Statements appearing in these forums represent the opinions of the authors
of each post, not the opinion of WritersWeekly.com and/or BookLocker.com.
It is currently September 2nd, 2014, 12:46 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 89 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: February 2nd, 2004, 7:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: February 2nd, 2004, 7:00 pm
Posts: 1
Just curious, I've been hired as a researcher to write briefs and wanted to know if anyone has had any experiences (good or bad) with this firm. Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Watch Out
PostPosted: February 10th, 2004, 3:24 am 
Offline

Joined: February 9th, 2004, 11:21 pm
Posts: 5
Hello,

I belong to a local digest and recall this company being a hot topic several weeks ago. I don't recall the details, but several of the comments were unfavorable. The initial poster decided not to accept assignments from this company.

That's all I know.

Best wishes.

Sonya


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 19th, 2004, 1:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: February 19th, 2004, 12:55 pm
Posts: 3
I've been working with Deveraux and Deloitte for quite a while (about 4 months) and I must admit it’s a rubbish job. They delay the salary for 2 months, you constantly have to prove them that you did the work (they seem to "forget it") and most astonishing they take your money if the client wants you to change something. "As a result of the amendments request, a 20% deduction will be applied to the fee payable to you" - that’s what they said to me, adding that "Failure to comply with this request may result in a further deduction to the fee payable to you".

That’s so much bullshit about this company.

Similar to Kiwi I am now working with DoctorText - it much better in working conditions and pay.

Alex


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 19th, 2004, 10:49 pm 
Hi all!

I have worked with D&D for about a year and whilst I agree that you used to have to wait up to 8 weeks for pay, this is now (and has been for sometime) a maximum of 6 weeks but as little as 2. (mostly 4 !)

I disagree with Alex completely - Deveraux and Deloitte have very high standards when it comes to the work that it delivers and indeed it expects from its researchers.

If you don’t deliver what you’re asked for then yes you do receive a penalty on your pay.

In 25 + pieces I have only had 2 penalties.

Also, I’ve also never been asked to remind them of the work that I did – simply to invoice them for it.

If you can deliver (and no offence Alex but the standard of English in your mail may suggest that you can’t) *oops* then I think it’s fairer in the long run for the better researchers to be protected by the policies in place and enjoy the benefits it has for the standards of the organisation as a whole.

As for the conditions - well you work from home so you only have yourself to blame!


Whilst they could work on their human interaction a little and it takes time to be offered the corporate projects, I can honestly say that I have worked for many organisations in this field and I have never earned as much in as many areas as I do with D&D (at least £1,000 per month) for working as much as I please - only about 15 hrs per week at present.


If you look at www.deverauxandeloitte.com and see the levels that they charge and indeed pay (about 50% of sale price) compared to places like "doctortext" you will see the difference between the level of the services and pay offered.

My advice is that if you want a challenge and you are not a run of the mill writer then go for it!

Best Wishes

Sarah Jayne Lecavalier


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Deveraux and Deloitte
PostPosted: February 20th, 2004, 9:01 am 
Offline

Joined: January 9th, 2004, 4:06 pm
Posts: 96
Location: Canada
Hey Sahrah,
Picky, picky, We all make mistakes! Oraganizations is spelled as such!!!Perhaps Alex_NN just felt relaxed as if he were among friends?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: February 20th, 2004, 6:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: January 16th, 2004, 1:41 pm
Posts: 400
Location: Denton, TX
Sahrah,

It's good for us to hear two different stories about the same company; it gives us a chance to see some problems one person had-- and therefore keep an eye out for such problems --while still allowing us to see that the company is legit.

These are forums, not a collection of articles-- many of the people here use "chatspeak" and proper grammar isn't dictated here. The style is simply more informal, and it doesn't speak for how anyone writes their formal pieces.

Putting "no offense" (and by the way, you spelled it "offence"-- pot calling the kettle black?) before an insult doesn't make it any less insulting.

I would say that you are perfectly welcome to post your opinion of the establishment, but I don't think that having had a different experience with them gives you the right to insult someone who has had a different experience. For the record, I would react the same way if Alex_NN came on and posted about your inability to write.

I'm not a moderator or anything, but I feel like I should just say this: can't we try to keep this a nice, casual, and overall friendlyl place to discuss our vocation?

_________________
Georgia ("Gia") Manry
[url=http://georgiamanry.com]GeorgiaManry.com[/url]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: February 20th, 2004, 10:36 pm 
Dear Giapet and Molly,

Thanks for your comments. To be honest I think all the points that you have stated go without saying.

I am also confident that the majority of readers will know that I was plainly providing an opinion on Deveraux and Deloitte, whilst stating the point that Deveraux and Deloitte will be draconian when standards slip!

Typos or not, the point was made, as I said, with no malice intended.

In reply to some of your points it is of course good etiquette not to infer any emotive feelings into written messages, especially on message boards!

Of course, not only is this highly subjective, it is often very easy to misconstrue the writer's intent.

Message boards are full of the same old same discussions everywhere you look.

That I may say is the weakness but the beauty of the written form!

On the subject of the written form, thank you for your comments - I can assure you that 'organisation' is the correct spelling in the UK and 'offence' and 'offense' are both acceptable in the context used.

Have a great day,

Sahrah


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Another opinion
PostPosted: February 21st, 2004, 8:53 am 
Offline

Joined: February 21st, 2004, 8:49 am
Posts: 8
http://www.blagger.com/scripts/db4.php? ... e8c9a1c89c

This company calls itself a supplier of research papers to students and general members of tghe public in need of a research paper. They operate in the UK, Australia and the USA. I worked with them for a feww months and a the moment of remunaration they came up with a story of plagiarism to avoid paying me my salary. They are very smart as only reachable via E-mail. I contacted Jon Tudor via E-mail and even wrto to BBC Watchdog about this. I received an abusive e-mail from Jon Tudor and never heard form the other partner Stephen Deveraux or anyone else from the company about that matter. I only received a pathetic sum not even worth half of the money the company owed me!!!! IF OYU ARE A STUDENT AND SEE THEIR ADVERT RUN AWAY AND IF YOU ARE IN NEED OF A PAPER PLEASE, PLESE DO NOT COMMIT THE MISTAKE TO GO TO THE: SCAM!SCAM1SCAM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: February 23rd, 2004, 9:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: February 23rd, 2004, 7:54 pm
Posts: 1
Hi Everyone,

I recommend these guys too.

I have worked for D&D for a few months after seeing their advert on my university careers site.

Getting work at the beginning is tough, but once you do, if you do a good job it soon starts to roll in.

Whilst it’s true that if you don’t meet the quality guidelines you get a penalty on your fee, I have been paid over £800 so far and all on time.

Sometimes the work is hard but you get to choose what you want, when you want it.

I am not sure that the person above (Lynn) is being wholly honest.

Not only are you given 2 contact numbers when you join, the company also has a 24 hour sales line, as you can see on their new website. (www.deverauxanddeloitte.com)

Just so everyone knows, I have spoken to three members of staff over the phone in the past.

Reading Lynn’s comments, one thing that does spring to mind is the constant warnings about plagiarising work off the net or from other sources that we get.

We were recently been told that 5 researchers had been caught doing this.

If Lynn ever did work for D&D I can only think that she was infact one of the scammers that tried to rip off the company be passing off plagiarised work as their own.

She got caught and to her and all like her I say good riddance.

In my view the honest researchers that work hard for this company to build up its reputation shouldn’t have to suffer from those that try and freeload off our efforts.



James


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: February 24th, 2004, 8:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: October 8th, 2003, 4:46 pm
Posts: 687
Am I missing something here? You think people who plagierize and pass other people's work off as their own deserve whatever they get, yet you're working for a company that sells papers to students who will then plagierize and pass them off as their own. So, what makes this behaviour okay in the second scenario, the fact you're being paid or the fact you haven't been caught?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: February 24th, 2004, 11:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: January 16th, 2004, 1:41 pm
Posts: 400
Location: Denton, TX
BookCoverDesigner wrote:
Am I missing something here? You think people who plagierize and pass other people's work off as their own deserve whatever they get, yet you're working for a company that sells papers to students who will then plagierize and pass them off as their own. So, what makes this behaviour okay in the second scenario, the fact you're being paid or the fact you haven't been caught?


I wish people would just post about their own experiences and refrain from making comment on the validity of what other people say. :\

_________________
Georgia ("Gia") Manry
[url=http://georgiamanry.com]GeorgiaManry.com[/url]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: opinion
PostPosted: February 25th, 2004, 7:55 am 
Offline

Joined: February 21st, 2004, 8:49 am
Posts: 8
This post was remove because Deveraux and Deloitte alleged that it contained libel. The poster needs to reword her opinion and repost it without alleging illegal activity.

