BARE Associates International, Inc

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:The receipt was legible I checked, and double checked, the receipt before I sent it, and there was not a problem viewing it I understand their policies and procedures which I adhered to As I stated, the receipt was clear and legible and there was no valid reason for not being paid, other than this being a way to scam mystery shoppers by having the work completed, then making an excuse as to why they couldn't provide payment The only notification I received was that they were not paying me No other emails were sent to meIf they had, I would've responded.
Regards,
*** ***

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me The person I spoke with was very professional and willing to resolve the issue
Regards,
*** ***

We have spoken with the complainant and were able to come to a mutual agreement on how to handle this issue.  We are both satisfied and this complaint should be closed.

For the [redacted] complaint, the project manager states, “The shopper had submitted an illegible receipt and did not submit a clear copy until after the...

deadline. The shopper was sent an email from one of the editors which I have included below.
 
3/16/14—Please resubmit your receipt—it is too blurry and we can't read it.  You may email it, or fax it to ###-###-####.  Please do so by 3pm.  Thank you!”
 
The shopper sent several emails after the report was excluded stating that she did not receive any email regarding the receipt not being readable.  The project manager responded to let her know that at the top of page 3, the Scenario B guidelines state, “Receipts are required and must be CLEAR or we cannot use your shop.” (The shop guidelines have been attached to this email for review by the Revdex.com.  They are provided to the shopper prior to their completing their evaluations.)  It is the shopper’s responsibility to make sure that any provided documentation is clear.  They are also encouraged to check their Shopper Log daily to mitigate any circumstances under which they might not receive emails regarding shop issues. 
 
The project manager also to let her know that when reports are excluded we cannot use the information and cannot send the reports to the client, and therefore BARE is not paid for those evaluations.  When a report is excluded, we are required to find another shopper to complete the evaluation and report successfully.

All of our communication with [redacted], a former mystery
shop evaluator for our company, has been up front and honest.  
 
We perform routine data integrity audits in our...

evaluator
database.   During this process evaluator accounts are flagged for
further inspection if they contain unusual discrepancies or similarities
between things such as street addresses, passwords, IP addresses, birth dates,
Social Security numbers or any other items that, in our industry and
experience, tend to indicate there might be some evaluator fraud
occurring.   Flagged accounts are then temporarily deactivated until
we can reach the evaluator and [redacted]’s account fell into this
category.  We have spoken with [redacted] several times about this problem
but he has not provided satisfactory explanation to justify reactivating his
account with us.  We spoke to him again on August 1 and let him know that
we would no longer be requiring his services and we removed all his information
as he requested.  He will no longer be receiving emails or other types of
communication from our company.

Review: BARE's policy is to pay only 50% for shops they schedule you for which, through no fault of your own, happen to be closed.

It takes just as long to complete a report whether the store be opened or not as one is required to go three times and fill out a special form if the shop is closed.

They claim it is their policy to pay 50% and do not publicize this anywhere.

According to how it suits them, they change policy to avoid paying.

I contacted their managers as well as corporate headquarters and they all stand behind their practice.

None of them apologized and none of them stated that they will publicize this apparent policy.

It's clearly a breach of trust and breach of contract.

Next thing they'll say all jobs completed all year only get paid 25%...it's unpublished made-up policy they can enforce at their own will.Desired Settlement: A few things:

1 - I should be paid the 10 Euros they ripped me off. A class action should also be brought to compensate all others they have ripped off in this way.

2 - I demand an apology for their misrepresentation and treatment of me -- they threatened to sue me should I file a complaint against them.

3 - Their actual policies should be published and enforced.

Business

Response:

This complaint appears to pertain to one of our European branch locations. We will respond with more information as soon as possible, but we must first research the particular situation with the management of those locations before we can do so. Thank you very much for your patience as this may take a little longer than usual to resolve because it involves an overseas office.

Review: I am an independent contractor with this company to perform "mystery shops" at various locations. On March 14, 2014 I successfully completed a mystery shop at a local [redacted] facility. I entered the requested information online, and attached a receipt of my transaction. Because the receipt was rather long, I had to bring the camera a little bit farther away to make sure I included the entire receipt. Before sending it, I checked to make sure the receipt could be enlarged with a two-finger swipe if need be. Ten days later I received an email from an employee of Bare International by the name of Erica S[redacted], indicating my mystery shop had been "excluded" due to the receipt being ineligible. She went on to say they attempted to notify me, however, due to the fact I didn't respond, they excluded the shop. I immediately replied to Ms. S[redacted] informing her that I NEVER received a call, voice mail or email advising me of the "problem" with the receipt. I also attached a picture of the same receipt, although this time I took three separate pictures that were closer. Either way, the receipt was fully able to be clearly read. I did not hear back from Ms. S[redacted] until 4/2/14 when I sent her another email asking about the status of my mystery shop. She went on to tell me they are "not required" to notify anyone is there is a problem, but do it as a "courtesy". She quoted policy and procedures and ended with once again telling me I would not be paid. I feel this is a scam, and I was taken advantage of. I have read on the internet that there are companies that do this on a regular basis, and I feel I have been a victim of such a scam. Bare International is paid by their customers, they have all the information I provided, but still refuse to pay me.Desired Settlement: I want Bare International to pay me the entire fee I am due.

Business

Response:

For the [redacted] complaint, the project manager states, “The shopper had submitted an illegible receipt and did not submit a clear copy until after the deadline. The shopper was sent an email from one of the editors which I have included below.

