Contracts - digital vs paper

Hi there! I'm in my first year of wedding photography in Australia and have been working through the pro's and

cons of digital contracts vs paper contracts. I have booked in around 10 weddings this year so far, and find that

I need a bit more consistency with distributing and collecting contracts from clients. I find that digital

contracts are sent quicker and the client is able to fill in any information they have not yet given me, but some

people send back horrible scans of messy low quality copies. I'm curious to find out if digital signatures are

legally binding in Australia. I have tried to find some information about this online, but can't seem to find

anything useful. I'm interested to know whether fellow photographers use the traditional way of sending two

copies to be signed by the client, both returned and signed by me, then one sent back to client. Or if the

industry is moving forward to quicker methods.... Any opinions would be helpful :) Many thanks!

<p>I am not a Solicitor. I am a Photographer and also a Director of a Company which is registered in Australia. I will make comment from a business perspective as the question is placed in the business forum.<br>

<br /> Our business uses paper contracts; two copies; one for us and one for the client; each is signed by both us and the client; each of those signatures is witnessed. We do this because we believe this to be the best business practice, with least exposure to problems down the line and is in keeping with our business profile and image.</p>

<p>To address your question directly: If you want the precise ins and outs of contract law you really do need to seek the advice of a Solicitor. This is not a difficult question and a local practice should be able to set you straight.</p>

<p>BUT - as far as I am aware electronic signatures and email exchanges may hold up as contractually binding, if there is a dispute.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>Post Script:</p>

<p>As for an opinion:<br>

I definitely understand the momentum to move a business practices to being smoother and more client friendly, (and your website and the procedures appear to be very ‘client friendly’).<br>

But when setting up any business system to be “more modern” or “more efficient” or more “client friendly” one has to weigh the potential cost of just one small problem raising its head later down the line and that problem not being able to be put to bed quickly and efficiently.<br>

Just as an example, I checked my car in for service this morning – and the mechanic required my signature on the contract, before he took the key from me. </p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>Thanks William. I think for piece of mind I will stick to paper contracts. Gets me away from the desk too, which is nice :) I guess I just wanted to know what industry standard was so I'm not being left behind... The digital contacts can get a bit messy with all the back and forth and archiving can get tricky because you simply forget to save them from the emails, they are easily overlooked. Whereas paper copies can just be filed straight away :)<br>

Thank you so much for contributing. Have a wonderful day!<br>

Carly</p>

<p>You're welcome.</p>

<p>This in an interesting area - very interesting for me as, when discussing the range of topics in this area, I don't think that there are any "industry standards" per se: but I do think that there are trends and movements. In this regard (and in other respects as well) Photoset has been of great value to me personally and also our businesses. The trends (not only business trends) that I note which are discussed here give a good mixed-up varietized world view of wedding photography and I have picked up many hints that have allowed me to refine and refine and refine - just a suggestion for you to hang around and participate.</p>

<p>*</p>

<p>Directly to your reply: the two points that you made (i.e. getting away from the desk and the potential messiness of digital to and fro) are the main two points as to why I do things the way I do them. Also, my base standpoint is that I (still) maintain the very strong view that best business is always done face to face and toe to toe with the primary decision maker.</p>

<p>WW</p>

 

<p>Thank you for this discussion! I am at the point myself where I believe I need someone to review my current contract and let me know some specifics. I don't have a lot of money, but would still like to do this correctly so looking in my PA area for something affordable. I am under a bit of a challenge recently from a potential client who wrote her own addendum's to my contract! Before accepting this, I would like someone to discuss it. <br>

Also this bears mentioning, I own a copy of <em>Best Business Practices Book by John Harrington</em>, which is a must have for any photographer, and states he has both the bride and groom sign the contract because one can not enter the other in a legal contract before they are married! I had never even considered this. Most of my clientele is your average income, hard-working, day-to-day couple that just want good wedding photography without it costing them a ton so therefore, review and sign the contract without much reservation. I had started to forward the contract to make things simple for all parties but realizing this is becoming more problematic then helpful....not getting it back in time or the rewritten verbiage. Just not acceptable or good business practices. I agree business should be face to face and a handshake, but still would like some modern conveniences.<br>

Nancy</p>

<blockquote>

<p>… and [<em>John Harrington] </em>states he has both the bride and groom sign the contract<strong> because one can not enter the other in a legal contract before they are married</strong>!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I would be interested to know if Harrington lists the areas of legal jurisdiction where, after marriage, either the Bride or the Groom can enter the other party into a contract, because they are married.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I am under a bit of a challenge recently from a potential client who wrote her own addendum's to my contract! Before accepting this, I would like someone to discuss it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As a general comment - the internet is not the best place to discuss any specific legal matters, especially not to mention names.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>Hi Carly,</p>

<p>First off, I wanted to tell you that I am a licensed attorney in the US, but I have no experience with Australian law. However, I believe the information is still helpful when you are weighing the pros and cons of digital contracts versus paper contracts.</p>

<p>In the US, the issue isn't so much whether the contract is or isn't enforceable, the real trouble with digital contracts is in proving them up in court if there is ever a problem down the road. Let me give you an example to illustrate what I mean. If I enter into a paper contract with someone and I ever have to enforce that contract in court, I can simply introduce the paper contract as an exhibit. If the person denies that they signed it, then it is a simply matter of comparing signatures.</p>

<p>However, when you are working with digital contracts, it gets a little more complicated. How can you prove that the specific client signed the contract? Even if you are tracking the IP address of the computer used to digitally sign the contract (which you are likely not), you still might run into some problems showing that the particular person digitally signed the contract.</p>