-WritersWeekly.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: February 26th, 2004, 11:35 am 
Offline

Joined: October 8th, 2003, 4:46 pm
Posts: 687
There was also a very good article covering the topic and the impact it can have on students, including forfeiting their degrees, and also references some lawsuits brought against term paper mills. The article was written back in 2001.


http://www.dailyfreepress.com/news/2001 ... 8812.shtml


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Rewording of my opinion
PostPosted: February 26th, 2004, 6:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: February 21st, 2004, 8:49 am
Posts: 8
There are thousands of such companies, all of which claim to product the work for “reference purposes only”, however, truly speaking they all know, that at least 1% of their customers will hand the essay in. Hence they admit that they are accepting plagiarism to a certain extent.
Knowing that, they deliberately outline that this essay would never be published or sold to anyone else so that customers would be sure that if he will hand in the essay tutors will never find out.
I am not saying that this is illegal – I am saying that this is unethical business. Because of companies like Deveraux and Deloitte students study less than they should be, hence getting less knowledge. In the long term this will subsequently lead to the lower IQ among the students. Moreover they jeopardise the education system by offering students the “products” which students are supposed to produce themselves. And you, dear Sahrah, along with other people working in the same industry are assisting such companies in getting richer by ripping-off poor students.
In my opinion you should not be proud of working for them. It’s the same as you’ll go to African countries and sell the food to local people – they’ll be buying it because they do not have a choice, however these would not be the money “to be proud of”. This is what I call unethical business.
Presuming you have very good education you can really make a difference by working somewhere else, but you, following your egoistic motives are very conductive in helping essays companies to rip-off more and more students. That’s understandable but not ethical.

Always yours,
Lynn

P.S. WritersWeekly, is that soft enough?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: February 26th, 2004, 9:01 pm 
Dear All,


As usual these discussions have reached a dead end, perpetuated by groundless reasoning plucked out from the thinnest of thin air.

The bottom line is that there are two schools of thought here, and neither side is likely to make headway.

My school of thought is that we entrust people (i.e. D&D’s customers) with a modicum of common sense and honesty, the other school of thought acknowledges such exists, but unlike me, they believe that the dishonest minority should in fact trump them by generating action/thought that will deny the honest (majority) the legitimate use of a greatly beneficial service.

Or at the very least the opposing school of thought believe that they are justified in unfairly criticising those that provide this service, by either failing, or ignoring to see the benefits that it provides.

It cannot be denied that

1) D&D’s services are of legitimate use to the majority.
2) That honest students can greatly benefit from using them.
3) That a very small minority will try and abuse their service.

On point 3, D&D has never stated that such isn’t the case, either in public or to us.

However, I say this to the opposing school of thought - can you imagine a world where the dishonest use of

books,
internet sites,
prescription drugs,

denied the honest and legitimate use of these products?

I maintain that the argument comes down to this,

If you believe that you can ensure that everything with a wholly legitimate use to the majority, is 100% foolproof against abuse by the minority, then your living in a world that is far removed from reality, and that would do nothing but to hold back the advancement not just of education, but of our society at large.

By denying those with the legitimate intention, because of the actions of the 1% illegitimate minority, you run the risk of stifling the honest and open use of this service, thus harming the honest majority at the expense of the dishonest minority. On a balance, I believe that there can be no justification in this denial.


I am glad to say that D& D realise this as well. Even so, they do not force you to undertake any work that your feel is against your ethics.

Also in their defence I must say that you are never even pushed to undertake any work, and can pick assignments as you choose. Granted it may take you longer to get the bigger projects if you don’t undertake academic work, but in the end some of my friends who chose not to, still received corporate (albeit initially small) assignments after a while.



In further response to Lynn personally, after your initial libellous allegations were removed, and have now been toned down, your arguments have being uncovered as rather weak.


"truly speaking they all know, that at least 1% of their customers will hand the essay in. Hence they admit that they are accepting plagiarism to a certain extent."

D&D do acknowledge that attempts to do this may occur, but by this reasoning a publisher of a book or an internet site that has their work copied are doing the same.

"Because of companies like Deveraux and Deloitte students study less than they should be, hence getting less knowledge. "

An honest student with a fully referenced expert writer’s opinion is far more likely to have superior knowledge on a question than one without, and indeed can be helped with the information seeking process to such an extent that they can actually spend more analysing the information and spend more time understanding the actual topic area.

Again see my arguments on the reasonableness of the denial of the service because of the dishonest minority.

"by ripping-off poor students."

So by gaining legitimate high quality academic help they are being ripped off? So when a student receives tuition - is your reasoning the same? How can someone be ripped off when they are receiving exactly what they want and what they pay for? Do you even think D&D forces their services upon people?

"It’s the same as you’ll go to African countries and sell the food to local people – they’ll be buying it because they do not have a choice"

That comment is so laughable that it doesn’t even warrant a reply.


As I said at the beginning, the viewpoints of the opposing sides will never change.

I won’t be posting on here anymore because the discussion (or lack of it) has reached a dead end.

As far as I am concerned there is a distinct lack of ability from the opposing school of thought to see both sides of the argument, and accurately assess the benefit/harm ratio.

The fact that they have seen it fit to press their black and white viewpoint in tandem with unjustified judgements on the way that others see fit to maintain both their ethics and run their professional lives, only goes to further show the lack of foresight and balanced reasoning from their side of the discussion.

Kind regards,

Sahrah


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 89 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group