SEEKING OTHERS WHO HAVE BEEN SCAMMED BY INTELLISHOP /-------------------------- [edited for ICA violation] FOR CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT WHO HAD BEEN ASKED TO PERFORM A VIDEO EVALUATION AT AUTO DEALERSHIP AND OR OTHER SHOP AND WAS NOT PAID.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/14/2013 02:00AM by ishopshopshop.

Why are you yelling at a bunch of people you do not know. You have posted this twice. Unfortunately, you did not complete the evaluation properly and a class action law suit is more than over the top.

Meanwhile, you have violated the posting guidelines of this forum and need to remove the client name from your post.

@LisaSTL Unbelievable, this guy. SMDH.

Please edit the subject lines, the ICA violation is also in the subject lines.

OK if you want to take a breath and share with us exactly why Intellishop rejected your report, perhaps we could all learn something from your experience.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2013 02:44AM by cynb.

cynb please edit the subject line in your post to remove the client name.

Ok I did edit, however I was not aware that it was my responsibility to do so. I thought it was up to the OP.

Actually the client name is not the one that was shown in the subject line, well maybe technically it is but the shoppers report on a different retail businesses. The companythatshallnotbenamed is kind of a middle man.

The companythatshallnotbenamed is the client. They send us to "the shop" to report on "the shop's" practices. But "the shop" where we were sent is not the client and probably doesn't see the reports.

The original poster cannot edit OUR posts, only their own, including the subject line. The subject line will copy to the next post automatically, but each poster has the ability to edit that subject line if they wish.

I wish you the best success with your litigation. It is very difficult to beat the big boys. I was party to litigation against a big corporation in retail merchandising. The main litigate did receive a settlement. That in and of itself was a victory.

cynb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok I did edit, however I was not aware that it was
> my responsibility to do so. I thought it was up
> to the OP.


Editing a post to remove an ICA violation should actually be the responsibility of the OP. BUT when another poster responds to a post containing an ICA violation and uses the subject line or quotes the post, the violation is not automatically removed if/when the OP removes the violation from his post and must be removed by each poster who used the incorrect subject line or quoted the post.

I don't wish the OP any success with a frivolous lawsuit.

Notice who DID wish him success.

The OP agreed to a covert video shop and used their cell phone instead of an approved video rig.

cynb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK if you want to take a breath and share with us
> exactly why Intellishop rejected your report,
> perhaps we could all learn something from your
> experience.

LisaSTL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The OP agreed to a covert video shop and used
> their cell phone instead of an approved video rig.
>
>

Sorry, OP--no soup for you!

On the other hand, I had a similar experience with another msc on a video shop (their equipment) and when the target skated on the appointment, I called immediately and the msc PROMISED that it wouldn't matter. I still didn't get paid. I believe I should get soup AND crackers!

oh holy hopping jesus on snowshoes.............

Cettie--I may have to use that one.....LOL! Thanks for the morning giggle!

I've never heard of it being acceptable to use a cell phone as a video device for a covert shop. I can't even imagine how one could remain discreet. In addition, one should ALWAYS get that type of approval in writing. The OP has no one to blame but him/herself. Filing a class action lawsuit for this type of situation is ridiculous and a waste of the court's time. JMO.

Good one, Cettie. Maybe this one will make Judge Judy and U Tube. Can't wait.

How did you use your cell phone? Did you hold it up the whole time like a microphone? I'm trying to grasp how that would occur.

As much as I do not like Intelli-Shop, I don't believe you have a lawsuit on your hands.

Please provide a link to the video, I'll be able to tell if you have a case.

That's actually pretty guffaw-worthy, imagining someone taking a 'covert' video on a shop, with a CELL PHONE. I mean, just think about that. Picture it in your mind. Looks pretty asinine, no? I imagine the person doing it with a puffed-up, self-important image of themselves as an 'undercover agent' while they're doing it, too. HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

What I wish we could see, which of course is impossible, is a video of this clown shooting his 'covert' video. And the sales associate's reaction. Heh.

In his original post he described it as a "video" shop that he was BEGGED to do. I don't see the word "covert" being used although it might have been on the instructions. While I'm sure all video shoppers understand that video is always covert (or would know enough to ask), a new shopper might not realize that. There are, after all, revealed audits where pictures are taken openly. If the scheduler said he could use his cell phone camera, why would he have reason (being new to video) to question that? Note the sentence I set off with ****** below.

I see this more of a misunderstanding than idiocy.

Although I will concede a degree of idiocy in the notion that the rest of us want to jump on his class action bandwagon. You don't start a class action lawsuit over a misunderstanding. Small claims court should suffice but he'd have a hard time proving what the scheduler said if he didn't record the conversation.

