Wedding Photographer won't deliver

Zabka

It has been almost a year and we have not received our wedding photos. Photog is located in NI. We have sent certified letters and received no answer and he dos not answer e-mails or his phone either. I know small claims court is an option, but I don't want money and it seems like the small claims would only get me money, and not even too much. I want my photos.
Does anyone have any ideas on what is the best way to proceed to get them? Thank you.
I do not live in NI or Ireland so going there and knocking on the door is not an option right now. I am also pretty sure he has not moved from the address I have.

Delancey

Inconvenient it may be but knocking on the door is probably your best option at this point.

Procrastastudy

Would a local debt collection agency be able to pay a visit for a fee?

Zabka

Can a debt collector also collect goods and not just money?

June Bird

Hi, I must say I know how you feel. I find myself in the same situation except for I am coming up to two years now!! This guy has been paid in full and continues to advertise for weddings etc. He just dodges my calls and doesn't reply to emails. I have told him I will take it further but where do you go!! I don't want to pay solicitor fees as well. Is there a limit in the small claims court. We paid him in the region of 1600...he wasn't cheap!! But same as yourself I really only want the photos!

Procrastastudy

Limit for Small Claims Court is €2000

Not sure what the time limit is (possibly 6 years) but unreasonable delays of any sort may be an issue - hypothetically.

http://www.courts.ie/courts.ie/Library3.nsf/PageCurrentWebLookUpTopNav/Small%20Claims%20Procedure

For educational purposes only - I'm not suggesting you should.

June Bird

Cheers for that, I will look into it. He might even get his ass in gear if I told him I was prepared to go down this route! I just find it hard to believe that they carry on like this and can get away with it!!

Procrastastudy

If this was the consumer issues forum I'd say most people are wise to being threatened with SmCC or simply don't care so don't expect too much from simply threatening it.

But it's not so I'll say check with someone properly qualified that you are with the time limits and its worth investing €25 in.

Zabka

I just find it hard to believe that they carry on like this and can get away with it!!

yeah that's what I'm finding with these photogs, basically the law is on our side to get our money back, but the law is def not on our side to get our pics, since it is *their property* under law, which is BS IMO because I am paying for them to make this property of theirs and without me they wouldn't have it so really it should be 50/50 ownership. Basically we are screwed waiting for them to give us our pics out of the goodness of their hearts and they know we don't just want our money back.

I don't want to pay a solicitor either, but I will if it gets me my pics. There should def be some way I should be able get the pics even if he doesn't want to edit them just give me all the raw one and I'll do it myself or hire someone else who will actually do it.

I have met others though this forum who have the same problems with the photog in question and one of them even did go to SCC and was awarded some compensation but he never showed up and hasn't yet paid up either, as far as I can see it I'm screwed.
I have already threatened him with going to SCC, but he couldn't care less, Photogs are untouchable.

June Bird

Yea it's such rubbish they really suck you in at the start and are so nice until they get their money that is! I'm not giving up and I'm really hoping to get the photo's in time for our second anniversary here's hoping!! I hope you get yours soon as well I suppose keep the pressure on!

Procrastastudy

Just to keep this a legal discussion and because saying it gets it in to my head - the Common Law remedy is damages. Its a different set of laws that governs 'making people do stuff'. You could seek an order, I believe in this case, of specific performance but that would require a solicitor and a higher court.

There's some very good reasons why the remedy in Contract is damages but I won't bore you with my cack handed explanations / interpretations of them. Suffice it to say the law does not set out to be awkward in this matter.

Zabka

The thing that gets me is that "damages" when it comes to wedding should include all the money spent on the wedding as it damages the whole event if you don't get the photos. IMO my damages would be:

5000- venue
400- flowers
3,000- hair, makeup, dresses, and BM and groomsmen wear
20,000 - Travel costs of all guests since it was a destination wedding
1,100- photog

For me, getting roughly 30,000 pounds for damages would actually be paying damages, and not the measly 1,100 which is rather minimal in the scheme of things.

Predalien

This may be a stupid question but why do you think he is withholding the photos? Isn't it likely something happened and there are no photos? In that situation your only remedy is damages. I can't see why he wouldn't just deliver on the photos if he has them and you've paid for them, if I was you I'd worry the photos don't exist.

