I have been a mystery shopper for many years and I feel it is the lifeblood of this business to pass the word on the good mystery shopping companies as well as the bad ones.

The mystery shopping companies I am mentioning all have facebook pages, so I am not violating any disclosure rules by mentioning them publicly.

Bare International: They have good paying shops and pay quickly. Whatever you do in one month you get paid on by the 20th of the next month. Absolutely responsive to any concerns!

Informars: These guys have several out of the box mystery shops that pay extremely well. The support system and response time is awesome!

Research Services Group: Another one with good paying shops that pays quickly. They will work with you should you have any questions.

Sentry Marketing: Avoid this company at all cost! Did one shop for them and never went back. Expected an 11 page survey, that took an hour and a half to fill out, for a $30 shop. To top it off refused to pay me because my opinion, which they asked for in an opinion portion of the survey, was too mean. Not that it was poorly written, not that it contained any foul language, but that it was too mean. I have been shopping for years, this is the only shop I have ever not been paid for.

Remember, this info is based on my personal experiences with these companies. I do absolutely feel that as mystery shoppers we should share the info with each other as often as possible as long as we are not violating the disclosure rules of the contracts we all signed.

I love to mystery shop and I hope you all do as well.

Welcome to the Board!

I agree with your posted informatiom...

Welcome to the forum DGutz01. I see you have been a member here for a while, so as you know we do share our opinions and frustrations and love for various companies. Luckily we all don't have the same response to all companies or there never would be work available with them, though it might take some of the dogs out of the business.

I too love to mystery shop and I love even more working with the companies that do not take an adversarial role with their shoppers but rather a cooperative, collegial approach that helps us work together. Interestingly enough, these latter companies are also ones that pay fairly for work done for the most part or when they are having a hard time getting a shop placed and you help them out, they REMEMBER you helped them when it is time to hand out the plums.

I agree with you 100% about your assessment of certain companies,I put Marketforce, Sentry, green bean casserole and liver all in the same category. I tend to be very wary of strutting capons.

I think Ellis should be listed as easy company to work with. When you call you get help when needed and they work with you on the scheduling. The male scheduler for audio and video work is one of the best I have ever worked with. The regular shops usually have redundant paperwork but the video paperwork if you are used to it takes around 20 minutes. I received an email from them this morning for a video shop in Miami that pays 60.00 and they will supply the equipment. Good shop to learn how to do video on if you are interested. I like Research Services also. They pay well on their dual trip car shops and they answer the phone and help when needed. The only company that I do very little work with is Corporate Research. They pay on time and fairly quickly but most of the time the pay is to little for me to mess with.

Beware Ellis before you check your state guidelines for audio and video recording laws. Just because Ellis says it is TOTALLY absolutely legal does not override state laws.

If employees sign waivers at hiring indicating they may be audio and/or video recorded, does that supersede state law?

TechSavvy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If employees sign waivers at hiring indicating
> they may be audio and/or video recorded, does that
> supersede state law?

It's not a question of superseding the law. The law in some states required '2 party consent'. If an employee has signed a document agreeing to be recorded, then you have consent from both parties and the recording is legal.

It would indeed mean that your audio and/or video recording is not without their presumed consent. There are several things at play, here, however. Just because somebody needing to get a job performed tells you that "all the employees signed consent forms" is no guarantee that they did. You will not be allowed to see the consent forms for yourself and my guess is that the company you are working with has not seen them either. Word of mouth is not really going to keep YOU out of difficulties. Second, there are only so many rights one can sign away that are enforceable. Obviously signing away rights unrelated to work or generally constitutionally guaranteed will not work. A truck driver can sign away his right to have a beer 24 hours prior to appearing for work, but he cannot be required to never consume alcohol as long as the company is his employer. So if the trucker chooses to spend his vacation in a drunken stupor, that is not a problem as long as he consumes no alcohol within 24 hours before reporting back to work. The alcohol prohibition by the company is to have drivers of their vehicles not be subject to DUI automatic liability in case of an accident. A smart lawyer could have any video or audio agreement thrown out pretty readily as applying only to those on site cameras that the employee was made aware of or phone conversations where the possibility of recording was announced. On site cameras are used in many, many retail establishments to control shoplifting and holdups. Agreement to be photographed by those cameras would be very different than an employee having presumed private, individualized conversations or presentations with a hidden camera or microphone running.

