"Not a white glove audit"... are you suuuuure?

I've recently done a bunch of the green gas station shops and have found the editors to be unusually picky--tiny specks of dirt, "damage" I can't even see (let alone actual customers), the list goes on and on. Anyone else have this issue?

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.

More About Love & Mystery Shopping

I have not done one yet but I will try one. If they are too picky, I won’t do more. Not enough money for those and No one is doing them in my area for the money.

I believe I got an e-mail today upping the pay to $25.

No takers here, even at that.

When they were with the old company (now merged together), I noticed that often, when my debrief was sent back for a hold, that many of my answers had been changed. Once, I was called out (by phone) on being too "white glove" on an answer that was changed by the editor.
Not too much I could do about it though. I wasn't believed by the supervisor!

If neither you or the customers can see the damage, how can the editors - who aren’t even at the location? Is the magnification on you camera that good?

#confused

@chrisg0619 wrote:

I've recently done a bunch of the green gas station shops and have found the editors to be unusually picky--tiny specks of dirt, "damage" I can't even see (let alone actual customers), the list goes on and on. Anyone else have this issue?

Hard work builds character and homework is good for your soul.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/15/2020 04:42PM by MFJohnston.

Lol I was wondering the same. Also, if you didn’t take a pic of the infraction, how can they see it? Unless you are talking about one of the year pics that you must take.

Yes, the old company's editors used to never follow the guidelines about only marking off for neglect and significant damage - station owners used to come point out the errors to me the next time I was there, and I knew that it was the editors changing my answers. It was frustrating to know that editors changed my correct answers to incorrect answers based on what they think they see. I had station owners very angry and wanting to change brands because they were marked off for very minor dirt and wear in the fueling area in rural farming communities where many customers are driving on dirt roads. One time they marked off the small snow collection pile (which was out of the way of customer traffic) as poorly maintained landscaping. What are they supposed to do - melt all the snow? They also used to always delete my gas receipts at stations that don't have pay at the pump, because they didn't understand that a register receipt WAS the gas receipt. Even when I would explain in the comments that the station did not have pay at the pump, they would never read the comments before placing something on hold.

Anyway, that was a long time ago and they have been so much better in recent years. I no longer have those problems.

Not sure about these - I completed a few yesterday and already received this response. I am sure that I did not duplicate any photos - there is no contact info to follow-up.

Reason provided by the reviewer:
"Thank you for attempting to complete a XXX Consumer Audit. Unfortunately, XXXXX requires this report to be rejected because each photo was not unique. The computer system has detected that one or more of these photos was already uploaded either to another report or to two spots on this report. The guidelines for 2020 state that reports that have a photo that was already uploaded elsewhere will be immediately rejected. Please do not appeal this shop; appeal requests for this type of rejection do not receive responses. If you are interested in re-conducting this visit, please visit the Presto map and check for the available pin, but *do not reuse the photos from this report*. Thank you."

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2020 08:06PM by Jmarkf.

Presto strikes again?

@Jmarkf wrote:

Not sure about these - I completed a few yesterday and already received this response. I am sure that I did not duplicate any photos - there is no contact info to follow-up.

Reason provided by the reviewer:
"Thank you for attempting to complete a XXX Consumer Audit. Unfortunately, XXXXX requires this report to be rejected because each photo was not unique. The computer system has detected that one or more of these photos was already uploaded either to another report or to two spots on this report. The guidelines for 2020 state that reports that have a photo that was already uploaded elsewhere will be immediately rejected. Please do not appeal this shop; appeal requests for this type of rejection do not receive responses. If you are interested in re-conducting this visit, please visit the Presto map and check for the available pin, but *do not reuse the photos from this report*. Thank you."

I already communicated with Christy Ensley at Ipsos about this when it happened to me. I'd recommend that you do the same. Her response was that she understood that it was frustrating but no plan of action for fixing the issues. Maybe if enough of us send her and email (or shops just don't get done), they might consider fixing it.

What I found incredibly amusing and ironic is the email that we got about the blue stations and making sure that we are being reasonable, that this is not a white glove audit and some wear and tear is to be expected. I'll be interested to see if either approach changes going forward.

@Jmarkf wrote:

Please do not appeal this shop; appeal requests for this type of rejection do not receive responses."

So, it's automatic and can't be challenged? What a crock.

"Let me offer you my definition of social justice: I keep what I earn and you keep what you earn. Do you disagree? Well then tell me how much of what I earn belongs to you - and why?” ~Walter Williams

When this happened to me, I just scooped the shop back up and resubmitted everything. In the comments at the end of the report, I said that I was 100% sure that there were no duplicates and that I had the file names and meta data to back it up. The report was accepted.

Anyway, this Presto stuff really sucks, and I hope Ipsos browses this board.

@Jmarkf wrote:

Not sure about these - I completed a few yesterday and already received this response. I am sure that I did not duplicate any photos - there is no contact info to follow-up.

Reason provided by the reviewer:
"Thank you for attempting to complete a XXX Consumer Audit. Unfortunately, XXXXX requires this report to be rejected because each photo was not unique. The computer system has detected that one or more of these photos was already uploaded either to another report or to two spots on this report. The guidelines for 2020 state that reports that have a photo that was already uploaded elsewhere will be immediately rejected. Please do not appeal this shop; appeal requests for this type of rejection do not receive responses. If you are interested in re-conducting this visit, please visit the Presto map and check for the available pin, but *do not reuse the photos from this report*. Thank you."

Me too!!! Ipsos needs to get it together with the duplicates, because like I said, If it happens again to me, I’ll email CEO there as well as Presto. My time is too valuable to. It get paid on something I do correctly. I’m hoping there will not even be issues to address.

Wanted to share some good news follow-up - after sending a couple of emails to the MSC, i was contacted by one of their managers who reviewed the shops in questions and shared that there were no duplicate photos and there must have been a glitch. She was most helpful and courteous - the shops have been accepted. Things happen and appreciate the MSC reviewing and taking action.

Thanks here to everyone who provided some feedback.

Yep and Colleen at Presto has been very helpful as well.

You can also use presto to check in and out, and then go to presto mobile site to submit. I haven't done this myself, but many have said they have.

Mine was kicked back for a 3 inch scratch on a Column. Wtf we were told it has to be more than 15 percent for an infraction

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

"Not a white glove audit"... are you suuuuure?

Create an Account or Log In

Official List of Mystery Shopping Companies

Mystery Shopper Magazine