Istock is stealing!!! PP is on january 9. i have 100 sales and all are 0.28. Every other page i have one on demand download on 10 subscription sales!

They are stealing every day. Not only oktober.

Apologies are always appreciated , but this is only the first step.

but the error was made by iStock , this is the risk of doing business.
Istock has made ??mistakes and I do not see why I have to pay for his mistakes .
Istock will assume the burden of this failure . So this will be a GREAT incentive for it to NOT COMMIT more mistakes like that.
My job : to make images that may have market , load them (in their mode cumbersome and slow), I have this job done properly.
THEIR job : to sell my images , to correctly calculate royalties and distribute them in a timely manner . This work Istock has done wrong.
WHY I have to pay for a job that someone else has done wrong ?
They are mistaken his own work and I have to pay for this mistake.
If I 'm wrong in my work, I pay directly the consequences.
But what I did wrong in my work ? NOTHING
This mechanism that istock has put together is deeply wrong
I repeat, do not ever again shortly nullla and retire all of my images.
I do not understand why I have to be treated so badly by a microstock .

Why do you think its normal to keep money that isnt yours? Honest question. In my opinion, it doesnt work like that with any company.

If the taxman makes a mistake, you have to pay it back
When items in a store are priced differently, you pay the register price, even when its more expensive
When utilities make a mistake you have to pay them back.

I once was undercharged for my gas bill due to their error, and still needed to pay the money, I protested but all they did was give me payback scheme to soften the blow.


ETA: Being overpaid by your employer or a mistake from the bank will also be corrected and the money has to be returned.

It is not the problem  oktober. November,december,january i sold 1000 images in PP, they were all 0.28$

Quote from: Aurielaki on February 27, 2014, 02:07

Apologies are always appreciated , but this is only the first step.

but the error was made by iStock , this is the risk of doing business.
Istock has made ??mistakes and I do not see why I have to pay for his mistakes .
Istock will assume the burden of this failure . So this will be a GREAT incentive for it to NOT COMMIT more mistakes like that.
My job : to make images that may have market , load them (in their mode cumbersome and slow), I have this job done properly.
THEIR job : to sell my images , to correctly calculate royalties and distribute them in a timely manner . This work Istock has done wrong.
WHY I have to pay for a job that someone else has done wrong ?
They are mistaken his own work and I have to pay for this mistake.
If I 'm wrong in my work, I pay directly the consequences.
But what I did wrong in my work ? NOTHING
This mechanism that istock has put together is deeply wrong
I repeat, do not ever again shortly nullla and retire all of my images.
I do not understand why I have to be treated so badly by a microstock .

Why do you think its normal to keep money that isnt yours? Honest question. In my opinion, it doesnt work like that with any company.

If the taxman makes a mistake, you have to pay it back
When items in a store are priced differently, you pay the register price, even when its more expensive
When utilities make a mistake you have to pay them back.

I once was undercharged for my gas bill due to their error, and still needed to pay the money, I protested but all they did was give me payback scheme to soften the blow.


ETA: Being overpaid by your employer or a mistake from the bank will also be corrected and the money has to be returned.

@Ron,

I agree with you to a certain point and that is Proper Explaination of each individual failure by the one who caused the mess.

I guess I am in the minority, in that I am glad to be getting an explanation, and some acknowledgment that they are cleaning up their act.  I have been posting here asking for those things and so have a lot of others and I am glad to see some response to our concerns.

Let me be clear.  I would MUCH rather have the money, but did anyone seriously think that was going to happen?

Their credibility level is a big fat 0. They might as well have said the money fell into our accounts from the 6th dimension, or whatever story they care to make up while thieving, if the peasants are gratefully groveling just from getting an extra email. "2 ez"

Quote from: Ron on February 27, 2014, 03:50

When items in a store are priced differently, you pay the register price, even when its more expensive

Actually, not in some places.  They're only supposed to charge you the displayed price.  Some states have laws about that:
https://www.google.com/search?q=register+has+wrong+price

OT the other day I got a 6 pack of milk and it should have been around 3 pounds but they charged me 6x3=18, the next day went to the supermarket and they replaced the 15 pounds, there was a lady behind me saying they can pay me the double if I ask because of their error, of course I haven't once that wasn't my goal, there are companies and companies, oh iStock where are you?

Quote from: Aurielaki on February 27, 2014, 02:07

Apologies are always appreciated , but this is only the first step.

but the error was made by iStock , this is the risk of doing business.
Istock has made ??mistakes and I do not see why I have to pay for his mistakes .
Istock will assume the burden of this failure . So this will be a GREAT incentive for it to NOT COMMIT more mistakes like that.
My job : to make images that may have market , load them (in their mode cumbersome and slow), I have this job done properly.
THEIR job : to sell my images , to correctly calculate royalties and distribute them in a timely manner . This work Istock has done wrong.
WHY I have to pay for a job that someone else has done wrong ?
They are mistaken his own work and I have to pay for this mistake.
If I 'm wrong in my work, I pay directly the consequences.
But what I did wrong in my work ? NOTHING
This mechanism that istock has put together is deeply wrong
I repeat, do not ever again shortly nullla and retire all of my images.
I do not understand why I have to be treated so badly by a microstock .

Why do you think its normal to keep money that isnt yours? Honest question. In my opinion, it doesnt work like that with any company.

If the taxman makes a mistake, you have to pay it back
When items in a store are priced differently, you pay the register price, even when its more expensive
When utilities make a mistake you have to pay them back.

I once was undercharged for my gas bill due to their error, and still needed to pay the money, I protested but all they did was give me payback scheme to soften the blow.