Steve - that's what I meant. I used the wrong word.

I believe that part of it goes to credibility. For instance. Ellis has been in business for 26 years and from all indications on the forums are credible with shoppers as well. I know we see complaints about paperwork or such but you have never seen anyone saying they were being sued for doing a shop for Ellis or probably any other company that is a member of the MSPA. I have a good attorney. I do not have to see his passed bar exam to know that he is an attorney. Most MSCs are under strict government scrutiny because of the type of business they are in. Can anyone on this sight tell me one person who was sued and did the work for a MSPA listed company? I am not saying it could not happen I am saying that after 6 years in this business I have never heard of someone who is regular on a forum being sued. I personally believe the chances of it happening are slim to none. Possible yes but it has rained frogs before and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

wjones777 Good point but illegal is still illegal. In SOME states. I for one do not care to take the chance to BE sued when I am well aware it is illegal in certain cities and states. And nothing says it could not come down to beinging sued years after the shop.

Cheer up CANADAMOMMY, chances are that there is a statute of limitations of 7 years or some such. :-)

As for EPMS, the folks doing video shops for them seem to be gung ho. Over the years I have heard way too many shoppers I respected get raw deals with EPMS with non video shops to ever be willing to get involved with them.

I do not work for the non-recorded side of EPMS, as I find those schedulers to be quite abrasive. The audio/video side is quite different. Robert is great to work with; very supportive and will go to bat for the shopper when he can.

Once again, it is NOT the video that is an issue, legally. It is the audio. SCOTUS long ago spoke on legal video in public spaces. The 14 "two party states" restrict AUDIO recording to situations where both parties have consented. BEWARE: Delaware is a 2 party state but does not yet appear on most lists of them.

Where is this list of 14 states to be found?

According to Wikipedia, it's currently 11 states:

[en.wikipedia.org]

As far as shoppers getting sued; Much of the concern over this started a few years back when an employee was fired due to a MS report and then sued the MS company, and the shopper was brought into the lawsuit. It does happen.

Flash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It would indeed mean that your audio and/or video
> recording is not without their presumed consent.
> There are several things at play, here, however.
> Just because somebody needing to get a job
> performed tells you that "all the employees signed
> consent forms" is no guarantee that they did. You
> will not be allowed to see the consent forms for
> yourself and my guess is that the company you are
> working with has not seen them either. Word of
> mouth is not really going to keep YOU out of
> difficulties. Second, there are only so many
> rights one can sign away that are enforceable.
> Obviously signing away rights unrelated to work or
> generally constitutionally guaranteed will not
> work. A truck driver can sign away his right to
> have a beer 24 hours prior to appearing for work,
> but he cannot be required to never consume alcohol
> as long as the company is his employer. So if the
> trucker chooses to spend his vacation in a drunken
> stupor, that is not a problem as long as he
> consumes no alcohol within 24 hours before
> reporting back to work. The alcohol prohibition
> by the company is to have drivers of their
> vehicles not be subject to DUI automatic liability
> in case of an accident. A smart lawyer could have
> any video or audio agreement thrown out pretty
> readily as applying only to those on site cameras
> that the employee was made aware of or phone
> conversations where the possibility of recording
> was announced. On site cameras are used in many,
> many retail establishments to control shoplifting
> and holdups. Agreement to be photographed by
> those cameras would be very different than an
> employee having presumed private, individualized
> conversations or presentations with a hidden
> camera or microphone running.


I would never want to get into video shopping myself. I would not feel comfortable taping anyone without seeing the consent forms.

I could be wrong, but I imagine many of those agreeing to be videotaped think they are agreeing to be monitored by the store's surveillance cameras, not people unaffiliated with the company sent to secretly videotape and record them individually. I would be ticked if I found out I had been singled out and recorded without having known it was a possibility.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2011 08:02PM by rainy.

To those searching for the 14 states be also advised local jurisdiction overrides as well. So check your local laws as well. You might not be in the 14 states but still be illegal.

My reasoning on this is not to be offensive but have family in law enforcement.

With respect to Ellis, I'm approaching 200 completed assignments spread over 5+ yrs; my experiences with all from whom I've sought assistance has been quite satisfactory. They're candid, concise, profession and business oriented; simply put, my kind of people. That stated, I do understand others could see matters in a different light. I've read statements from some shoppers who've typed "great pay" with reference to an MSC that I'd define as merely OK. It always seems to revert to the old adage of "To each his/her own."

