Opinions needed on a strange situation

I think you should be paid the $12 fee, but not the $75. That amount was to be reimbursement--money to pay you back what you paid. You didn't pay anything, so reimbursement doesn't apply. You got your free meal. If you get your $12 fee, you are in exactly the same situation you would be in if the MSC reimbursed you money you spent out of pocket. You'd still have spent X hours on a report with a $12 profit. Where is your loss? If your "loss" is treating your friends, that's a decision you make (and I'd do the same, btw), but that decision has nothing to do with the MSC, and they shouldn't be held responsible for it. You accepted the free meal and did not either re-schedule the shop or notify the scheduler immediately on returning home, before doing the report. You made the decision to complete the report--which, too, is fine. But to then expect reimbursement for something you didn't pay is unreasonable, in my opinion. Reimbursement is not payment. Your payment is the $12. That term didn't change, unless the MSC also decides not to pay you for not strictly following the instructions. If that happens, then I'd agree that's not fair. Unless they truly couldn't and didn't use your report.

I'm assuming the shop terms were reimbursement "up to" the cost of your meal, to a maximum of $75. So you wouldn't have made any more than the $12 shop fee in any event. Frankly, I don't understand your POV. I really don't.

I'm beginning to think that people don't understand what "reimbursement" means....

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 05/27/2017 11:45AM by BirdyC.

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.

I had this happened for a hotel shop that a friend did. She had a horrible night due to some light that was coming in through the windows. Her room was right next to a sign and she said it lit up the whole room. There were no other rooms available. The next morning she advised the front desk about it and they said they could comp the room or offer her another night . The MSC said that she could not take the extra night because the client would already be paying(reimbursing her) for the previous night and they would be losing money by giving her a second night. She was then mad about the fact that she would not get the reimbursement amount. Well if you were never charged it then why would you think you should get reimbursed for something you didnt pay for. Reimbursements does not count against you for tax purposes but if you get "reimbursed" for something that you never paid money into then it is not reimbursement it is actually a fee paid to you. You should not want reimbursed if you didn't pay it out. The MSC does not get the reimb amount as in all actuality the client has already paid it out by offering to comp your meal. They pay the MSC the fee for that shop. So essentially you got paid you "reimb" earlier than expected. Just my thoughts

The way I see it----->The Op is not being totally honest.

A friend paid for the spouses meal. She "rangled" a receipt from the establishment. The receipt implied $75 was the bill total. The spouse's collegeuage paid for his own meal and theirs. So how is it that the OP had a $75 bill. No way is she out $75, or owe her "friend" $75. (She may owe the friend a meal in the future and that's on her.

) If anybody is "owed" $75, it is the friend. The OP is not owed squat. They didn't even pay a tip.

The receipt did not indicate what Guest #1(Friend) total was or Guest #2(OP) total. So if the MSC was going to reimbursed something -------->how much was the OP's actual meal? Nada, zippo, nothing.

The report was a given. She was paid for the report and the 9/10 rating. Did the MSC submit the report----->maybe, maybe not. It was their given right. They paid for it $12. The OP did post she had problems with the food quality.

If the OP wants a "reimbursed" tally, then maybe she should negotiate for another $12.

, but she did get a free meal for 2.

If I was the OP friend, an I found out later down the road, that my dear old friend received $75 back on the meal I paid for. The word would spread around the office, company, and regional district, about the 'Snake in the grass".

I know I am blind, but this is how I see it.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 05:00PM by sojo917.

@Charlesvanzant wrote:

She still got a free meal without paying for it. It's all good. Do not make a big deal or the Msc could terminate you. It's a learning experience

Her agreement with the MSC and client was they would reimburse a meal and pay $12. In the case of a comped meal, the client would obviously be paying for the meal twice, so it is understandable. In this case the MSC did not comp the meal. The agreement was not a free meal by any means and $12 payment.

As for being terminated, I don't wotk for MSCs that do not treat me prpperly, so if I was the OP that would be the least of my worries.

There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind

@staceython wrote:

I find it completely unethical of the MSC (and/or restaurant) to use this generosity as an excuse to not honor their part in the agreement. It is, of course, our intention to return the gesture to him next time he is in town, so basically our "free meal" is now a $75.00 expense that we never intended to have. Sure I will hopefully get the $12 fee for the shop, but frankly that is not enough. I began mystery shopping as a way for my husband and I to enjoy dinners out together and not break the bank. I am perfectly happy spending 2+ hours reporting on a meal where I receive $30+/hour in food and/or fees, but $6.00/hour is unacceptable and insulting.

