Author Topic: Hold on to your wallets! "There are irregularities with October's PP royalties" (Read 98924 times)

jorgenmac · « **Reply #600 on:** February 28, 2014, 14:10 »

Quote from: Ron on February 27, 2014, 08:00

Quote from: topol on February 27, 2014, 07:58
Quote from: Beppe Grillo on February 27, 2014, 07:46
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 [nofollow]

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
Not if its an honest mistake

OK.. kept my gob shut throughout this debacle... but now that i've 'earnt' my $800 dollars (4 grand plus cut to IS) plus this month, Ron mate... how much can I spend and how much shall I keep tucked under my mattress for another 3 months just in case IS have another monumental mess up? Just asking

pancaketom · « **Reply #601 on:** February 28, 2014, 14:51 »

Quote from: jorgenmac on February 28, 2014, 14:10

Quote from: Ron on February 27, 2014, 08:00
Quote from: topol on February 27, 2014, 07:58
Quote from: Beppe Grillo on February 27, 2014, 07:46
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
Not if its an honest mistake

OK.. kept my gob shut throughout this debacle... but now that i've 'earnt' my $800 dollars (4 grand plus cut to IS) plus this month, Ron mate... how much can I spend and how much shall I keep tucked under my mattress for another 3 months just in case IS have another monumental mess up? Just asking

about 4800 should be safe.

Anyka · « **Reply #602 on:** February 28, 2014, 15:24 »

Well, I never got my announcement-mail from Istock (though I checked my spam box every day), but today they took 68,8 dollars from my account. So now I just have to do 68,8 x 6 to know what the missing e-mail had to say. 412,80 $. GREAT!

lisafx · « **Reply #603 on:** February 28, 2014, 17:03 »

I requested payout before receiving the mail that they were taking the money out. My balance before they took the money out was showing as .76. I don't see any balance showing now - not negative numbers, not anything. Weird.

I assume either they will take it out of the request I made, or I should be in negative numbers at the moment.

Fairplay · « **Reply #604 on:** February 28, 2014, 17:08 »

Quote from: Anyka on February 28, 2014, 15:24

Well, I never got my announcement-mail from Istock (though I checked my spam box every day), but today they took 68,8 dollars from my account. So now I just have to do 68,8 x 6 to know what the missing e-mail had to say. 412,80 $. GREAT!

Same here. They forgot to send me notification mail but not to RECOUP the money!
Grrrr I hate IS!

Monty-m-gue · « **Reply #605 on:** February 28, 2014, 17:17 »

Quote from: lisafx on February 28, 2014, 17:03

I requested payout before receiving the mail that they were taking the money out. My balance before they took the money out was showing as .76. I don't see any balance showing now - not negative numbers, not anything. Weird.

I assume either they will take it out of the request I made, or I should be in negative numbers at the moment.

I too requested a cashout around an hour before I got the email confirming they were going to deduct money. Under "financials" my account is now showing a negative figure. I replied to their email stressing that they weren't to deduct anything from my account without an itemised explanation of their 'recoupment'. Of course, they just ignored it...along with the support ticket I sent a few days ago.

Mantis · « **Reply #606 on:** February 28, 2014, 17:24 »

And my oh my, HOW FAST, EFFICIENT & ACCURATE TO THEIR PROMISE the clawback was......

dpimborough · « **Reply #607 on:** February 28, 2014, 17:43 »

Quote from: Fairplay on February 28, 2014, 17:08

Quote from: Anyka on February 28, 2014, 15:24
Well, I never got my announcement-mail from Istock (though I checked my spam box every day), but today they took 68,8 dollars from my account. So now I just have to do 68,8 x 6 to know what the missing e-mail had to say. 412,80 $. GREAT!

Same here. They forgot to send me notification mail but not to RECOUP the money!
Grrrr I hate IS!

Ditto didn't get a re-coupment email but they certainly managed to email to tell me they took $2.16 from the account and will for 6 months

the halfwits

Noedelhap · « **Reply #608 on:** February 28, 2014, 18:07 »

Quote from: lisafx on February 28, 2014, 17:03

I requested payout before receiving the mail that they were taking the money out. My balance before they took the money out was showing as .76. I don't see any balance showing now - not negative numbers, not anything. Weird.

I assume either they will take it out of the request I made, or I should be in negative numbers at the moment.

Ahh, you know you could have gotten the .76 as well, just type it after the dollar amount.

I cashed out as well, right before they removed the money. On the Financials tabs it shows the negative amount.

fritz · « **Reply #609 on:** February 28, 2014, 18:10 »

Requested payout couple of hours ago and now my Account Balance: is $-56.31 USD was $-60.79 .
Bravo IS

you greedy mouse

roboz · « **Reply #610 on:** February 28, 2014, 18:56 »

In our 'class action' some time ago I deleted out of protest almost my entire (small) portfolio from IStock, with 10 images left. I hardly earned a thing, especially not around September and October. However, IStock is deducting $11.70 over the next six months - which is MORE than I actually made with them during the "overpaid" period

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #611 on:** February 28, 2014, 19:38 »

Quote from: roboz on February 28, 2014, 18:56

In our 'class action' some time ago I deleted out of protest almost my entire (small) portfolio from IStock, with 10 images left. I hardly earned a thing, especially not around September and October. However, IStock is deducting $11.70 over the next six months - which is MORE than I actually made with them during the "overpaid" period

Which is the best evidence to date that this is the equivalent of the "estimated meter reading" for energy bills instead of measuring your actual usage. Unless they are covering a broader period in this initial funds reversal than they said, no matter what they did in screwing up the books, you couldn't have reversed an amount larger than you were credited.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #612 on:** February 28, 2014, 20:03 »

Somehow I believe you are giving them too much credit?

