was going to go to the store, but it was raining too hard." "I was going to go to the store, but I changed my mind."
Lol at everyone trying to decode the meaning. OP's wording may not even be the same wording they used in the report; it doesn't seem to be a direct quote. Either the editor screwed up for not getting clarification/ bothering to fully read the report, or OP didn't write a very detailed report to begin with.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/13/2016 12:31AM by jdickersonshops.
@roflwofl wrote:


Can you tell us where it says you DID get out of the truck to tour the unit?

I agree with Birdy and Sybil. I think your narrative is very unclear.

Actually, I didn't say that I thought his/her narrative was unclear. We don't really have a direct or verbatim quote, it would appear, from the report. But it seems pretty clear that the units were indeed toured: "...the associate that took me to look at storage units asked me to wait in the truck while he unlocked the two units I was going to tour." The logical next step would be that he/she toured the units once they were unlocked.

My point was that I hoped the OP would be able to direct the editor to the portion(s) of the report that indicated the units were physically toured. It could be that wasn't explicitly stated in the narrative, but what the OP said, even if written in the report that way, doesn't mean that they weren't toured. I don't know how an editor could draw that inference!

In any event, the OP should have been contacted for clarification, not have the report simply rejected.

I learn something new every day, but not everyday!
I've learned to never trust spell-check or my phone's auto-fill feature.


Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/13/2016 05:09PM by BirdyC.
@BirdyC wrote:

Actually, I didn't say that I thought his/her narrative was unclear. We don't really have a direct or verbatim quote, it would appear, from the report. But it seems pretty clear that the units were indeed toured: "...the associate that took me to look at storage units asked me to wait in the truck while he unlocked the two units I was going to tour." The logical next step would be that he/she toured the units once they were unlocked.
If you have been MS'ing for any period of time, you should know that there are no logical "next steps" when it comes to MS'ing. That is why we need to be on our toes at all times.

@BirdyC wrote:

My point was that I hoped the OP would be able to direct the editor to the portion(s) of the report that indicated the units were physically toured. It could be that wasn't explicitly stated in the narrative, but what the OP said, even if written in the report than way, doesn't mean that they weren't toured. I don't know how an editor could draw that inference!
Look at the many interpretations from various forum members in just this thread alone. That is why our posts and our reports need to include all the details so no assumptions can be made.
You can't compare a post to a report. By reading the report came back because he/she didn't take a tour then he/she explained how the site manager asked them to wait while unlocking the unit they were going to tour the next logical step is they completed the tour but either failed to convey it clearly to the MSC or explained it and the editor glossed over the details. I think anyone who has completed more than just a few shops has at one time or another had an editor miss details outlined in their reports.

Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It's not pie.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
Have you seen some of the reports submitted by so-called shoppers? It is pretty scary.
I'm not doubting they are piss poor. Just the original post doesn't necessarily compare to the actual report.

Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It's not pie.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
@Sybil2 wrote:

That is why our posts and our reports need to include all the details so no assumptions can be made.

But there is nothing in that post that indicates the shopper didn't include all the details in the report. He/she may not have, but we can't infer that. It sounds as if the OP is experienced enough to know how to properly write a report. And, yes, I understand that many reports are poorly written, not detailed enough, not responsive to the questions, etc. But there's no reason to make that assumption in this case.

I learn something new every day, but not everyday!
I've learned to never trust spell-check or my phone's auto-fill feature.
@Sybil2 wrote:

@jmitw wrote:

BUT, the OP did say "WAS GOING TO TOUR" that give me the impression the OP did get out of the truck and take the tour
"WAS GOING TO TOUR" and actually taking the tour are two totally different things. I WAS GOING TO take the day off of MS'ing work on Wednesday. IN REALITY, I performed 8 shops after I got out of my FT job. The first scenario gives me a night off of writing reports and catching up on NetFlix. The second scenario gave me a late night of writing reports and a triple digit income for the day. See, two totally different things!