I've re-read your posts, Stacey, to see what I might be missing, since my opinion and others like it seem to be in the minority. Here's what I find unreasonable about your stance: You claim the MSC isn't honoring its agreement. The agreement it made with you was to reimburse you $XX for your dinner, plus pay a fee. You did not have any out-of-pocket expense, so there's nothing to reimburse. How is that unethical of the MSC, and how is it not honoring their agreement with you?

You still received your $30+/hour in food, because it didn't come out of your pocket. Nor did it come out of the MSC's pocket. But that's not their fault. Nor is it yours. It just is. Again, that you wish to reciprocate the courtesy with your friends is honorable, but how is that the MSC's responsibility?

I'm trying to understand why you and others feel you should be reimbursed when there is nothing to reimburse? On top of that, you don't know that the MSC is getting "your" $75. If they didn't pay it out, either, what makes you think they received that money from the client?

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'm pretty sure the MSC the OP is writing about is Customer Impact. One of their schedulers, Barbry Booth, was this forum's 2015 Scheduler of the Year. Barbry has come to the forum in the past and posted in response to posts about Customer Impact. I would be interested in hearing what Customer Impact thinks about the situation.

It could be that the report is not usable and has been declined by the client because the shopper outed herself when she asked the client location for a receipt for a meal someone else paid for. The OP said " I was able to quickly come up with a ridiculous reason why I needed the itemized receipt...." I find it hard to believe that Customer Impact would be excitedly collecting the $75 reimbursement amount when it will not be remitted to the shopper. I'm betting either the client is withholding that amount or the client has completely declined the report. I would be surprised if the shopper is ever able to shop the client again. It would be interesting to hear from Customer Impact.

It has been 5 days since the OP posted this post. and She has only replied one since. She probably has bitten off more that she can chew in posting . Wanting something for nothing is not a good thing. Because many MSCs read this forum, the OP has probably already been outed. Maybe the $12 was worth it. Happy shopping

2Clients and 2 MSCs have been mention in this post. It would be best if neither MSC or Client respond to this post. And we, as Shoppers, make ourselves better shoppers.

There is a thread in general chat with basically the same subject line. Perhaps someone has 2 screen names?

Kim

@BirdyC wrote:

[The agreement it made with you was to reimburse you $XX for your dinner, plus pay a fee.

Exactly. The MSC has an agreement to reimburse the shopper for their dinner. There is nothing in that agreement that states the shopper has to be the person who pays for the dinner in order for it to be reimbursed.

There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind

@roflwofl wrote:

I'm pretty sure the MSC the OP is writing about is Customer Impact. One of their schedulers, Barbry Booth, was this forum's 2015 Scheduler of the Year. Barbry has come to the forum in the past and posted in response to posts about Customer Impact. I would be interested in hearing what Customer Impact thinks about the situation.

I agree. I would be VERY interested in hearing their feedback on this situation. I for one cannot fathom that they would think because someone unrelated to the business paid for the OP's meal that it excuses them for offering a full reimbursement.

There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind

Here is a simplified way of looking at it to me. One of three things will have to happen:

1. The shopper gets reimbursed for a meal someone else paid for
2. The client gets to be paid for a meal they should have had to reimburse
3. The MSC gets paid by the client for a meal they should reimburse to the shopper but don't

Since the person who paid for the meal was doing so as a nice gesture to the shopper, the only fair choice of the 3 is #1. The person was not doing this as a gesture to the client or the MSC and as such they should not be the ones benefiting from the gesture.

There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 08:20PM by bgriffin.

A reimbursement pays a person back for out-of-pocket expenses. You can't be reimbursed for money you didn't spend. It's impossible. How can the OP be reimbursed if she didn't pay anything in the first place?

Definition: reimbursement

noun
the action of repaying a person who has spent or lost money.
"reimbursement of everyday medical costs"

a sum paid to cover money that has been spent or lost.
"the family received insurance reimbursements"

Shops reimburse when a shopper spends money out of his or her pocket, which is then returned to the shopper. It's not the same as pay. I don't understand why people don't get the difference, or perhaps they don't understand what a reimbursement actually is? If it's called something else, oh, say, a "fee," then it doesn't matter who paid. The shopper is entitled to the money if the shop's done correctly.

If you work for a corporation, and you go out to lunch with a client or vendor, and you pay the bill, then you'd put in an expense report and be reimbursed. But if the other party pays the bill, you can't go back to your employer for reimbursement--because you didn't pay anything for the meal. This situation is the equivalent. If anyone thinks you could ask your employer to be reimbursed the cost of the lunch you didn't pay for, I'd like to know how you'd justify it. Ask for a copy of the receipt so you could rip off your employer?

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 05/27/2017 08:37PM by BirdyC.