Quote from: dpimborough on February 28, 2014, 17:43

the halfwits

Goofy · « **Reply #613 on:** February 28, 2014, 22:09 »

Quote from: lisafx on February 28, 2014, 17:03

I requested payout before receiving the mail that they were taking the money out. My balance before they took the money out was showing as .76. I don't see any balance showing now - not negative numbers, not anything. Weird.

I assume either they will take it out of the request I made, or I should be in negative numbers at the moment.

Like the IRS they will get you...

photosoup · « **Reply #614 on:** March 01, 2014, 01:32 »

This is what I got from email.

We have removed a total of $-52.57 from your account. This is the first recoupment out of six.....

what???

Beppe Grillo · « **Reply #615 on:** March 01, 2014, 03:23 »

I don't understand, the PP (the figure under the graph) for january are considering the recoupment or not?

sumners · « **Reply #616 on:** March 01, 2014, 03:32 »

-38.00

so frustrating

it's really hard to believe that they treat contributors this way.

TheDrift- · « **Reply #617 on:** March 01, 2014, 04:29 »

Quote from: lisafx on February 28, 2014, 17:03

I requested payout before receiving the mail that they were taking the money out. My balance before they took the money out was showing as .76. I don't see any balance showing now - not negative numbers, not anything. Weird.

I assume either they will take it out of the request I made, or I should be in negative numbers at the moment.

I did this and they made me negative,

KarenH · « **Reply #618 on:** March 01, 2014, 08:49 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on February 27, 2014, 07:06

Quote from: ShadySue on February 26, 2014, 18:45
Quote from: TheBlackRhino on February 26, 2014, 18:38
I posted they should give us our money...and they deleted it. Losers.

Strictly speaking, it was never 'our' money, as 'we' hadn't earned it; but they made the very serious mistake, and didn't spot it at the time (how come?) not the contributors.

But really strictly speaking they DO have some of "our money," since they're making smaller corrections in the contributors' favor, supposedly. So that means they've been underpaying us in some cases. Which cases? For how long? Beats me. No transparency whatsoever.

If they've underpaid contributors (and it sounds like they have from their latest explanation where they say ". . . we also have some transaction corrections that will result in additional amounts being added to contributors’ accounts. . . our review is producing adjustments and in the contributor’s favor") -- then I don't know why they don't wait until they sort the whole thing out, rather than set up six monthly installments for each contributor involved, and then additional transactions to repay the money they underpaid? Seems like it would be cleaner to me. Because based on history, the potential is there that something will be screwed up along the way and they'll have to make a correction to a correction.

Julied83 · « **Reply #619 on:** March 01, 2014, 09:12 »

Do you think starting a petition to istock from all affected contributor can change something ?

Mantis · « **Reply #620 on:** March 01, 2014, 09:20 »

Quote from: Julied83 on March 01, 2014, 09:12

Do you think starting a petition to istock from all affected contributor can change something ?

I doubt a written petition would do anything but make them laugh and end up in the round file, Ju-lee. They have shown time and time again that they simply and clearly do not care about their contributors, let alone what we think. They are in their own cone of silence. When we speak they cover their ears with their hands and say, "la la la la la la la la".........

Anyka · « **Reply #621 on:** March 01, 2014, 09:41 »

Quote from: KarenH on March 01, 2014, 08:49

If they've underpaid contributors -- then I don't know why they don't wait until they sort the whole thing out, rather than set up six monthly installments for each contributor involved, and then additional transactions to repay the money they underpaid? Seems like it would be cleaner to me.

Because "(50 x 6) - (2,5 x 3)" is a LOT more complicated for IS than "50x6" and THEN "2,5x3"

Mantis · « **Reply #622 on:** March 01, 2014, 09:51 »

Quote from: Anyka on March 01, 2014, 09:41

Quote from: KarenH on March 01, 2014, 08:49
If they've underpaid contributors -- then I don't know why they don't wait until they sort the whole thing out, rather than set up six monthly installments for each contributor involved, and then additional transactions to repay the money they underpaid? Seems like it would be cleaner to me.

Because "(50 x 6) - (2,5 x 3)" is a LOT more complicated for IS than "50x6" and THEN "2,5x3"

lol

Lev · « **Reply #623 on:** March 01, 2014, 10:39 »

seems like everyone i know is affected. should be 9000 only.

is there anyone on this forum, who is selling via PP on iStock and who is NOT affected by this "backfire" action?

pancaketom · « **Reply #624 on:** March 01, 2014, 10:44 »

Quote from: dolgachov on March 01, 2014, 10:39

seems like everyone i know is affected. should be 9000 only.

is there anyone on this forum, who is selling via PP on iStock and who is NOT affected by this "backfire" action?

I am, but only because I removed enough files so I made barely over $10 in pp during that time.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Hold on to your wallets! "There are irregularities with October's PP royalties" (Read 98924 times)

jorgenmac

pancaketom

Anyka

lisafx

Fairplay

Monty-m-gue

Mantis

dpimborough

Noedelhap

fritz

roboz

Jo Ann Snover

Uncle Pete

Goofy

photosoup

Beppe Grillo

sumners

TheDrift-

KarenH

Julied83

Mantis

Anyka

Mantis

Lev

pancaketom

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors