I wanted to ask some of you who are more experienced about fees for assignments that are cancelled by the company after you have already done or at least shown up for the assignment. In the past, I have had assignments that I agreed to do and tried to perform cancelled. In these cases, one company (Market Force) paid half a fee after an audit was refused onsite. Another (Maritz) paid the whole fee after giving me a special assignment involving an audit with digital photos that was pulled before I could file the report. STN also paid the entire fee on a shop that didn't fit the report due to circumstances beyond my control. In all cases, I was impressed by the ethical treatment I received.

I recently took an auditing assignment from GfK that would have taken two days of my time and I had already cleared my schedule, turning down other assignments to do it. When I arrived, a very puzzled manager told me the audit had already been done the previous week. I called the scheduler onsite and was told to leave. A brief mention of compensation was made on the phone call so when I arrived home, I sent her an email saying I thought 25% of the fee was fair. Basically a half day. It required a lot of preparation on my part and a two hour drive. It has been almost a week and I have heard nothing and there is no record on the website of the shop ever being assigned. Of course, I have the email assigning it. Am I being unreasonable here or did I just stumble on a company with a different attitude? This would have been my first assignment for them.

Attitudes vary between companies as well as between clients. I can see a company turning down a request for 25% of the fee for a two day assignment when you showed up and were quickly told not to continue. After all, your preparation has you ready to do the next assignment that comes up. Also, unless it is being done as a negotiated special favor, your drive time/distance is your elective choice. I know that is not what you wanted to hear and yes, I do feel you are due some compensation for what was, evidently, their scheduling error. If you can get 25% out of them, fantastic. I think you are more likely to be offered a $5-$10 'nuisance fee' for their error.

And yes, there are companies that pay nothing for their cancellations (of course they always blame it on the client). There are some, such as Trendsource, who pay a flat fee such as $5 when they cancel work. I had once such shop for them that I had spent a significant amount of time in preparation for the work in general and for the job site specifically and had purchased special equipment for the job that got cancelled. $5 did not START to cover the time and actual expense. Next job came along, I was prepared, I had the equipment and could accept and perform the work with very little further time or cash investment.

We know that very few jobs make economic sense to only do once. Learning the job takes time, and that is not time for which we generally are compensated. Doing the job at multiple locations is where the economies of scale come in and you finally can amortize out the time spent studying and learning the job. Certainly I will do the same shop at as many locations as possible unless the shop turns out to be a stinker.

Annie, persevere with GFK. You're not being unreasonable, at least about expecting SOMETHING. I had a different kind of situation, which also required a resolution, and I had to be diligent about pursuing it.

That said, in your situation, the wild card could be the scheduler. If the error was theirs personally, I wonder if it's handled a different way. Every shop I've done with them has had an outside scheduler, even though the phone numbers appear to be internal.

This is pure hearsay, but I heard a story from another shopper in my area involving a certain company that will remain nameless, and a large retail store:

He showed up to conduct a picture audit of a kiosk inside a large superstore (the kiosk was operated by a company that wasn't the superstore). He had with him two letters of authorization, one for the superstore and one for the kiosk. He gave the superstore's letter to a manager and proceeded to the kiosk. He gave the kiosk's letter to a friendly person-in-charge at the kiosk, who informed him that he had been expecting him.

He conducted about 3/4ths of the audit when he moved on to the required pictures. At that time a low-level superstore employee (not affiliated with the kiosk or the company that he was auditing) informed him that pictures were not allowed inside the store. He informed the woman that he was authorized my the superstore's corporate officer to take the pictures, and store management knew he was conducting the audit. She responded, "Well, I'm the supervisor and I don't know anything about that. Put the camera away."

The auditor complied, put the camera away, and asked to speak to the manager. The employee called something in on the radio, and a big burly man in a security jacket showed up. The auditor again asked for the manager and the security guard told him, "You can speak to her outside." And indicated for him to leave. He reiterated that he was conducting an audit on behave of the kiosk company, and the security responded, "If you refuse to leave you'll be arrested for trespassing."

The auditor was escorted off the property by two security guards. When he asked to speak to the manager again he was told, "You're done here."

He called his scheduler, who told him, "You're fine. Just return home and report what happened online." He reported his experience online. Two days later he got an e-mail saying his shop had been invalidated and he wasn't getting paid.

AGAIN, this story is hearsay. I wasn't there, so I don't want to cast blame on anybody, that's just the story I heard.

So in conclusion, shop companies can be real jerks when it comes to paying you for shops you don't complete (regardless of the reason).