ANYONE WITH ANY LOGIC OR COMMON SENSE WOULD THINK THAT IT WAS IN FACT LIKELY THAT THE PERSON DID TOUR...and at least clarify rather than ASSume they did not get out once the cubes were open.
@roflwofl wrote:

Actually, the phrase "was going to tour" reads to me, like he did not tour. He was going to, but he didn't. He intended to do it, but it just didn't happen. When I do something, I don't say "I was going to go to the store" to mean I went to the store. I say "After I locked my bike, I went in to the store." Or "I went to the store." If I say "I was going to go to the store," it means I didn't end up doing it, i.e., "I was going to go to the store, but it was raining too hard." "I was going to go to the store, but I changed my mind."

But you have to look at the wording of the entire sentence and the context: "It was pouring rain, the associate that took me to look at storage units asked me to wait in the truck while he unlocked the two units I was going to tour."

What else would the OP say? He was going to tour them once they were unlocked, so that was, at that moment, a future event. A present or past tense wouldn't be accurate within the context. About the only other wording that would work would have been "...two units I was to tour." Not much of a difference, and the same meaning. He couldn't say "was touring" or "toured."

And, again, we don't know if this wording is exactly what was in the report. I think some are assuming it was, but we don't know. I do wish the OP would come back to this thread and let us know if this has been resolved, though! I think the editor was probably at fault, though. There have been a lot of comments on this forum about some editors seeming to feel that they need to justify their existences! winking smiley

I learn something new every day, but not everyday!
I've learned to never trust spell-check or my phone's auto-fill feature.
I assume since the OP was up in arms over being told his/her report was being denied for not getting out of the truck, that he/she indeed got out of the truck. Otherwise, there would be no point to the post.

However, there is no point in assuming or speculating, since only the OP, the truck driver, and God know if the OP did, indeed, get out of the truck. Neither the truck driver nor God are available for questioning, and it appears as though the OP has vanished into the wind. tongue sticking out smiley
@chigirl777 wrote:

However, there is no point in assuming or speculating, since only the OP, the truck driver, and God know if the OP did, indeed, get out of the truck. Neither the truck driver nor God are available for questioning, and it appears as though the OP has vanished into the wind. tongue sticking out smiley
The Mystery Shopping Gods were watching. It would be real easy for the editor/MSC to have the client check the video cameras. Maybe that is what happened and the reason for the Disappearing OP.
@jmitw wrote:

ANYONE WITH ANY LOGIC OR COMMON SENSE WOULD THINK THAT IT WAS IN FACT LIKELY THAT THE PERSON DID TOUR...and at least clarify rather than ASSume they did not get out once the cubes were open.
First of all, why are you yelling? Soooo rude!

Second, if you have been MS'ing for any amount of time, you should know that logic and common sense do not always go hand-in-hand with MS'ing.
I like these too and did A LOT of them this year alone. In the freezing cold and snow, I am usually told to stay in the cart till the space is open. I can see perfectly clear from the cart how the space looks. I don't think you literally NEED to go inside it.. BUT, I will say, yes, I do walk into them to look like a real person would if trying to figure out if the size is correct.
The scheduler is working on getting me paid for my work. I got out of the truck, the associate and I discussed the size of my sofa in the unit. I was able to provide the MSC with a PDF copy of the original report.

I visited the other two locations as planned. The original location was an outdoor facility. The two I visited last week were indoor, climate controlled facilities.

What upset me most is that was, I was not contacted for clarification. I asked the scheduler to verify thru video that I got out of the vehicle. It was raining hard enough and stepped in enough puddles that I was able to wring out the bottom of my dress when I got back to my car, it was an ankle length dress and had stopped raining when I left.

With my original post, "fat fingers" bumped to submit after writing the heading.

MSPA Gold Certified
Undercover Essentials Video Specialist


Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/17/2016 10:52PM by beadzoo.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login