If the OP's acquaintance had stopped them outside the restaurant and given them $75, telling them, we want to buy your meal tonight, then the OP went into the restaurant and spent the $75 the acquaintance had just given them, no one would be complaining. It's the same thing, it just all happened at once instead of 1 hour apart. The money spent was a gift to the OP, and as such the OP did spend the money.

Also this is absolutely NOT the same situation as the one you mentioned. In your example the parties are all involved in the same business. It makes sense that if one company picks up the whole check an employee of other company should not try to claim an expense. But, if someone gives you a Red Lobster gift card and you use that to take a client out to lunch and it's a reimbursable expense are you saying you should not submit that receipt since you were given the gift card to begin with? That's a MUCH more equitable example to the OP.

There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind

I can see bgriffin's point of view, but I absolutely disagree with the example. If someone stopped me outside a restaurant and handed me $75 and told me to buy myself something, this $75 would be taxable income and up to me how I used it. It would have no relation whatsoever to the shop I was performing. I may choose to use the money to buy myself dinner or I may just pocket it and order a drink and no meal and take the gift.
And then at some time later, I would need to add to my taxes and pay taxes on it. However, picking up my meal in the restaurant, causing me to have to make myself memorable by asking for a receipt for a meal someone else paid for makes it very much a part of the shop.

And, you know, at this point, we do not know whether the shop was accepted by the client and the MSC will be paid or not. We don't even know if the shop was sent to the client and not re-shopped immediately by another shopper.;

@roflwofl wrote:

If someone stopped me outside a restaurant and handed me $75 and told me to buy myself something, this $75 would be taxable income and up to me how I used it. It would have no relation whatsoever to the shop I was performing.

Personal gifts under $10,000 are not taxable.
Also, just as you said, the fact the friend paid for the meal ALSO had no relation whatsoever to the shop. That is central to my argument. The only relation it has to the shop is the fact that the gift was given during the shop, it is otherwise unrelated.

There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 09:36PM by bgriffin.

@roflwofl wrote:

I'm pretty sure the MSC the OP is writing about is Customer Impact. One of their schedulers, Barbry Booth, was this forum's 2015 Scheduler of the Year. Barbry has come to the forum in the past and posted in response to posts about Customer Impact. I would be interested in hearing what Customer Impact thinks about the situation.

@dprice is a project manager for them and is active here as well. It appears he logged in just yesterday around 11AM. I would be interested to know if this indeed was CI and what their comment on it is.

There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind

Reimbursement is the amount agreed to for a paid check. The meal was not comped so it should be paid. The receipt submitted represents the meal consumed and reported about. If the report was completed and graded then the shopper should be paid.

Evaluating and mailing packages since 1994. I am an undercover connoisseur of customer service, a master of disguise in the aisles, and a sworn enemy of subpar experiences. I blend in, observe, and report—because excellence should never be a mystery.

The last question is ----->Was the shop used or sent to the Client? If the shop was not submitted to the Client, then the Client / or MSC owes nothing. It is up to the Client to accept the shop in order for any body to be paid.

The Op has not been paid as of yet because she has not says she has.

If the Client accepts the shop and the OP is "guaranteed" a pay. I would only pay her half of the receipt. The OP did not pay anything but the bill was charged $75. The MSC should pay her for a meal but not the total of the bill. The OP, who is the shopper for the MSC should be satisfied with less than half of the bill. The OP can't proved what she had to eat or drink. So if the shop is accepted, pay her half and be done with it.

For all we know, the OP could have grab the receipt out of the trash can. After all, she is trying to get $75 back from a meal she did not pay for.

Long ago in Fl., my "friend" came to a high end dinner with me as my guest. He wouldn't let me pay, and put the bill on his credit card...nothing was said about who paid, and I was reimbursed. I still did the job as the OP did, the restaurant got their money, and OP should be reimbursed.

Live consciously....

If the OP and her husband put their credit card on the table in anticipation of paying the bill, and the friend walks over and says, "You guys are great. I'm paying for you meal. I'm not taking 'no' for answer. Enjoy your meal. My treat." The friend then puts a $100 bill on the table and leaves. So the credit card and $100 bill are side by side on the table. Why would the OP get reimbursed for using the credit card, but not reimbursed if she used the cash? For me, there is no sticking point here.

@bgriffin wrote:

But, if someone gives you a Red Lobster gift card and you use that to take a client out to lunch and it's a reimbursable expense are you saying you should not submit that receipt since you were given the gift card to begin with? That's a MUCH more equitable example to the OP.