MagicSean

Zabka wrote: »

The thing that gets me is that "damages" when it comes to wedding should include all the money spent on the wedding as it damages the whole event if you don't get the photos. IMO my damages would be:

5000- venue
400- flowers
3,000- hair, makeup, dresses, and BM and groomsmen wear
20,000 - Travel costs of all guests since it was a destination wedding
1,100- photog

For me, getting roughly 30,000 pounds for damages would actually be paying damages, and not the measly 1,100 which is rather minimal in the scheme of things.

That's ridiculous. How was your wedding day ruined by a future event that you knew nothing about?

Zabka

MagicSean wrote: »

That's ridiculous. How was your wedding day ruined by a future event that you knew nothing about?

Because the future event was to see the documentation of the event in photo form, If i never receive the photos documenting the event it leaves a very sour taste about the whole event. It pretty much makes me feel physically sick. Same things when I see other people's wedding photos usually displayed prominently. You are obviously not in this situation or you would know what I mean.

MagicSean

Zabka wrote: »

Because the future event was to see the documentation of the event in photo form, If i never receive the photos documenting the event it leaves a very sour taste about the whole event. It pretty much makes me feel physically sick. Same things when I see other people's wedding photos usually displayed prominently. You are obviously not in this situation or you would know what I mean.

Your day was not in any way ruined by this. Your memory was not in any way ruined. You haven't got professional photos but I'm sure there were plenty taken by others to document it. If not having a professional photo makes you sour about your wedding day then I pity you.

Procrastastudy

Actually - while I think 30K is taking the micky I wonder, hypothetically, given the cases involving Holidays and emotional distress whether you'd have a case as there is a sentimental value attached to the photos beyond the intrinsic value.

I think you'd be looking at a fairly hefty legal bill trying to prove that one though.

coylemj

Does every wedding photographer demand all of the payment upfront?

The photographer's outlay on the day of the wedding is purely labour since they're all digital these days so the album and printed photographs represents the main cost in terms of raw materials and if the customer pays all of the money upfront then you are a hostage to a fraudster or a lazy photographer who can't manage his time and is now too busy doing other weddings to be bothered to produce your album.

If you had withheld at least the cost of the raw materials and a little bit more then he would have an incentive to produce your album. As things stand he has no such incentive so it makes no commercial sense for him to produce your album. Some might say that reputational damage might be an incentive but clearly he's getting away with this carry-on so why should he change what seems to be a nice little earner with a 100% profit margin?

This is another case (lots of similar cases over in Motors) of someone who has a problem with a supplier and discovers after the event that other people have had the same problem. The moral of the story is: do your research before you hand over the cash or at the very least, in the case of a supplier of services, withhold some of the money until the full service is delivered.

Zabka

Predalien wrote: »

This may be a stupid question but why do you think he is withholding the photos? Isn't it likely something happened and there are no photos? In that situation your only remedy is damages. I can't see why he wouldn't just deliver on the photos if he has them and you've paid for them, if I was you I'd worry the photos don't exist.

I donno, sheer laziness I think. If there is nothing legally we can do to actually force him to give us the pics, he has no motivation. He is already paid and knows we don't want a refund so he can take his whole lifetime promising us pics and never actually doing them. If he didn't have them I think he would have told us because eventually I will go to court to get my money back anyway and this way he could be rid of me sooner.

Zabka

coylemj wrote: »

Does every wedding photographer demand all of the payment upfront?

The photographer's outlay on the day of the wedding is purely labour since they're all digital these days so the album and printed photographs represents the main cost in terms of raw materials and if the customer pays all of the money upfront then you are a hostage to a fraudster or a lazy photographer who can't manage his time and is now too busy doing other weddings to be bothered to produce your album.

If you had withheld at least the cost of the raw materials and a little bit more then he would have an incentive to produce your album. As things stand he has no such incentive so it makes no commercial sense for him to produce your album. Some might say that reputational damage might be an incentive but clearly he's getting away with this carry-on so why should he change what seems to be a nice little earner with a 100% profit margin?

This is another case (lots of similar cases over in Motors) of someone who has a problem with a supplier and discovers after the event that other people have had the same problem. The moral of the story is: do your research before you hand over the cash or at the very least, in the case of a supplier of services, withhold some of the money until the full service is delivered.