I like to read the personal experiences of other forum members, but I attach very little credibility to second-hand stories. A generalization like "shop companies can be real jerks when it comes to paying you for shops you don't complete (regardless of the reason)" is pretty meaningless. If it applies to a particular company, and if a shopper is reporting a personal experience, that's reasonable. But a shopper reporting a second-hand story that does not identify a particular MSP and stating that shop companies can be real jerks is not reasonable.

AustinMom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I like to read the personal experiences of other
> forum members, but I attach very little
> credibility to second-hand stories. A
> generalization like "shop companies can be real
> jerks when it comes to paying you for shops you
> don't complete (regardless of the reason)" is
> pretty meaningless. If it applies to a particular
> company, and if a shopper is reporting a personal
> experience, that's reasonable. But a shopper
> reporting a second-hand story that does not
> identify a particular MSP and stating that shop
> companies can be real jerks is not reasonable.

That's why I prefaced the story with "this is pure hearsay" and reiterated it over and over again. Hearsay, I believe, is the same as a "second-hand story".

I didn't identify the company BECAUSE the story was hearsay. I didn't want to personally bash a company, instead make a generalization.

I understand where both of you are coming from. I personally have had shops rejected where the employee would not do what they were required to do but far and away I have had more companies pay in full for shops that got beyond shopper control. I still remember being thrown out of a locked building with all sorts of security guards when I wanted to take a picture of a shipping company's drop box in the lobby of the building. Gimmee a break! Scheduler told me the location of the next nearest one and that I could take a picture of it instead. She was very apologetic and concerned for my 'trauma' until I let her know that frankly I was LMAO at these pompous policeman wannabes.

Regarding the post from Nichtoliver, irrespective of whodunwhat, I always take duplicates of letters of authorization with me on audits. I present one to the manager, who gives me the go ahead. Further inside the establishment, if I run into an uninformed, unhearing stonewall, I produce another copy of my LOA.

Regarding the GfK shop, their closed location shop fee varies by client. It would seem this call-off would fall under that umbrella, circumstances considered. I'd pursue it as far as their policy would allow. If the circumstances fall outside policy, I would ask for a reasonable payment, and justify my request. Time in preparation for the shop would not be one of my determinants.

Wow! I can top this story, and my name came be mentioned...I did over 52 projects at the local CVS'.....this was very hard, because of the travel time.....After completing my assignments and faxing the signed sheets over to "CAST RETAIL" based in Florida......The person in-charge of the payout. Told me We can't find your paperwork, and the time has expired to be paid.....I still have all forms......But! don't know what to do with the stack...The pay was "$16.00 per store, w/.35 for mileage......I traveled over 300 miles in a 3 day turn around


-------------------------------------------------------
> This is pure hearsay, but I heard a story from
> another shopper in my area involving a certain
> company that will remain nameless, and a large
> retail store:
>
> He showed up to conduct a picture audit of a kiosk
> inside a large superstore (the kiosk was operated
> by a company that wasn't the superstore). He had
> with him two letters of authorization, one for the
> superstore and one for the kiosk. He gave the
> superstore's letter to a manager and proceeded to
> the kiosk. He gave the kiosk's letter to a
> friendly person-in-charge at the kiosk, who
> informed him that he had been expecting him.
>
> He conducted about 3/4ths of the audit when he
> moved on to the required pictures. At that time a
> low-level superstore employee (not affiliated with
> the kiosk or the company that he was auditing)
> informed him that pictures were not allowed inside
> the store. He informed the woman that he was
> authorized my the superstore's corporate officer
> to take the pictures, and store management knew he
> was conducting the audit. She responded, "Well,
> I'm the supervisor and I don't know anything about
> that. Put the camera away."
>
> The auditor complied, put the camera away, and
> asked to speak to the manager. The employee
> called something in on the radio, and a big burly
> man in a security jacket showed up. The auditor
> again asked for the manager and the security guard
> told him, "You can speak to her outside." And
> indicated for him to leave. He reiterated that he
> was conducting an audit on behave of the kiosk
> company, and the security responded, "If you
> refuse to leave you'll be arrested for
> trespassing."
>
> The auditor was escorted off the property by two
> security guards. When he asked to speak to the
> manager again he was told, "You're done here."
>
> He called his scheduler, who told him, "You're
> fine. Just return home and report what happened
> online." He reported his experience online. Two
> days later he got an e-mail saying his shop had
> been invalidated and he wasn't getting paid.
>
> AGAIN, this story is hearsay. I wasn't there, so
> I don't want to cast blame on anybody, that's just
> the story I heard.
>
> So in conclusion, shop companies can be real jerks
> when it comes to paying you for shops you don't
> complete (regardless of the reason).

