It doesn't make sense as a reply to either. lol
But apparently this isn't the venue to discuss mystery shopping questions ROFLMAO

Well Stacy, it seems like you were a little too descriptive with the details of your shop.

If the customer receives the report no matter who has paid for the meal they should pay the shopper or instead of you getting accused of being paid twice the customer did not pay anything for their report and still got paid for the supplies.

If there was no fee, just reimbursement for the meal, for the shop what would be your incentive to fill out the paperwork. You end up doing the paperwork and feel in a way somewhere down the road you have to pick up a meal for your friends to even things out. Doesn't quite seem fair.

@BirdyC wrote:

I've posed this situation to three of my attorney friends. I'm waiting for a response from the third, and will post them when I have all three. Although it's important to remember that without seeing the shopper/MSC contract and the specific shop guidelines and survey, they can only give their best interpretation, not necessarily a definitive answer....

@BirdyC, please share the responses you received from your attorney friends. Thanks.

A reimbursement is just that; a reimbursement for your out of pocket expense. No out of pocket expense - no reimbursement due.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/08/2017 05:46AM by dakotagypsy.

Wow, great topic and discussion. No doubt in my mind that you should be reimbursed for the meal.

Wow,what a great topic and discussion. No doubt in my mind. You should be reimbursed for the meal.

Hi staceython, Wow what an interesting situation. But if you would allow me to give you my opinion, and I totally disagree with the members who say "you should not get paid" and I will tell you why they are 100% wrong.

We all know that assignment shops comes with requirements, examples of such requirements are A) you need to go to the right establishment at the right day and time. you should buy a specific item, not to exceed the amount of reimbursement. C) you need to take certain photos, or visit the restroom and you see where I am going.

Question: any of these requirements state that for your shop to be accepted and paid for YOU MUST PAY FOR WHAT YOU GET? I don't thinks so, or I have never seen such requirement.

So, you did the report according to the assignment requirements, you stated that you held your end of the contract between you and the MSP. You delivered the report on time and you said that it was accepted.

So for all you members who say wrongly that staceython should not get paid, WHY? Where is the requirement that staceython must personally pay for her meal? It does not exist, and the MSP cannot change the rules once the contact was accepted by both parties.

What if staceython found $75.00 on the street, and used that to pay for the meal? Should the MSP pay her for the report, AND any reimbursement?!

staceython I suggest you reach out to the MPS and explain that you were honest enough to tell them the circumstances, and if you had any prior dealings with the MSP and they value you as a good shopper, they should live up to their end f the bargen. If not LEGALLY.

You should be paid, you did the work, and your good fortune is irrelevant to your contact with the MSP.

My policy is that I stop working with any MSP that does not pay me. I am trying to do business, I am a business so is the MSP. Do you think the MPS will allow any of their clients not to pay them if all entries of the contract were adhered to? NO WAY! So why does the MSP do it to the shopper?

The topic of reimbursement came up during the shoppersFest 2017 in Orlando, FL. I now understand better how this is all done.

You did the report, you should be paid, your good fortune is irrelevant.

@Wassim wrote:

Hi staceython, Wow what an interesting situation. But if you would allow me to give you my opinion, and I totally disagree with the members who say "you should not get paid" and I will tell you why they are 100% wrong.

We all know that assignment shops comes with requirements, examples of such requirements are A) you need to go to the right establishment at the right day and time. you should buy a specific item, not to exceed the amount of reimbursement. C) you need to take certain photos, or visit the restroom and you see where I am going.

Question: any of these requirements state that for your shop to be accepted and paid for YOU MUST PAY FOR WHAT YOU GET? I don't thinks so, or I have never seen such requirement.

So, you did the report according to the assignment requirements, you stated that you held your end of the contract between you and the MSP. You delivered the report on time and you said that it was accepted.

So for all you members who say wrongly that staceython should not get paid, WHY? Where is the requirement that staceython must personally pay for her meal? It does not exist, and the MSP cannot change the rules once the contact was accepted by both parties.