I would expense and ask for reimbursement for only the amount of the meal that exceeded the value of the gift card. If the gift card was $25, and the meal cost $45 with tip, I would request reimbursement of $20. How could I be reimbursed for money that I didn't spend? That's what a reimbursement is. You can't be reimbursed for something that you didn't pay. It doesn't make sense.

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

@kimmiemae wrote:

There is a thread in general chat with basically the same subject line. Perhaps someone has 2 screen names?

YES. YES. YES

It seems like @staceython of "Opinon needed on a Strange Situation" and @Franchet of "A Strange Situation" are the same person. Some people have no integrity. If only they could be honest above all.

Moderator beware

I am with bgriffin. Op should be reimbursed for the meal. Immaterial that she did not pay for it, neither did the MSC. It was paid for by her friend who has nothing to do with the shop. Op would be basically doing the shop, somehow indebted to her friend. She consumed the meal, out of the goodness of her friend's heart but should not be expected to do the shop for free for the MSC. Reimbursement should not depend on who paid the meal. The MSC owes the OP.

I had a similar case but this was a shoe store. He insisted on paying for it and when I was reimbursed for more than 50% of the full upscale price, there was no question about the reimbursement although my friend paid with his credit card.

You may want to look at the fine print in your shopper agreement. If there is nothing there that backs up the MSCs actions and they are an MSPA member, I would suggest that you contact the MSPA. The MSPA expects their member MSCs to behave ethically and may be able to intervene on your behalf. Good luck, and please keep us posted on how this evolves. It is a very interesting case study from which all of us are learning!

@staceython wrote:

Thanks for the feedback. Here is a little more background on the shop. There actually is a $12 fee (along with the reimbursement) which was supposed to have been paid on 5/20 and I have not yet received. The service itself was fine, but the food quality was horrendous. I included this information in my report and was given a 9/10 by the editor because I used the phrases: "I found the____ to be..." and "I believe..." a couple of times. I am still learning the MS lingo as I just started in February. I was happy to see that some of you have the same opinion that I initially did. Yes, I do understand that I enjoyed a free meal and yes, it was very kind of my husband's friend to foot the bill. I find it completely unethical of the MSC (and/or restaurant) to use this generosity as an excuse to not honor their part in the agreement. It is, of course, our intention to return the gesture to him next time he is in town, so basically our "free meal" is now a $75.00 expense that we never intended to have. Sure I will hopefully get the $12 fee for the shop, but frankly that is not enough. I began mystery shopping as a way for my husband and I to enjoy dinners out together and not break the bank. I am perfectly happy spending 2+ hours reporting on a meal where I receive $30+/hour in food and/or fees, but $6.00/hour is unacceptable and insulting. Like I said before, I am new to this whole thing and didn't even think to email the msc about the situation before completing the report. I was just focused on getting it in by the deadline. It did cross my mind to not even mention what happened in the report, but I wanted to be truthful and do the right thing. I imagine it would have been revealed in the end anyway. Once the report was submitted and I saw the rating, comments and payments to be received (which included the fee but not the reimbursement) I emailed the msc about it. I received no reply. I emailed again about a week later and still no reply. Finally I called them and was told that she had talked to her supervisor and they didn't think they would be reimbursing. I very politely told her that I didn't think that was right. She told me she would ask again and get back to me. I received the email saying it was a no go on the day I was to have been paid. I am still waiting for the fee. I am assuming that the report will be sent to the restaurant, so they will benefit. I don't really know how it all works, but I am assuming that the msc will pocket the $75 reimbursement (which would be a pretty sweet deal for them) or the restaurant gets to have a free report (which makes the msc look fabulous). In any case, this msc is not advocating for me as a shopper and has basically "stolen" the generosity of a stranger at what will eventually be my expense.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 11:55PM by MSF.

I am a relatively new shopper. Having just 'fallen off the turnip truck' I will admit to being amazed at anyone thinking the OP is entitled to the UP TO $75 listed as the reimbursement. For time put into the report, the OP certainly should be paid the $12 fee. If a shop does not allow gift cards or coupons or promotions, it pretty much spells out that the SHOPPER needs to pay for the meai in order to get the reimbursement.. the RETURN of what THEY paid out of pocket. Not money in their pocket that SOMEONE else paid (hence gift card.. ). I'm also hit hard by the OP 'wrangling' for a receipt- not only because it was to be submitted to recoup monies not spent by the OP, but because such a tactic could easily have outed the OP as a shopper and therefore jeopardized the agreement between the MSC and the restaurant, their client. The friend who covered the cost of the OP's meal was generous and should be sent a thank you card. The OP should submit for the $12 shop fee- any maybe rethink their understanding of reimbursement. NO ONE should be going into a restaurant shop with a high end reimbursement fee thinking they are coming out the other side with any money (beyond a shop fee, which many restaurant shops don't even offer) they personally did not spend landing in their bank account. Are you shopping to be of service to others dining at the restaurant by providing the thorough and objective report? Or are you shopping to simply put money in your pocket? True, you can do both, but if it's more about the dollar signs than the ability to be a good shopper, maybe mystery shopping isn't for you. Lastly.. $6 an hour for reporting? You got a whole lot more than that.. you got a meal that a lot of people probably would never spend that much money for if there was no chance of reimbursement, and you did not pay a CENT for it. If the food wasn't great, that's a shame.. but in all honesty your report should be helping to ensure that no other person (who isn't getting a reimbursement) has the same experience.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 11:58PM by Joscelin.