They're very inconsistent in how they do things.

MFI has cancelled 2 shops on me-one they paid the base fee, not the bonused fee that was agreed to. The other, they paid nothing.

Intelli-shop just paid me for a shop that I would have bet they would have rejected. It specifically deviated from the guidelines and I delineated that very clearly. However, my report was so detailed that even their hard-nosed editors had to realize that had I stuck to the guidelines like glue, I would have had a flashing sign over my head that said "Mystery Shopper".

I found it interesting that (very unlike them) they simply knocked the score to 8/10 and the only pithy comment on the Shop Log was "You weren't supposed to do that". It took them nearly 2 weeks to even do that. Typically, Intelli-shop has to e-mail and tell you how wrong you were. Perhaps common sense prevailed?

I did a shop for a MSC, a post office shop, and when I got back that day to enter it I had an email that it had been canceled. I had requested it when I was doing work in that area (I do part time mortgage mitigation for the banks in my area 60 miles out and take mystery shops in the areas where I will be for that week) but was assigned two weeks later. I had several days to do it in, but got the flu. I emailed them from their site to tell them I was sick but email came back saying no such job. I finally got tbattle, she told me to go ahead, but I didn't get the email until that night. I did it the next morning, 60 miles out of the way, $10.50 expense (to mail a book that could have gone media mail) and tried to do the report but it wasn't on my assignments. I have emailed tbattle several times and she doesn't respond. I have done several other jobs for this company and have a high rating with them. I am upset with the waste of my time, money, and gas and the fact that tbattle wouldn't contact me. I do not want to work for her again and I think management ought to know this. Or should I just take my name off of available for this company? Oh, I am still getting emails about available post officd jobs!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2011 12:53AM by Carolina81.

Carolina81 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


Well, before you do anything, what you may want to do is remove the client name from your post. As per your ICA, you cannot have the client name and MS company name mentioned together.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2011 03:36AM by Karen IL.

I did a shop for Bare, and my fee for mailing the package was .50 over what I had in my purse, so I used a CC. They gave me a big stink about that, did pay me, but have never accepted me again for that shop...go figure. Since I mail monthly, this was a bit of a loss to me.

Irene_L.A. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I did a shop for Bare, and my fee for mailing the
> package was .50 over what I had in my purse, so I
> used a CC. They gave me a big stink about that,
> did pay me, but have never accepted me again for
> that shop...go figure. Since I mail monthly, this
> was a bit of a loss to me.


That's why I always make sure I have lots of cash on hand when doing a mailing shop. I'm thinking that you're lucky you got paid for the shop, since they said that it had to be cash...

Irene_L.A. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I did a shop for Bare, and my fee for mailing the
> package was .50 over what I had in my purse, so I
> used a CC. They gave me a big stink about that,
> did pay me, but have never accepted me again for
> that shop...go figure. Since I mail monthly, this
> was a bit of a loss to me.


I have been in the parking lot of the "shipping company" when I realized I didn't have cash and left to go get some. I always use my debit card for just about everything, so I rarely carry cash. I have to be really thinking to make sure I have it when I do these shops. I thought to myself, when I had almost gone inside to do it, that I'd probably just send the dumb package on my own dime (when I realized it should have been cash) and then send another for the shop. But so far I've caught myself before it was too late.

Sorry, I was not thinking. I am very upset about this. I have about 5 jobs, trying to make ends meet and went out of my way to do that shop since I had agreed to do it. I started to tell her that when I requested the shop I was working in the area and now I am not but I didn't. I did the shop.

Carolina81, from your telling of the story, you have every right to be upset.

Since you've had no luck communicating with the scheduler, I would definitely contact management. I find Bare to be really strange -- I've posted before about how inconsistent I feel they are. Some of the schedulers are horribly uncommunicative, but when I've had to contact project supervisors, they've been very nice and responsive. Same goes for upper management, to whom I had to reach out on one occasion.

Keep the faith, hold your ground, and good luck! No matter what the outcome is, you'll feel better if you have the opportunity to speak your mind.

I haven't had any trouble with tbattle communicating with me about shipping shops. And I've done 64 of them since the beginning of November. Now there's somebody at Intelli-shop who won't communicate. I tried for three days and finally went and did my shop without getting my question answered. Fortunately I did it correctly and will get paid for it, but it was crappy sitting and waiting three days and finally having to go in blind.

Bottom line...COMMUNICATE!!!!!!!!

