Client wants to change contract

[jay_maxwell]

I have a client who wants to "make some changes" to my contract. I require a $1000 deposit and the

balance 1 week before the event.

 

The client wants to hold back 25% until AFTER they receive their final album. I told them that it's industry

standard to get paid upfront. I explained the time and costs of producing an album, yada, yada, yada.

 

I'm not going to bend on this, but what have you said to clients in similar circumstances?

 

The client is going to have their lawyer friend call me to discuss. Ironically, the lawyer is a past client who

signed the contract!

 

Also, I have a clause in the contract which states I can substitute myself with another photog if I'm sick or

due to scheduling conflicts. They want that "scheduling conflict" part out too! I'm not taking that out

either, but is there maybe, softer language I can use?

 

Thanks.

[jmichaelc]

Do you even have to think this one over Jay? Think about it.

 

Under no circumstances do you let a client change YOUR contract. Next, will you have to think about whether or not you let them tell you how to shoot?

 

I have yet had a client want to change MY contract. Can't wait really.....the look i give them (followed by an instant NO) hopefully will make them realize instantly how insulting their comment just was.

 

It's yours and non-negotiable.

 

 

Thanks my opinion...works for me but maybe not everyone.

[jenseay]

The only change I've ever had a client ask for is to remove the clause about using their pictures for my advertising. These are usually pretty private clients who don't want their pictures "out there" for everyone to see.

 

I'd definitely speak to my own attorney about this, if I were you. Remember, no part of your contract can be changed unless both parties agree to it.

 

By the way, regarding "scheduling conflicts," what kind of conflict might arise? Sounds like it could allow you to schedule another wedding for their date and send someone else in your place to this couple's wedding. I wouldn't really want that in my photographer's contract either. Did an attorney write your contract?

 

Jen

[gpjoell3]

Jay, I have similar jargon in my contracts; however, I did bend on one instant in the past. I had a affluent client who had connections in the community that I wanted to attract, ask me to modify my contract in the same way your client is requesting. I did bend a little and everything worked out fine. I still received my full payment prior to the final product being delivered and I did not get sick, nor was there a scheduling conflict that took me from the assignment.

 

What I suggest you do is evaluate how important this customer and the referrals from this customer is to your business. If you are rolling like I think you are, then stick to your guns and don't bend. Just remember, as long as you are producing a quality product, you will get paid.

 

As far as softer language is concerned, your contract speaks for itself. If you are not going to bend, then no matter how you say it, your client is not going to be happy. I contracted with a Lawyer for his daughter's wedding. He ask for my contract so that he could review it ahead of signing. He did not find anything out of the ordinary and once he was finished reviewing it, the contract was signed.

 

Sometimes customer relations is more important than being so stern. Good luck...

[Jerry_]

To be wise, you should contact a lawyer. A contract has to be "equal" for both parties. If, for example, you want full pay for your day's work, and then send in some other photographer __ a unequal factor enters the equation. If you can offer - before the wedding - the client a portfolio of the "backup" photographer, and the client agrees the other *could be used* photographer is up to your skill level, you might have a chance at winning if you were taken to court.

 

 

 

 

Good luck.

[john_h.1]

"They want that "scheduling conflict" part out too!"

 

The horror!

 

Clients select a photographer based on their style, approach, demeanor, talent, price and on and on. It is not like hiring someone to paint a house one color. The wedding photographer is a unique artist and it is critial to the hiring client. That's why its so important to have a clause allowing a substitute just in case the photographer just can't make it.

 

If your contract excuses personal performance, however, merely "due to scheduling conflicts", your potential clients are very prudent to balk at such terms. You could simply pay some sub to shoot it while you are off doing other work or goofing off. I would never reccommend hiring a photographer that insists on terms like that.

 

I do agree that the other proposed changes, particularly the payment after delivery, should not be altered. I would take the call from the freind as a courtesy and because he/she can become your ally in getting the contract signed. Discussing his lack of objection to signing the contract is useful of course. You might also sway them by pointing out that virtually no lawyers agree to be paid after representation unless they are working for a contigency fee which is something photgraphers would never do. Remind the freind that, like lawyers, there are other industries that routinely require up front payments because it is difficult to get paid when you are no longer needed. You can throw in some other examples like one of my favorites, oral surgeons. The freind will probably identify with this comparison.

 

Throw them a bone too and ease up on the scheduling conflict thing. That's just not right. You should agree to show up unless you are prevented by matters reasonably beyond your control.

[john_h.1]

"a unequal factor enters the equation. If you can offer - before the wedding - the client a portfolio of the "backup" photographer, and the client agrees the other *could be used* photographer is up to your skill level, you might have a chance at winning if you were taken to court."

