Every effort was made to validate the information provided and the information was deemed inaccurate after complete research of the matter The shopper submitted the shop and much of the substantiating narrative was simply a statement that he did not have the time (or interest) in documenting the required information The fact that he felt that he completed the assignment by stating that he did not have enough time to do so does not warrant a second chance We at BestMark took time to do our due diligence to determine if the shop was indeed valid The shopper may continue submitting complaints, but it will not change the indisputable facts that the business card was not valid, there was no one at the dealership by the name or description submitted, the shopper made the determination on his own that he was not required to adhere to the shop requirements because he had overcommitted by taking too many shops in a short period of time, and he admitted that he was confused regarding the facts of the matter In reading his continuing complaint, it is clear that he is taking about the same amount of time and care in constructing his complaint as he did in writing up his mystery shop His shop was NOT accepted, he did NOT provide the substantiating narrative required, and his shop was NOT submitted to the client Another shopper was dispatched to perform the shop correctly and was paid in full, like thousands of others who have submitted quality shops He was removed from our system because he was clearly not a fit, nor did he give us any indication that we would want to work with him in the future Simply complaining repeatedly that something is unfair does not change the indisputable facts of the matter
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 8, 2015/12/21) */ The shopper did NOT in fact comply with the shop instructions to a "T" and admitted this when BestMark staff spoke with herWe were required to contact our client to apologize and ask for special permission for the shopper to go back and perform the non-compliant sections of the shop at a later dateMs [redacted] stated that she was very grateful that we were able to make this arrangement for her, went back to the location and was paid for performing the shop Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 10, 2016/01/04) */
[redacted] successfully completed and was paid for two shops through BestMark; one on 1/18/and the other on 2/19/I believe the shop she is contesting was automatically canceled on 2/20/because she did not confirm or sign off on the shop by 10AM CST, as clearly stated in the client requirements that she signed off on prior to completing the shopHowever, after the shop was canceled due to her error, the shop was reinstated and she was provided with the opportunity to complete the survey form so she could be paidBestMark is not required to reinstate shops that are not completed by the required deadline but we made an exception for ***We wish for her to remove the Revdex.com complaint, as BestMark has done nothing wrong in this case and actually went out of our way for this shopper to be paidThank you,
This gentleman performed a mystery shop for BestMark at an automobile dealership As stated in the shopper instructions, the shopper was required to obtain and upload a business card of the sales associate whom he evaluated The shopper uploaded a plumber's business card with a hand written name on it At BesMark, we make every effort to corroborate the information provided and to compensate shoppers for their efforts In this effort, a BestMark Quality Editor contacted the dealership in question and asked if they had an employee by the name written on the invalid card They indicated they did not The Editor then described the associate based on the information provided by the shopper, and again they confirmed they did not have an employee by that description The shopper also admitted to the editor that he did many shops that day and the day prior and he got confusedFurthermore, the report the shopper submitted was not usable without additional informationThe shopper repeatedly began answering the survey questions in the narrative box but then would quickly write something such as, "When we first started the salesman asked appropriate probing questionsI do not feel the need to type this all out." Starting with Qon, the shopper did not provide details and kept stating that it was too much workQ970: "He did a great job hitting all the major pointsI have many forms to fill out I cant be typing all this out in every box." The editor originally contacted the shopper on 8/for the missing informationThe shopper said he was on an airplane and to email himThe shopper was then emailed twice on 8/5, per the contact logThen, when the editor emailed the shopper for the missing information, on 8/8, she did not get a response for more than hoursThe time this shopper spent performing and completing documents in the completion of this shop is inconsequential Mystery shoppers are compensated for performing shops in adherence to specific instructions Not only did he NOT adhere to the instructions, he felt it to be appropriate that he could submit a poorly written and inaccurate report because he was too busy to take the time required to do the job correctlyAs a result, we scheduled a different shopper to perform the shop correctly and fully compensated that shopper.We will not be compensating this shopper for an assignment that was done poorly, inaccurately and incompletely simply because he feels it appropriate to air his complaint publicly Had he performed the shop according to the specifications (or any part of it for that matter) he would have been paid in full with no issue
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Ms [redacted] is correct that she performed a mystery shop for BestMark on 3/ Her shop was assigned to an editor who attempted to contact Ms [redacted] once on 3/and twice on 3/to obtain critical information without which the shop was invalid In the last email attempt on 3/(the only one that Ms [redacted] references), she was given a deadline by which she needed to respond and provide the needed information She did not do so and the shop was canceled Ms [redacted] did not reach out to BestMark to resolve this matter We are currently making a final attempt this morning to get ahold of Ms [redacted] to obtain the information needed If we are successful, we will submit the shop to the client and Ms [redacted] will be paid her $in full.Ms [redacted] had ample opportunity to perform the shop correctly and adhere to the methodology when performing the shop When she did not do so, BestMark staff reached out in good faith to correct the situation so that Ms [redacted] would receive credit for the shop Because Ms [redacted] either did not notice or did not concern herself with these contacts, the shop was canceled and the matter became one of public record