What if staceython found $75.00 on the street, and used that to pay for the meal? Should the MSP pay her for the report, AND any reimbursement?!

staceython I suggest you reach out to the MPS and explain that you were honest enough to tell them the circumstances, and if you had any prior dealings with the MSP and they value you as a good shopper, they should live up to their end f the bargen. If not LEGALLY.

You should be paid, you did the work, and your good fortune is irrelevant to your contact with the MSP.

My policy is that I stop working with any MSP that does not pay me. I am trying to do business, I am a business so is the MSP. Do you think the MPS will allow any of their clients not to pay them if all entries of the contract were adhered to? NO WAY! So why does the MSP do it to the shopper?

The topic of reimbursement came up during the shoppersFest 2017 in Orlando, FL. I now understand better how this is all done.

You did the report, you should be paid, your good fortune is irrelevant.

But this, legally relevant, definition of "reimburse" fully applies.

Reimburse: verb
repay (a person who has spent or lost money).

"the investors should be reimbursed for their losses"

synonyms: compensate, recompense, repay

"we'll reimburse you"

repay (a sum of money that has been spent or lost).

"they spend thousands of dollars that are not reimbursed by insurance"

synonyms: repay, refund, return, pay back
"they will reimburse your travel costs"

A lot has been posted about the literal definition of reimbursement. Rather than focus on that, to me the question is quite simple. Why does the client and/or MSC deserve to make a profit on someone's work without paying a dime?

@LisaSTL wrote:

A lot has been posted about the literal definition of reimbursement. Rather than focus on that, to me the question is quite simple. Why does the client and/or MSC deserve to make a profit on someone's work without paying a dime?

It's interesting, but irrelevant to the agreement between the MSC and the shopper.

No one knows whether the MSC made a profit or not (or, more precisely, was itself re-imbursed for the meal). And, the same for the end client -- which could have been a competitor, a supplier, the IRS, another part of the government, or hundreds of entities other than the dining establishment itself. We also know nothing of what the agreement between the MSC and client specifies, including compensation. Whatever that agreement may be, it's also irrelevant to the matter at hand.

And, of course, the shopper dined without (much) cost and submitted their report.

You mean the agreement where the MSC states the shopper will be reimbursed for a meal? There are seven pages here all stating the same thing, it is not the MSCs business where the initial funds for the meal came from, whether it be money found on the street, the spouse, or a friend. Unless the MSC put it in writing that the meal payment must come out of the shopper's pocket and nowhere else, they violated the contract, not the shopper.

Sorry, but yes it is.

There could be 700 or 7000 pages here stating the same thing (which they don't, but I digress), but the shopper didn't get reimbursed and won't stand a chance in court should they sue.

Let me approach this another way. The restaurant owner hires you to buss tables for three hours. You and the owner agree he will compensate you with a meal in lieu of a cash payment. Only you and the owner know of the arrangement, not the servers. While you are eating a friend sees you and asks the server to put your meal on their tab. Now the owner has your three hours of work plus the money from your friend. The owner makes the argument your meal was free to you so the agreement was fulfilled.

Obviously this will never end up in court. I just happen to find it hard to believe a judge would immediately rule in favor of the MSC. Usually in contract law the agreement is between the two parties. The friend who paid for the meal is a third party unrelated to the contract. The judge would most likely ask the MSC/client to prove why they should receive the benefit of the report without compensating someone for it's value. Without compensating the shopper, in essence they received a gift.

I wanted to add the end client or whether the MSC received the reimbursement intended for the shopper is irrelevant. The shop was set up for the MSC to make a profit and the client to receive valuable information.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/09/2017 07:47PM by LisaSTL.

gukka the definition of the word is moot. What if the OP wants to "reimburse" the friend? What will happen then? Is the OP out that money? The way it was described at ShoppersFest 2017 is that the MSP asks the client for a certain amount that they feel, based on their experience, is equitable. The client is going to pay that amount, and the project goes. The client does not want to pay that amount ( and in my humble opinion the valuable information we provide is priceless) the MSP will not take the assignment. Thus we will never hear about it. Now out of this amount, about 30% goes to the IC, and 70% goes to the MPS. That is understandable the MSP has some work to do to cultivate clenits and get us these assignments.