3/16/14—Please resubmit your receipt—it is too blurry and we can't read it. You may email it, or fax it to ###-###-####. Please do so by 3pm. Thank you!”

The shopper sent several emails after the report was excluded stating that she did not receive any email regarding the receipt not being readable. The project manager responded to let her know that at the top of page 3, the Scenario B guidelines state, “Receipts are required and must be CLEAR or we cannot use your shop.” (The shop guidelines have been attached to this email for review by the Revdex.com. They are provided to the shopper prior to their completing their evaluations.) It is the shopper’s responsibility to make sure that any provided documentation is clear. They are also encouraged to check their Shopper Log daily to mitigate any circumstances under which they might not receive emails regarding shop issues.

The project manager also to let her know that when reports are excluded we cannot use the information and cannot send the reports to the client, and therefore BARE is not paid for those evaluations. When a report is excluded, we are required to find another shopper to complete the evaluation and report successfully.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

The receipt was legible. I checked, and double checked, the receipt before I sent it, and there was not a problem viewing it. I understand their policies and procedures which I adhered to. As I stated, the receipt was clear and legible and there was no valid reason for not being paid, other than this being a way to scam mystery shoppers by having the work completed, then making an excuse as to why they couldn't provide payment. The only notification I received was that they were not paying me. No other emails were sent to me. If they had, I would've responded.

Regards,

Business

Response:

We have spoken with the complainant and were able to come to a mutual agreement on how to handle this issue. We are both satisfied and this complaint should be closed.

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. The person I spoke with was very professional and willing to resolve the issue.

Regards,

Review: The company is not honest. They tell you they will do something and then blow off all communications for months. Ultimately, their word is not kept and their business practices are less than professional. All business should steer clear of this MSP and utilize industry professionals. See resolution below.Desired Settlement: 1. Completely remove all of my specific personal account and personal information from your website including ability to login etc. for email addresses :

[redacted] & [redacted]

2. Stop emailing me.

Business

Response:

All of our communication with [redacted], a former mystery

shop evaluator for our company, has been up front and honest.

We perform routine data integrity audits in our evaluator

database. During this process evaluator accounts are flagged for

further inspection if they contain unusual discrepancies or similarities

between things such as street addresses, passwords, IP addresses, birth dates,

Social Security numbers or any other items that, in our industry and

experience, tend to indicate there might be some evaluator fraud

occurring. Flagged accounts are then temporarily deactivated until

we can reach the evaluator and [redacted]’s account fell into this

category. We have spoken with [redacted] several times about this problem

but he has not provided satisfactory explanation to justify reactivating his

account with us. We spoke to him again on August 1 and let him know that

we would no longer be requiring his services and we removed all his information

as he requested. He will no longer be receiving emails or other types of

communication from our company.

Review: Bare International is a mystery shopping companyI performed work according to the agreement and they continue to make excuses for non- paymentI accepted an assignment to mail post office packages to an [redacted] Food BankI filled the boxes with food for the food bank and then proceeding to send them via priority mail as requiredThe company refuses to reimburse me for the postage for assignments and also refuses to pay me for the assignmentsI have the receipts for the postageThen I completed another assignment for them that involved visiting [redacted] bank in [redacted]I met with a representative and followed all the rules as requiredNow they are making excuses not to pay me for this jobPlease adviseI do not think this company is legitimate.Desired Settlement: I want to be paid for my services and reimbursed for the postage that I laid out and the cost of the food that I sentHere is an itemized accountTotal for jobs: $Also, I would like other consumers to be aware of their shady business practices
Job #- USPS
-RCE Service Evaluation
[redacted] NY ([redacted]) [redacted]
M-F 9AM-5:30PM SA 9AM-3PM SU Closed
[redacted], NY
Directions Shop Fee:
Spec Exp: Food $10, Postage: $26.90, Box: $Total Pay for Job: $
Job #- [redacted]: [redacted]
-[redacted] - [redacted] Bank
[redacted] ([redacted])
[redacted], NY
Shop Fee: + Gas: $Total Pay for Job: $
Job #- USPS
-RCE Service Evaluation
[redacted] NY ([redacted]) [redacted]
HOURS: M-F 9AM-5PM SA 9AM-1PM SU Closed
[redacted], NY
Directions Shop Fee:
Spec Exp: Food $10.00, Postage: $21.25, Box: Total for Job: $
Business
Response:
Regarding the complaint by [redacted], the project manager states:
"This shopper's Scenario C shop performed in [redacted], NY on 5/5/(shop #[redacted]) was excluded as several critical items in the guidelines were not followed, including:
1) She purchased her box at a USPS location
2) The box was not one of the approved dim weight sizes
3) The package was overweight at lboz
Her Scenario C shop performed in [redacted], NY on 5/5/(shop #[redacted]) was excluded because her package was overweight at lboz." The shopper was advised of these scenario violations after the reports were reviewed
For Scenario C evaluations, the shopper is required to purchase the box at a location other than one of the client's locations (found on page of the guidelines, checkmark 3)The box must be one of several sizes—these sizes are listed both in the guidelines and in the shop report (found on page of the guidelines, checkmark 3)The box must weigh between and lbs(page of the guidelines, checkmark 5)It is also indicated in the guidelines that the food that the shopper provides for this evaluation is a donation—it is not reimbursable (page 3, checkmark 4)The guidelines for this scenario have been attached to this email for review by the Revdex.com—they are provided to the shopper prior to their completing the evaluation