Every effort was made to validate the information provided and the information was deemed inaccurate after complete research of the matter The shopper submitted the shop and much of the substantiating narrative was simply a statement that he did not have the time (or interest) in documenting the required information The fact that he felt that he completed the assignment by stating that he did not have enough time to do so does not warrant a second chance We at BestMark took time to do our due diligence to determine if the shop was indeed valid The shopper may continue submitting complaints, but it will not change the indisputable facts that the business card was not valid, there was no one at the dealership by the name or description submitted, the shopper made the determination on his own that he was not required to adhere to the shop requirements because he had overcommitted by taking too many shops in a short period of time, and he admitted that he was confused regarding the facts of the matter In reading his continuing complaint, it is clear that he is taking about the same amount of time and care in constructing his complaint as he did in writing up his mystery shop His shop was NOT accepted, he did NOT provide the substantiating narrative required, and his shop was NOT submitted to the client Another shopper was dispatched to perform the shop correctly and was paid in full, like thousands of others who have submitted quality shops He was removed from our system because he was clearly not a fit, nor did he give us any indication that we would want to work with him in the future Simply complaining repeatedly that something is unfair does not change the indisputable facts of the matter
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 8, 2015/12/21) */ The shopper did NOT in fact comply with the shop instructions to a "T" and admitted this when BestMark staff spoke with herWe were required to contact our client to apologize and ask for special permission for the shopper to go back and perform the non-compliant sections of the shop at a later dateMs [redacted] stated that she was very grateful that we were able to make this arrangement for her, went back to the location and was paid for performing the shop Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 10, 2016/01/04) */
[redacted] successfully completed and was paid for two shops through BestMark; one on 1/18/and the other on 2/19/I believe the shop she is contesting was automatically canceled on 2/20/because she did not confirm or sign off on the shop by 10AM CST, as clearly stated in the client requirements that she signed off on prior to completing the shopHowever, after the shop was canceled due to her error, the shop was reinstated and she was provided with the opportunity to complete the survey form so she could be paidBestMark is not required to reinstate shops that are not completed by the required deadline but we made an exception for ***We wish for her to remove the Revdex.com complaint, as BestMark has done nothing wrong in this case and actually went out of our way for this shopper to be paidThank you,
This gentleman performed a mystery shop for BestMark at an automobile dealership As stated in the shopper instructions, the shopper was required to obtain and upload a business card of the sales associate whom he evaluated The shopper uploaded a plumber's business card with a hand written name on it At BesMark, we make every effort to corroborate the information provided and to compensate shoppers for their efforts In this effort, a BestMark Quality Editor contacted the dealership in question and asked if they had an employee by the name written on the invalid card They indicated they did not The Editor then described the associate based on the information provided by the shopper, and again they confirmed they did not have an employee by that description The shopper also admitted to the editor that he did many shops that day and the day prior and he got confusedFurthermore, the report the shopper submitted was not usable without additional informationThe shopper repeatedly began answering the survey questions in the narrative box but then would quickly write something such as, "When we first started the salesman asked appropriate probing questionsI do not feel the need to type this all out." Starting with Qon, the shopper did not provide details and kept stating that it was too much workQ970: "He did a great job hitting all the major pointsI have many forms to fill out I cant be typing all this out in every box." The editor originally contacted the shopper on 8/for the missing informationThe shopper said he was on an airplane and to email himThe shopper was then emailed twice on 8/5, per the contact logThen, when the editor emailed the shopper for the missing information, on 8/8, she did not get a response for more than hoursThe time this shopper spent performing and completing documents in the completion of this shop is inconsequential Mystery shoppers are compensated for performing shops in adherence to specific instructions Not only did he NOT adhere to the instructions, he felt it to be appropriate that he could submit a poorly written and inaccurate report because he was too busy to take the time required to do the job correctlyAs a result, we scheduled a different shopper to perform the shop correctly and fully compensated that shopper.We will not be compensating this shopper for an assignment that was done poorly, inaccurately and incompletely simply because he feels it appropriate to air his complaint publicly Had he performed the shop according to the specifications (or any part of it for that matter) he would have been paid in full with no issue
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Ms [redacted] is correct that she performed a mystery shop for BestMark on 3/ Her shop was assigned to an editor who attempted to contact Ms [redacted] once on 3/and twice on 3/to obtain critical information without which the shop was invalid In the last email attempt on 3/(the only one that Ms [redacted] references), she was given a deadline by which she needed to respond and provide the needed information She did not do so and the shop was canceled Ms [redacted] did not reach out to BestMark to resolve this matter We are currently making a final attempt this morning to get ahold of Ms [redacted] to obtain the information needed If we are successful, we will submit the shop to the client and Ms [redacted] will be paid her $in full.Ms [redacted] had ample opportunity to perform the shop correctly and adhere to the methodology when performing the shop When she did not do so, BestMark staff reached out in good faith to correct the situation so that Ms [redacted] would receive credit for the shop Because Ms [redacted] either did not notice or did not concern herself with these contacts, the shop was canceled and the matter became one of public record