Hagen-Sinclair Research Recruiting Chico, Inc

My office and that of my research partner communicated many times with this participant to explain that our email about the study contained inaccurate information about the mode of payment and that she would be paid $not by check but by e-rewards from her panelThis was communicated clearly in
the initial panel survey that she took (see attachment), so it is certain that she actually knew this.The participant seized on this technicality to insist that we pay her another $by check in addition to the $e-rewards credits she had already received, and I have written and mailed this check todayBecause of this opportunistic move she is essentially receiving double payment and a total of $for a $studyWe consider her to be a problematic research respondent and she is now on our national Do Not Recruit list as a consequenceThankfully percent of all research respondents are much more reasonable and respectful

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
I received the check for $

RevDex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.It was unfortunate that my complaint had to go through Revdex.com before the business provided any resolution especially for a small amount of money. A resolution of letting me know that their client had no evidence that the beta testing was fully completed would have suffice; however, the lack of communication from the business forced me to file a complaint against the business through Revdex.com. Regards,***

Our client was responsible for paying the $75 incentive and did not originally do so because according to her information, the respondent did not complete the study. After learning of the Revdex.com complaint, however, our client paid it and the respondent indicated that she received it.

I am confident that my team and I could not have done more to explain and rectify the situation.The screen shot that I presented was the opening page of the survey that the respondent took, with correct payment information clearly detailed.Our client also worked with her directly from December 7 to correct the misunderstanding in our email about the source of the incentive and to apologize. Here is the correspondence:-----Original Message-----From: [redacted] <[redacted]@focusvision.com>To: [redacted] <[redacted]@aol.com>Sent: Wed, Dec 21, 2016 8:26 pmSubject: RE: Executive Interview ConfirmationHi [redacted], I apologize for the silence (I was in and out of the office) but I was working with Research Now to get this resolved for you. Please see below for their exact response. Again, we apologize for the inconvenience and if you still have any questions, please reach out to member services directly. Of course, keep me posted!  Hi [redacted] The panel team has confirmed that [redacted] was credited. Let us know if she writes you back. Again, we apologize for the inconvenience.   [redacted] *Please note our offices will be closed December 23rd, December 26th, December 30th, and January 2nd for the Christmas and New Year's holidays. From: [redacted] [mailto:[redacted]@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 5:37 AMTo: [redacted] <[redacted]@focusvision.com>Subject: Re: Executive Interview Confirmation Another week and still no check.  At this point I think my only option is legal action.    -----Original Message-----From: [redacted] <[redacted]@focusvision.com>To: [redacted] <[redacted]@aol.com>Sent: Mon, Dec 12, 2016 2:53 pmSubject: RE: Executive Interview ConfirmationHi [redacted], Please see below:  From Research Now  team – I think part of the issue is the panel member has multiple email addresses. They are registered under our panel at the following email address. I have replaced the 4 digits in the email with [redacted] for privacy purposes.  In your last response to them please tell them to use and check this email that they are registered with to work with the panel team. They were sent a notification on the 7th.  I am being informed that we will need to process all of the incentives at project completion. [redacted]@aim.com  [redacted]Account Executive,FocusVision**
[redacted]
[redacted]
   From: [redacted] [mailto:[redacted]@aol.com] Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 9:36 AMTo: [redacted] <[redacted]@focusvision.com>Subject: Re: Executive Interview Confirmation Yes, I have reached out to erewards with no answer.  I have tried calling them, but I only get a recording.    -----Original Message-----From: [redacted] <[redacted]@focusvision.com>To: [redacted] <[redacted]@aol.com>Sent: Mon, Dec 12, 2016 12:31 pmSubject: RE: Executive Interview ConfirmationHi [redacted], I’m reaching out to my contact at Research Now for a status update and will get back to you as soon as I hear back. In the meantime, did you reach out to Member services? Research Now do have requirements that they want their members to follow. So reaching out to them directly with the requested information will definitely accelerate the process. I’m sorry, Research Now to manage all incentives and legally we are allowed to incentivize their panel directly. Also, we apologize for not communicating accurate information during the interviews regarding incentives. Just to reiterate, incentives are to managed by Research Now directly (not by Decipher) and respondents to be incentivized as soon as the survey is closed (not after 2 weeks). Rest assured, you will receive the incentive and I will do everything in my power to get this resolved as soon as possible.   Thanks for your continued patience, and we're sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused you! [redacted]     From: [redacted] Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 1:46 PMTo: '[redacted]' <[redacted]@aol.com>Subject: RE: Executive Interview Confirmation Hi [redacted], I just spoke to folks at Research Now and they confirmed that someone from the member services should be reaching out by end of the week (I am hoping today). Since the panel is owned by Research Now, they would like to manage all incentives directly. Now if you would like to reach out to them sooner, they suggested you to submit a request via the member portal. I’d suggest you waiting to hear back and if you still don’t, please reach out to me (let’s please allow time until Monday).   Here is the direct link:https://www.e-rewards.com/contactus.do Thanks again! [redacted]

I am disgusted by the tone of the response.   This company informed me in writing that I would be sent check for $150 for my time.  Many weeks after the study, I inquired about the check and was then informed AFTER I had participated that the compensation had changed.  To imply I am the unethical party is ridiculous.   The screen shot that was attached was never presented to me.   What is unclear about this?To thank you for your time and feedback, Decipher will mail your $150 honorarium to this address: 
  
[redacted] [redacted]
Skaneateles, NY 13152
  
With kind regards, 
[redacted]
 
[redacted] l Senior Project Director
HAGEN / SINCLAIR  RESEARCH RECRUITING INC., CHICO
[redacted] l  Chico, CA 95926  l  [redacted]direct
[redacted]@hagensinclair.com  l   www.hagensinclair.coThe response also states I was informed multiple times, throughout the process about the change.   Also untrue.  I was not informed until Dec. 23:Hi [redacted],Our original email that
mentioned a $150 check was incorrect. It was based on the information
that we had received from our client that Research Now panelists would
be paid with checks.During the last round of
correspondence between you, [redacted], and [redacted] we learned that Research
Now pays their respondents in credits and not checks. There will not be
an additional payment.I hope this clears up the misunderstanding. Please let me know if you have further questions.We appreciate your participation.Thanks,[redacted] Cross l PresidentHAGEN / SINCLAIR  RESEARCH RECRUITING INC., CHICO[redacted] l  Chico, CA 95926  l  [redacted] direct[redacted]@hagensinclair.com  l   www.hagensinclair.com  You made the mistake - own up to it and apologize instead of blaming me for asking for what I was promised!   I am thrilled that I am no longer on your recruitment list!

[redacted] of Hagen/[redacted] responded to Mark on Monday, February 8 to explain the reporting error that led to the delay. The check is being mailed to him this week.