Payment for this assignment has not been refused. There was a bonus attached to this assignment that was contingent upon the assignment being submitted the same day. The assignment was not submitted the same day. This shopper is scheduled to be paid the fee and reimbursement for this assignment.

The shopper was provided feedback regard comments made in the "In Your Opinion" section of the shop. The comment in question was:

"IF you can get over the absolute filth of the restaurant then you will have an enjoyable experience."

There is a right way and a wrong way to convey subjective feedback and the vast majority of experienced shoppers know the difference.

DGutz01 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have been a mystery shopper for many years and I
> feel it is the lifeblood of this business to pass
> the word on the good mystery shopping companies as
> well as the bad ones.
>
> The mystery shopping companies I am mentioning all
> have facebook pages, so I am not violating any
> disclosure rules by mentioning them publicly.
>
> Bare International: They have good paying shops
> and pay quickly. Whatever you do in one month you
> get paid on by the 20th of the next month.
> Absolutely responsive to any concerns!
>
> Informars: These guys have several out of the box
> mystery shops that pay extremely well. The
> support system and response time is awesome!
>
> Research Services Group: Another one with good
> paying shops that pays quickly. They will work
> with you should you have any questions.
>
> Sentry Marketing: Avoid this company at all cost!
> Did one shop for them and never went back.
> Expected an 11 page survey, that took an hour and
> a half to fill out, for a $30 shop. To top it off
> refused to pay me because my opinion, which they
> asked for in an opinion portion of the survey, was
> too mean. Not that it was poorly written, not
> that it contained any foul language, but that it
> was too mean. I have been shopping for years,
> this is the only shop I have ever not been paid
> for.
>
> Remember, this info is based on my personal
> experiences with these companies. I do absolutely
> feel that as mystery shoppers we should share the
> info with each other as often as possible as long
> as we are not violating the disclosure rules of
> the contracts we all signed.
>
> I love to mystery shop and I hope you all do as
> well.

Sentry- you asked for an opinion, you got an opinion.

We all have different opinions and ways of expressing them.
If you want a dictated answer have a drop down box of choices to pick from. Actually not unusual for shopping companies.

Otherwise don't ask for a true opinion if you do not want the answer!

And BTW I do not see the words subjective and objective in the words...
"In Your Opinion" . IMO!


DISCLAIMER: I do not, will not, and have not shopped for them.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2011 01:01PM by CANADAMOMMY.

[www.rcfp.org]

This site lists 13 2 party states. Add Deleware to get 14.
New gathering organizations keep the best track of what these laws are.

I respect your opinion but don't agree. Also, this specific topic is covered in our orientation. There are ways of conveying opinion/subjective information that are appropriate and there are ways of conveying this information that are not appropriate for a business report.

Regardless, the bonus was not paid because this shopper did not submit the not by the deadline specified. This had nothing to do with the content of the In Your Opinion. Also, we are not withholding payment for this assignment.





CANADAMOMMY Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sentry- you asked for an opinion, you got an
> opinion.
>
> We all have different opinions and ways of
> expressing them.
> If you want a dictated answer have a drop down box
> of choices to pick from. Actually not unusual for
> shopping companies.
>
> Otherwise don't ask for a true opinion if you do
> not want the answer!
>
> And BTW I do not see the words subjective and
> objective in the words...
> "In Your Opinion" . IMO!
>
>
> DISCLAIMER: I do not, will not, and have not
> shopped for them.

Sentry

"IF you can get over the absolute filth of the restaurant then you will have an enjoyable experience."

I am interested in taking this "exact" thought and would like to see how you would word this. Let's assume it was not a clean restaurant and that was the ONLY problem. And you ask for an opinion. Can we see what you would accept? Thank You.

My 2 cents (Sentry post) is personally I would never use the words filhy, nasty or the like...there are more digestable ways to describe a place, such as:
The restaurant needed cleaning, the floors were a little sticky, and the menu's needed wiping down. This tells you what is needed and is still objective, as a shopper, I am turned off by this kind of reporting.

I haven't shopped for Sentry for years, I am neutral as I haven't had anything bad happen, I am tempted to take the next shop offered and see for myself.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2011 05:11PM by Irene_L.A..