SpyGirl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Irene_L.A. Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I did a shop for Bare, and my fee for mailing
> the
> > package was .50 over what I had in my purse, so
> I
> > used a CC. They gave me a big stink about
> that,
> > did pay me, but have never accepted me again
> for
> > that shop...go figure. Since I mail monthly,
> this
> > was a bit of a loss to me.
>
>
> I have been in the parking lot of the "shipping
> company" when I realized I didn't have cash and
> left to go get some. I always use my debit card
> for just about everything, so I rarely carry cash.
> I have to be really thinking to make sure I have
> it when I do these shops. I thought to myself,
> when I had almost gone inside to do it, that I'd
> probably just send the dumb package on my own dime
> (when I realized it should have been cash) and
> then send another for the shop. But so far I've
> caught myself before it was too late.

The cash thing with the "shipping company" drives me batty. I shop my own PO and I just know they quickly figured out what was going on when I started paying with cash.

I have *always* used my PayPal debit card when shipping eBay selling because I get cash back

Just as with the McShops, not sure what the point is, of paying with cash only.

Most people DO NOT PAY WITH CASH any more.

It's funny....many places I will use my debit card... but when I'm shipping things...I almost always use cash. Strange.

Oh..and BTW...I disabled Adblocker, and my reply box mysteriously reappeared! Guess this site and Adblocker don't play nice together anymore.

Latanya Wrote: No! THEY DIDN'T PAY ME AT ALL.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wow! I can top this story, and my name came be
> mentioned...I did over 52 projects at the local
> CVS'.....this was very hard, because of the travel
> time.....After completing my assignments and
> faxing the signed sheets over to "CAST RETAIL"
> based in Florida......The person in-charge of the
> payout. Told me We can't find your paperwork, and
> the time has expired to be paid.....I still have
> all forms......But! don't know what to do with the
> stack...The pay was "$16.00 per store, w/.35 for
> mileage......I traveled over 300 miles in a 3 day
> turn around
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > This is pure hearsay, but I heard a story from
> > another shopper in my area involving a certain
> > company that will remain nameless, and a large
> > retail store:
> >
> > He showed up to conduct a picture audit of a
> kiosk
> > inside a large superstore (the kiosk was
> operated
> > by a company that wasn't the superstore). He
> had
> > with him two letters of authorization, one for
> the
> > superstore and one for the kiosk. He gave the
> > superstore's letter to a manager and proceeded
> to
> > the kiosk. He gave the kiosk's letter to a
> > friendly person-in-charge at the kiosk, who
> > informed him that he had been expecting him.
> >
> > He conducted about 3/4ths of the audit when he
> > moved on to the required pictures. At that time
> a
> > low-level superstore employee (not affiliated
> with
> > the kiosk or the company that he was auditing)
> > informed him that pictures were not allowed
> inside
> > the store. He informed the woman that he was
> > authorized my the superstore's corporate
> officer
> > to take the pictures, and store management knew
> he
> > was conducting the audit. She responded,
> "Well,
> > I'm the supervisor and I don't know anything
> about
> > that. Put the camera away."
> >
> > The auditor complied, put the camera away, and
> > asked to speak to the manager. The employee
> > called something in on the radio, and a big
> burly
> > man in a security jacket showed up. The
> auditor
> > again asked for the manager and the security
> guard
> > told him, "You can speak to her outside." And
> > indicated for him to leave. He reiterated that
> he
> > was conducting an audit on behave of the kiosk
> > company, and the security responded, "If you
> > refuse to leave you'll be arrested for
> > trespassing."
> >
> > The auditor was escorted off the property by
> two
> > security guards. When he asked to speak to the
> > manager again he was told, "You're done here."
> >
> > He called his scheduler, who told him, "You're
> > fine. Just return home and report what
> happened
> > online." He reported his experience online.
> Two
> > days later he got an e-mail saying his shop had
> > been invalidated and he wasn't getting paid.
> >
> > AGAIN, this story is hearsay. I wasn't there,
> so
> > I don't want to cast blame on anybody, that's
> just
> > the story I heard.
> >
> > So in conclusion, shop companies can be real
> jerks
> > when it comes to paying you for shops you don't
> > complete (regardless of the reason).

Man, that's bad. Small claims court? You have a paper trail on your side of things, right? And proofs of visit, all that stuff? At the least, you should file a complaint with the Better Business Bureau for their state and keep following up.

Latanya Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Latanya Wrote: No! THEY DIDN'T PAY ME AT ALL.
> --------------------------------------------------
>

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/06/2011 07:07AM by TechSavvy.