ETA: Being overpaid by your employer or a mistake from the bank will also be corrected and the money has to be returned.

Hi Ron,
I do not understand the binomial:
you make a mistake -> I will pay for your mistake
This I really do not understand it.
Peace

It's not that unusual for companies to make a mistake, as Ron has pointed out above.

A few years back, we had a long-term savings account (that we put money into monthly) mature while we were on holiday.
It so happened, when we got back, we opened their third letter first, which was the one threatening us with legal action if we didn't pay them (whatever it was, certainly less than �50) by return of post. Bit of a shock - hadn't realised the policy had matured until later on we found two letters, one telling us out policy had matured and enclosing a cheque, the second saying they've overpaid us by one month's savings and we had to pay it back. The legal threat was the third, and dated ten days after the first, and only four days after the second, telling us about the overpayment. In July, which is the peak month for Scots to go on holiday, so hardly unreasonable that we hadn't responded to their second letter within four days.
Of course, I internally vowed to have nothing to do with that company again (because of the 4-day legal threat, not because of their mistake) but yesterday I got a letter in telling me that they had taken over the storecard accounts of one of my store cards.

At the end of Jan this year, I got my ISA statement in for the quarter, and I noticed there was no note about the 'cash reserve'. As it happened, I had an appointment with them yesterday, so I'd made a mental note to ask about it then. But at the end of last week, I got a letter in sayhing it had been a mistake throughout their system and all clients with my sort of policy had been affected. This one is different, in that they hadn't overpaid me money I had to pay it back, but it was a sum of almost �19k. However, in parallel with iStock/Getty, this is a huge company (Barclays) who seem to be in some sort of trouble and are shedding >7000 of their UK staff and many more abroad this year (I've spoken to three different reps since November, having dealt with one guy for c15 years previously; and the one I saw yesterday is starting with a different company on  Monday.)

None of this defends iStock, but it's not an isolated case the say some people seem to think.

Annoying as paying back money they'd overpaid you is, think of how we regularly have to pay for their incompetance when they have a site outage and offer a credit value discount to recompense buyers.
In these cases, we lose a percentage of our legitimate earnings through their sheer negligence in putting up code which hasn't been properly tested. Morally and logically, they should take all the hit on that.

Quote from: Aurielaki on February 27, 2014, 07:11

Quote from: Ron on February 27, 2014, 03:50

Quote from: Aurielaki on February 27, 2014, 02:07

Apologies are always appreciated , but this is only the first step.

but the error was made by iStock , this is the risk of doing business.
Istock has made ??mistakes and I do not see why I have to pay for his mistakes .
Istock will assume the burden of this failure . So this will be a GREAT incentive for it to NOT COMMIT more mistakes like that.
My job : to make images that may have market , load them (in their mode cumbersome and slow), I have this job done properly.
THEIR job : to sell my images , to correctly calculate royalties and distribute them in a timely manner . This work Istock has done wrong.
WHY I have to pay for a job that someone else has done wrong ?
They are mistaken his own work and I have to pay for this mistake.
If I 'm wrong in my work, I pay directly the consequences.
But what I did wrong in my work ? NOTHING
This mechanism that istock has put together is deeply wrong
I repeat, do not ever again shortly nullla and retire all of my images.
I do not understand why I have to be treated so badly by a microstock .

Why do you think its normal to keep money that isnt yours? Honest question. In my opinion, it doesnt work like that with any company.

If the taxman makes a mistake, you have to pay it back
When items in a store are priced differently, you pay the register price, even when its more expensive
When utilities make a mistake you have to pay them back.

I once was undercharged for my gas bill due to their error, and still needed to pay the money, I protested but all they did was give me payback scheme to soften the blow.


ETA: Being overpaid by your employer or a mistake from the bank will also be corrected and the money has to be returned.

Hi Ron,
I do not understand the binomial:
you make a mistake -> I will pay for your mistake
This I really do not understand it.
Peace

But you arent paying for their mistake. You just have to pay back what they OVERpaid. If it all is calculated correctly, you only pay back what they paid too much, you shouldnt be out of pocket, so you are not paying for their mistake.

Disclaimer: Assuming IS calculated the overpayment correctly.

They take an extraordinary 85% to keep their house in order, so it should be extraordinarily in order. If even despite all of that things go wrong, it's negligence, so: swallow it. Like a good hoe. It all have been covered well in advance by that 85%.

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on February 27, 2014, 06:13

Quote from: Ron on February 27, 2014, 03:50

When items in a store are priced differently, you pay the register price, even when its more expensive

Actually, not in some places.  They're only supposed to charge you the displayed price.  Some states have laws about that:
https://www.google.com/search?q=register+has+wrong+price

It is like this in most of the countries that I know.
I am surprised if it is different in Ireland because I thought that it was the same for the whole European Union.

Charging something different than a displayed price is basically scamming the customer, and should be punishable by law. They used to do this frequently to tourists in some establishments in commie and ex-commie countries, they got instantly blacklisted by embassies and consulates +threats of political sanctions if it keeps happening... it all disappeared very quickly

Annoying as paying back money they'd overpaid you is, think of how we regularly have to pay for their incompetance when they have a site outage and offer a credit value discount to recompense buyers.
In these cases, we lose a percentage of our legitimate earnings through their sheer negligence in putting up code which hasn't been properly tested. Morally and logically, they should take all the hit on that.

Case in point....the search is currently borked. Add the word CAR to the main search box, select the drop-down CAR. No cars in sight in the resultant search.