How about:

"I found the restaurant to be severely lacking in cleanliness which impacted my experience. I would not return due to the condition of the restaurant"

The In Your Opinion/Voice of the Guest section is included to give the shopper an opportunity to provide their point-of-view in a professional and respectful manner.

The fact that we include an opinion section on our forms does not give a shopper license to abandon business writing etiquette. We are not asking shoppers to censor their opinion in any way, shape or form, rather we simply require shoppers to communicate in a professional and respectful manner. This doesn't seem to be a problem for most shoppers as this issue comes up in less than .01% of shops submitted.






CANADAMOMMY Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sentry
>
> "IF you can get over the absolute filth of the
> restaurant then you will have an enjoyable
> experience."
>
> I am interested in taking this "exact" thought and
> would like to see how you would word this. Let's
> assume it was not a clean restaurant and that was
> the ONLY problem. And you ask for an opinion. Can
> we see what you would accept? Thank You.

Of course that modification may not be what the opinion was of the shopper, Dave. The shopper may well have thought that although the place was a pigsty they would still return and overlook the slime because they liked the food and the service and the value. That is the real danger when you ask someone for their OPINION and then try to modify what THEY thought/felt to have it say something else. Perhaps an OPINION is just let lie as it comes in. For myself I probably would have toned down 'absolute filth' to be an equally damning set of specifics unless that list would be more than four or five specifics. My OPINION of several places I have visited is that the Health Department should be notified immediately of unsanitary conditions. Unfortunately I was not asked for my opinion on those shops, so specifics in abundance needed to be inserted edgewise.

If your client wants opinion, give them the shopper's opinion. If they don't want/need the opinion, take it off the survey if you are frightened when it seems "too mean". You definitely got what you asked the shopper for.

Flash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of course that modification may not be what the
> opinion was of the shopper, Dave. The shopper may
> well have thought that although the place was a
> pigsty they would still return and overlook the
> slime because they liked the food and the service
> and the value. That is the real danger when you
> ask someone for their OPINION and then try to
> modify what THEY thought/felt to have it say
> something else. Perhaps an OPINION is just let
> lie as it comes in. For myself I probably would
> have toned down 'absolute filth' to be an equally
> damning set of specifics unless that list would be
> more than four or five specifics. My OPINION of
> several places I have visited is that the Health
> Department should be notified immediately of
> unsanitary conditions. Unfortunately I was not
> asked for my opinion on those shops, so specifics
> in abundance needed to be inserted edgewise.
>
> If your client wants opinion, give them the
> shopper's opinion. If they don't want/need the
> opinion, take it off the survey if you are
> frightened when it seems "too mean". You
> definitely got what you asked the shopper for.


The issue is one of respect and not one of being "frightened". And while I would not have used the word "mean" to describe the comments, I would have used the word "inappropriate" and "unprofessional".

As you said, you would have toned it down. This is what I would expect from a seasoned and professional shopper such as yourself. In the end, we did not get what we asked of the shopper because this specific topic is addressed in our orientation and in the assignment guidelines. Shoppers are asked to convey their opinion "in a professional and respectful manner" In the end, it's really about complying with the assignment guidelines.

Considering how infrequently this comes us, I really think it is simply an isolated incident. Ultimately, I only replied to this post to set the record straight as is applies to this shopper's claim that we were withholding payment.

Obviously I don't know what your specific instructions were about an opinion since I have not worked and will not be working with you. My reaction, however, is that you got an opinion that was not 'unprofessional' enough to be noteworthy. My gut response is that the second phrase of the comment puts back any respect you might sense was lost in the first. So to me this sounds like nit picky for the sake of nit picky.

I would say the opinion is unprofessional in the sense that it is sarcastic.

In another recent thread, many shoppers (myself included) called a scheduler on her professionalism for what I would consider to be a less sarcastic comment than this one.

Can we consider for a moment that the client is the one ultimately paying the bills here? IF your bosses boss asked you what your opinion of a new program at work was, would you unleash your unedited opinion about it, or would you come up with a professional way to point out possible flaws?

Ultimately, it seems there is evidence to support the fact that the original post was fallacious. The shop was not denied for the reasons stated. When I called the shopper on the repeated bashing of Sentry, he defended his post as being "honest". It apparently was not.