@BirdyC wrote:

I would expense and ask for reimbursement for only the amount of the meal that exceeded the value of the gift card. If the gift card was $25, and the meal cost $45 with tip, I would request reimbursement of $20. How could I be reimbursed for money that I didn't spend? That's what a reimbursement is. You can't be reimbursed for something that you didn't pay. It doesn't make sense.

No offense but I think that is one of the absolute craziest things I've ever heard in my entire life.

There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind

It looks like the OP put in at least three hours worth of work including the restaurant observation and the report writing. The OP submitted the three hours worth of work to the MSC. It's the MSC's obligation to compensate the shopper for the three hours of work. That compensation was to be the equivalent of about $87. The OP should get to appreciate the value of the gift she received from the friend, not have it be used as the compensation for the three hours she spent evaluating the restaurant.

@Joscelin wrote:

I am a relatively new shopper. Having just 'fallen off the turnip truck' I will admit to being amazed at anyone thinking the OP is entitled to the UP TO $75 listed as the reimbursement. For time put into the report, the OP certainly should be paid the $12 fee. If a shop does not allow gift cards or coupons or promotions, it pretty much spells out that the SHOPPER needs to pay for the meai in order to get the reimbursement.. the RETURN of what THEY paid out of pocket. Not money in their pocket that SOMEONE else paid (hence gift card.. ). I'm also hit hard by the OP 'wrangling' for a receipt- not only because it was to be submitted to recoup monies not spent by the OP, but because such a tactic could easily have outed the OP as a shopper and therefore jeopardized the agreement between the MSC and the restaurant, their client. The friend who covered the cost of the OP's meal was generous and should be sent a thank you card. The OP should submit for the $12 shop fee- any maybe rethink their understanding of reimbursement. NO ONE should be going into a restaurant shop with a high end reimbursement fee thinking they are coming out the other side with any money (beyond a shop fee, which many restaurant shops don't even offer) they personally did not spend landing in their bank account. Are you shopping to be of service to others dining at the restaurant by providing the thorough and objective report? Or are you shopping to simply put money in your pocket? True, you can do both, but if it's more about the dollar signs than the ability to be a good shopper, maybe mystery shopping isn't for you. Lastly.. $6 an hour for reporting? You got a whole lot more than that.. you got a meal that a lot of people probably would never spend that much money for if there was no chance of reimbursement, and you did not pay a CENT for it. If the food wasn't great, that's a shame.. but in all honesty your report should be helping to ensure that no other person (who isn't getting a reimbursement) has the same experience.

Why? Because I'm an honest person?

Well, I still don't see how someone can be expected to receive a reimbursement for monies she didn't pay. That's not what reimbursement is. Honestly, I think y'all are really stretching, twisting, and/or purposely misunderstanding the spirit and actual meaning of the word But everybody has to do what they feel is right and ethical. If you think a shopper should get reimbursement for monies not spent, that's a personal judgement call.

I'd be interested in what a legal ruling would be. I'm guessing the law would hold that the shopper isn't entitled to reimbursement, but since I'm not a lawyer, that's only a guess.

So now I'll shut up, since nobody's going to change anybody's mind on this!

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

Those who think the OP should not be reimbursed by the MSC: What if the OP's husband had paid for the meal? Would you also argue that she should have not have been reimbursed because she did not pay for the meal herself?

@BirdyC wrote:

If you think a shopper should get reimbursement for monies not spent, that's a personal judgement call.

But monies were spent.

Let me ask you a different question.
Do you think the client should get paid twice for the same meal?

They got $75 from the OP's friend, which was the agreed upon cost of the meal from the menu.
They got $75 worth of work from the OP which was the agreed upon cost of the meal through the shop.

There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2017 01:20AM by bgriffin.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Opinions needed on a strange situation

Create an Account or Log In

Official List of Mystery Shopping Companies

Mystery Shopper Magazine