I have not come across a photog that would work without having full pay in advance and agree that it should not be this way. So yeah then you are stuck in the situation with your balls literally in a vice. I think the law is completely wrong when it comes to photogs.
I used to do some freelance translation but that is the opposite, you get paid after you do the work, and if it is a long project you can get it itn the middle after you've shown some work and I just got too frustrated trying to get paid because if it is small amounts less than 500EUR the client just thinks it easier not to pay you and get some other sucker to do it next time, so I always seem to have the short end of the stick. But I'm very curious why some professions get paid upfront and others after.
As for the advice to do your research it is true, but we met with him 2 times before the wedding, I was in contact with another client who received her pics and they were lovely, he was super fast at replying to e-mails, very pleasent, a complete doll, but after he got his money...crickets. I also searched for bad reviews, though now some exist, when we had booked him and even a few months after our wedding none existed...so even research has limitations really.

Zabka

MagicSean wrote: »

Your day was not in any way ruined by this. Your memory was not in any way ruined. You haven't got professional photos but I'm sure there were plenty taken by others to document it. If not having a professional photo makes you sour about your wedding day then I pity you.

Yes it is. All the guest pics I have of the ceremony have the asshole in them cause he's front and center, so it really doesn't make for the best of memories..As for your pity, thanks, but I really didn't come on the board to receive it though.

Open A

Best of luck, hope you get all your photos soon!

Paulw

Zabka wrote: »

I have not come across a photog that would work without having full pay in advance and agree that it should not be this way. So yeah then you are stuck in the situation with your balls literally in a vice. I think the law is completely wrong when it comes to photogs.

In fairness, I know plenty of wedding photographers who do not demand full payment up front. Most require a booking deposit, then an upfront payment, and then final payment upon delivery (if that's an album, CD of images, or whatever is agreed in contract). I would never pay everything up front.

Of course, I am used to dealing with photographers who act professionally. They would be fully insured and responsible people.

Yes, things can go wrong, memory cards can become corrupt or lost, hard disks fail, etc. That is why photographers have insurance.

But, with regards to this issue, if the photographer won't provide the images then all you can do is take a legal case to recover your costs. A horrible situation for the OP to be in.

Zabka

I did end up getting a lawyer and after they sent a letter I got some pics from the photog. 50 less than the promised minimum and quality is disappointing. So yeah don't complain get nothing, complain get a few ****s.

Nothing I can really do except warn others of the disaster that is this photog...it sucks

Procrastastudy

Zabka wrote: »

I did end up getting a lawyer and after they sent a letter I got some pics from the photog. 50 less than the promised minimum and quality is disappointing. So yeah don't complain get nothing, complain get a few ****s.

Nothing I can really do except warn others of the disaster that is this photog...it sucks

Contact the solicitor about suing for damages.

Reloc8

The quality issue is a bit nebulous but you'd be entitled to take examples of his work from his website and if yours are clearly not up to that standard that is a breach of contract.

If he provided you with less than agreed amount of pictures (and hopefully you have the service level terms agreed in writing) then that's also a breach of contract.

You should now be instructing your solicitor to be looking for some refund by way of damages.

I'm not convinced you'd be successful in getting general damages on top of that and to be honest if it were me I'd be advising you to be very, very slow to commence litigation regarding your wedding - because the likelihood is that in years to come that's all that will live in the memory if you do that.

NUTLEY BOY

Issue SCC or DC proceedings and he probably wont bother replying. You will get judgment. How will you enforce judgment as defendant is outside the jurisdiction? Answer = with a lot of trouble for what is involved!
As he in NI check if there is a Trading Standards office up there and complain about him to them.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

If he were a reputable photographer he would have insurance in case God forbid something did go wrong. But then again most photographers myself included would have at least two cameras

finbarrk

I don't know but when we got married we just paid him when he produced the photographs and the album. Maybe it's different up the country.

Zabka

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Issue SCC or DC proceedings and he probably wont bother replying. You will get judgment. How will you enforce judgment as defendant is outside the jurisdiction? Answer = with a lot of trouble for what is involved!
As he in NI check if there is a Trading Standards office up there and complain about him to them.

I'm def going to SCC. How I'll enforce the judgement? Get a dept collector. Wish me luck!

I've already talked to the Trading Standards office. They didn't care too much. Maybe if other people complain about him as well.