It's also noteworthy that ishopshopshop has left the building. He has not posted again since starting this thread.


ishopshopshop Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I was begged to do a mystery shop, (urgent
> request).
> New guy who booked me, or just reaaaaaaaaaly slow!
> Asked me to do a video shop at a Car dealership.
> I told him I had a video camera on my iphone,
> would that be ok. He responded with a clear yes,
> as long as the video has a date/time stamp.
>
> Drove over 160 mi RT, throughly completed the
> shop, went out of my way to provide an excellent
> and complete shop for them.
>
> INTELLISHOP REFUSED TO PAY ME stating I did not
> use the proper equipment. Even their guidelines
> did not specify and I had both the verbal
> agreement and *******an email confirmation that we
> discussed my iphone in. **********

First, it is highly unlikely that a shopper not experienced in video would be begged to complete the shop. Second, it is highly unlikely that Intellishop would have an inexperienced scheduler working with their video shops for a picky client. Third, I've been completing video shops with them for a long time, including two just this week, and the scheduler(s) for video have been women. Fourth, no video scheduler would mix up cell phone video and covert video. Lastly, the instructions for their video shops are quite clear so even if any of the above mistakes had been made, reading the instructions would have either cleared it right up or left the OP with no other option than to contact the scheduler for clarification.

I'd like to see the email he says he has. This may have been a case of novice scheduler (possibly overstepping his authority) intersects with newbie buyer to create a disaster.

Otherwise he's lying through his teeth and I generally don't like to call someone a liar without proof.

Or possibly we have a newbie shopper who is confused. I find it difficult to believe that even a novice scheduler would have asked a new shopper to do a video evaluation. I find it even harder to believe that any scheduler, novice or not, would have agreed to having a shopper use a cell phone instead of video equipment.

I personally think the OP is pulling our leg. This has practical joke written all over it.

I think AM hit the nail on the head. I happened to still have the guidelines from my recent shops and they state, "DO NOT use your cell phone........."

Ah, I'm far too trusting... sigh.... never occurred to me the whole tirade could be a prank......

I don't think it was a prank. I believe when the OP didn't get the support expected, he/she went away.

Thank you for your comments. I apologize for my delay in responding and also for posting the name of the company. I have not used this forum in the past but now understand the policy.


The mystery shopping company that hired me to complete a shop for them did so with the full understanding I would be using the video feature on my cell phone. I did not simply assume it was ok but cleared this in advance of accepting the shop.

While it was clear the employee that asked me to "help him out" was new, I explained I had not done video shops & I am not a career mystery shopper but have discreetly evaluated businesses on several occasion over the years.

This is not an issue of my misunderstanding instructions or providing an incomplete evaluation. I had explained to him that I did have an iPhone with a video feature I could use if that would be acceptable and HE AGREED that it was.

He agreed and said the only criteria was that it had a date and time stamp and that must appear on the video when uploaded.

We discussed the fact that I would be using my iPhone both verbally and also in an email so he clearly understood I did not have professional equipment.

The only reference to the video procedure in guidelines that they sent to me prior to the shop referred only to the date and time stamp. There was no mention of equipment whatsoever.

I would accept their position if this were an issue of my not understanding their instructions but that is not the case, they fully knew I would be using my cell phone and agreed PRIOR to my accepting and completing the shop. There was no doubt!

The company leads their clients to believe that they actually provide highly trained and certified video shoppers. Nothing could be further from the truth.The following is stated on their web site;

"Video Evaluators – With years of experience conducting Video Mystery Shopping, we appreciate the challenges associated with this type of program. Each video evaluator is thoroughly educated and certified. The certification includes in-depth role-playing and scenario workshops specific to the industries/environments to be evaluated."

They were desperate to have the shop complete because they do not trained shoppers in the area. This is not a rural area and I have received ongoing "urgent" shop requests from them for last minute shops several miles away from the client.

I am not 007 but I was discreet the entire duration of the shop.( it is not unusual these days for people to carry their phones everywhere they go. Part of the time I held it and part of the time it was tucked candidly in a pocket & my purse with the camera facing outward.

Additionally, my time has been wasted sending countless emails to the company trying to resolve this, they were extremely slow to respond and when they eventually did, their replies were both evasive and condescending in their refusal to compensate me for my work.

I have been advised to pursue legal action against them and it has been recommended that I seek damages for my additional time and resources to resolve this. I have also been encouraged to report them to agencies that will evaluate their business practices and how they represent themselves.

I am presently pursing the possibilities of a class action law suit because I have learned that there are many others who have been mislead and refused payment by this same company. At this point, its not so much about the money as it is the fact that they get away taking advantage of people and that should not be tolerated in this industry or anywhere else.