<p>So, even if you learn that digital contracts are enforceable in Australia, you should at least be aware that you could still potentially run into other incidental problems with using them.</p>

<p>Hope this helps,</p>

<p>Paper contracts also have proof issues - how can you prove that the signature was genuine? How can you prove that you didn't switch pages in the middle of the contract?</p>

<p>The burden of proof is on the balance of probabilities. Personally, I don't think it matters too much whether you go for paper or digital, but I have a leaning towards digital. If there's a course of correspondance from a particular email, and you can show a contract came from the same email, it would be pretty hard for the other side to start trying to prove that the contract didn't come from them. They're unlikely to dispute it, and if they really do try, relatively easy to show on the balance of probabilities that the contract was from them (or their agent). It would have to be pretty extraordinary circumstances for them to prove that the contract had nothing to do with them and they were unaware of it if it had come from their email.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Paper contracts also have proof issues - how can you prove that the signature was genuine?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /> <em>'Our business uses <strong>paper contracts</strong>; two copies; one for us and one for the client; each is signed by both us and the client; <strong>each of those signatures is witnessed.</strong></em></p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>"<em><strong>each of those signatures is witnessed.</strong></em>"</p>

<p>Seems like overkill unless you're planning to alienate clients. If the contract is sent by post, then how do you know the witness signature is genuine? If you insist on every client coming to the office, then do you record the name and address of every witness? Can you prove that you didn't unstaple the contract and attach the signature page to another page?<br /> Can you prove that you didn't scan the signature at very high resolution and print it out on another contract? Or prove that you didn't practise his signature and write it out yourself (I know of a case where a secretary got so used to doing the boss's signature while he was out that in the end the company's bank started to refuse the boss's version of his own signature and would only accept the secretary's version of it). And how can you be certain that the other guy signing the contract hasn't made up a mickey mouse signature on the day that is different from his normal signature and will later deny that it was him? And so on...<br /> <br />Paper contracts are probably inherently less secure than digital, but in practice the likelihood of the signature being disputed is still very low, there are much greater risks to worry about. There is always a theoretical possibility of dispute, but the question is at what point does it become extremely unlikely that the other side will dispute the contract.</p>

<p>On the whole, digital is probably more secure in terms of proof, but there is no absolutely guaranteed way of proving a signature. But the probability of there being an issue with a disputed signature is minute, whether by email or in paper.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Seems like overkill unless you're planning to alienate clients"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No-body has ever complained. Just a business procedure which I have found appropriate, rather than alienating clientele some have made comments that our business is most professional. I still used the same procedure with the Commissioned Portraiture and also for some (large cost) Restoration work that I do. <br>

Here, when buying many items with a contract, often a signature is witnessed - maybe it is uncommon where you work/reside. <br>

Anyway, I was just answering the point that you raised. </p>

<p>*</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>“If the contract is sent by post, then how do you know the witness signature is genuine? If you insist on every client coming to the office, then do you record the name and address of every witness?”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Again, answering your point by describing what I do/did.<br>

For Weddings we had a face to meeting with every Prospect/Client; that was part of our business structure. Some businesses are not structured like that.<br>

Yes, the witness of a signature records their name (printed) and address on the document: that is simply part of the process of the witnessing of a signature. </p>

<p>*</p>

<p>The other <em>“how can you”</em> questions that you’ve asked - I shan’t respond as it occurs to me that they are just a set of extreme hypothetical questions: obviously any method can have a failure – my point of view back in June is still the same as today - I prefer paper and for the reasons that I gave. That suits my business structure; meeting Prospects face to face also suits my business structure.</p>

<p>As I also mentioned in June, in my post script, I understand the momentum to move to being client friendly and that might mean contacts via email or other electronic means – and that’s fine if it suits the business structure.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>typo corrected:<br>

". . . I understand the momentum to move to being client friendly and that might mean <em><strong>contracts</strong></em> via email or other electronic means – and that’s fine if it suits the business structure."</p>

<p>That's absolutely fine, there's absolutely nothing wrong with using paper contracts - the point is that it isn't more secure, you should just use whatever suits you best from the business/record keeping/client relationship point of view. If it helps your business to bring the client into the office and make them sit down and sign a contract and get witnesses and record their details, that's fine, but it only makes sense if it helps your business from a forcing clients to come to the office point of view.</p>

<p>Just did a job for a well known international magazine - and the terms of the contract were in the footer to the email they sent me - a standard footer attached to all their emails. That was fine, it's a clear system and works well enough, and it can easily be overriden/customised by the contents of the email exchange so it's not set in stone. There's no signature at all needed in such cases - the correspondance is enough.</p>

<p>I also use contracts for certain types of jobs - but I don't actually insist on the client signing and returning them (though in 9/10 cases they do). The fact that I have sent them the contract (by email), they have acknowledged receiving my email, and they went on to ask me to do the job is enough, they have notice of my terms. The signed contract via email is nice for housekeeping purposes, but it's not needed.</p>

<p>But if you have a business/client relationship workflow that has commercial benefits from a more formal approach (maybe you sell them extra products while they're in the office), that's great, no need to change it.</p>

 

<p>It is worth pointing out as this point relates directly to the OP’s question - the nuances of my business scaffold are predicated on a personal and rapport building approach: there a difference between that rationale and a simplistic generic assumption of having 'formality' simply to upsell on product.<br>

<br>

WW</p>

<p>Hi. I would be interested to know what others use for digital contracts. Sometimes it's easier for me to have the clients send a contract back via email due to distances.</p>