No matter what the word or the definition of that word might be, this is a case of breach of contract. The OP did the work as per the instructions of the MSP, if there is a point that says the IC MUST PAY TO GET REIMBURSED, then the OP is out of luck, unless the OP reimburse the friend. Otherwise the MSP is in breach of contract.

I ask you will you do any work if you are not paid for? Leave volunteering out of it. We as IC are business owners, and the MSP and the clients are businesses as well. We put up with the fact that we get paid 30+ days after the fact, but to not get paid is not what we do this kind of work for. At least me. If it's your hobby that is fine, but some of us need this kind of work to supplement our income. We take it seriously, we go to conferences, we buy our own equipment, we are a business in business to make money, just like Macdonald, Microsoft, the government, or the MSPs.

@gukka wrote:

shopper didn't get reimbursed and won't stand a chance in court should they sue.

gukka, please let us know if you are an attorney, law student, had any law training, or if you are just stating your opinion. Have you been in court, do you know the logic used in court?

I suggest you look at contract law (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract ) and educate yourself about this situation.

Now I am wondering if the MSPs know how ill informed the ICs are, and if they take advantage of this situation. We need help!

@dakotagypsy wrote:

A reimbursement is just that; a reimbursement for your out of pocket expense. No out of pocket expense - no reimbursement due.

dakotagypsy

A contract is a contract, you don't live up to the terms of a contract, then I'll stop working with you. Yes there are 100s of ICs out there, and there are 1000s of MSPs as well. The ones that treat me well, I will bend backwards to help.

After all we are in the "evaluation" business, so we should evaluate the way MSPs treat us, and the only way we can better ourselves is by telling the MPSs such behavior is unacceptable. And we will not work with them, and they will not be able to fulfill their contract to their clients, and soon they go out of business and that will end the maltreatment.

Here is my latest wee wonderment. Is it the MSC's fault or the end client's fault that the IC and/or their spouse was acquainted with a person who would secretly pay for a meal? Who could predict such a circumstance?!?

The meal was paid for by the spouse's colleague. This payment meant that the shopper incurred no out-of-pocket expense for the meal. There was no need to pay the cost of the meal to the shopper because the shopper did not pay any money for the meal.

Should the shopper be paid some fee for the report? Is this possible according to the terms of the shop agreement? Apparently, the shop payment was not separated into reimbursement and report fee. In exchange for buying the meal and reporting on the attendant experience, the shopper would be reimbursed for the cost of the meal, or up to a certain amount of that cost.

I think the shopper does not have a sound legal case. I believe that the shopper has a generous acquaintance. Certainly, the shopper had a perfect teaching moment during a shop. Because of the shopper's described situation, we are now discussing how shop agreements might be revised for future use. We are wondering whether IC's who are to work in secret have legal recourse in certain situations. We are learning!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/2017 09:24PM by Shop-et-al.

In my many years of conducting restaurant shops for different MSC's I don't recall a report not asking about the handling of the guest check. At the least they want to know if it was picked and returned in a reasonable amount of time. No where in this long thread can I find that this was not required on this shop. So how did the OP complete that part of their report? Since they didn't pay the Server it would appear that the report was incomplete and therefore they could not be reimbursed.

One always has legal recourse on a contractual matter, but the cost of prosecuting a case like this could far exceed the value of one's alleged damages. I am sure that filing fees and out-of-state service costs alone on the MSC would far exceed the value of any reimbursement (and there is none due in this case based on the particulars as they have been presented).

kenasch, if what you say is correct, then the incomplete report could not have been submitted to the client. Unfortunately, if that is the case the MSC did not convey it to the OP.

Or, the OP did not disclose it to us.

I really can't remember if I posted at the start of this thread...I wa in Sarasota, Fl. visiting my SO and accepted a fine dining job an invite him, planing to pay. When the check came, he said, I was his guest, and took out hi CC.
I didn't give it a second thought, he paid, i turned in report and nothing was ever said. My question i: Why should client care as long as they get paid, I the shopper wrote the report, and my MSC didn't care nor question anything. a great meal was had by all....I don't see this a a problem, but then I always try to keep it simple.