 

There is merit to this but the suggestion is very limiting. It would specifically exclude other photographers which places the original photographer at great peril if the approved sub cannot be secured on short notice. Usually a sub would have to have be within the general range of competence as the original and cover the wedding in generally the same fashion as contracted for anyway. As to the "unequal factor" being claimed in court, the photographer would likely state that it is, in fact, equalized by the contract being at a lower price than would exist if there were a guarentee of specific personal performance or if there were no mention at all.

[jimstrutz]

My contract reads about the way your client wants. I don't care if it's not the customary practice, I think it is fair. I know that if I was the client, I would appreciate it if I was allowed some financial leverage to guaranty the satisfactory delivery of goods. And the only reason I would schedule another photographer is if I was near death. The "scheduling conflict" language doesn't cut it for me. Most wedding photographers turn down many opportunities that they would rather do, but can't because they made a commitment. Your clients just wants to know that this is what you will do for them.

 

However, contracts are always negotiable until they are signed. They are negotiated all the time in some areas of the business world. If a client wants the wording changed or a clause dropped or added, I would consider it, and if I thought I could live with it, I would change it. But I would ask for more money if I thought it would raise costs or risk.

 

Changing your contract or not is your choice. But doing either is not a bad thing to do.

[fotografz]

I just signed a client that is a lawyer. She wanted to significantly alter my contract. I said

be my guest and e-mail me a copy to review. After we went back a forth a couple of

times, it ended up being the best wedding photography contract I've ever seen.

 

Basically, I got free legal work and signed the biggest wedding yet for 2008 : -)

 

BTW, were I a client I'm absolutely sure I would balk at letting a wedding photographer

bale on my wedding if there were "scheduling conflicts". Basically it sounds like "sure I'll

do your wedding, unless something else better comes along."

 

My contract says if I am unable to shoot your wedding, all money paid is immediately

refunded and every effort made to secure a replacement will be made. Once contracted

and a retainer deposit is paid, it doesn't matter if the Sultan of Brunie calls and wants me

to shoot his 35th wedding with a solid gold Hasselblad he'll have made for me ... sorry, I'm

booked.

[jay_maxwell]

I realize many of you are playing devil's advocate, but the reality is I wouldn't double book myself. It would only hurt me in the end by ruining my reputation. In my market, my reputation precedes me and to make such a low-rent move simply isn't logical. You can read a contract literally and assume the absolute worst, or you can read it with a bit of reality. If you think I'm going to screw you, don't hire me.

 

The whole scheduling conflict clause protects me if something comes up last minute (i.e. family member is sick/dead, etc.). I also state in the clause that any sub is a competent professional.

[mark_hanegraaff]

<p>"They want that "scheduling conflict" part out too!"

 

<p>I completely agree with John. If I told my employer that I'll send a replacement to work in case I'm busy, I'd be fired on the spot. There should be no reason for scheduling conflicts, unless you decide to take another gig that day, which would not be very ethical. I know I would not sign that.

[brooke_moore]

Leaving the sub issue aside, it can go or stay in my opinion if explained what the intent is, the pay before issue is probably the one to deal with most.

 

Client is uneasy probably due to horror stories about other businesses. I do have a complete contract paid at the point that proofs are delivered. Additional items are paid at the time of pick up. I sweetly explain that by having everything pre-paid they will be able to order their album as soon as they are ready with no waiting for those after wedding bills to be paid.

 

I also show them the shelf with finished product that is paid for and people are slow to pick up! My reasoning has always been that having the original paid for helps with going up in album size at the order and in ordering items for others.

 

A couple of years ago I had a father who was intense in wanting to change this part he insisted that they would be swift in their ordering etc. His daughte prevailed and said "Dad I want her, sign the contact." Needless to say two years after the wedding they were finally ready to order. Paid the penelty for late order and added a ton of stuff. GO figure.

 

The whole contract thing is about the only point of control we have over the process so think it through and go with what you feel secure with. Since they know another client who was satisfied and signed the contract as presented this may go away. If not and they persist decide go or no go.

 

Brooke

[rvalois]

This is an EXCELLENT thread and I'll throw my 2 cents. Any and all constructive comments/suggestions are welcome.

 

Here's my "I can't make it clause":

"In the event that the photographer cannot be present at the wedding for reasons out of his control, he will take the measures necessary to find a photographer with equivalent skills in wedding photography. Should a photographer with the appropriate skills not be available for the wedding, the liability of the photographer will be limited to the return of all deposits, INCLUDING the non-refundable deposit".

 

I do anywhere from 5 to 10 weddings per year. My payment schedule is also somewhat different than what I've read to date. When I developed this payment schedule I was advised NOT to go with it. After 40 or so weddings, I've never had a problem whatsoever with payment of services. After what I've read to date, I'm starting to think that lady luck has been sitting by my side.

 

Here's my schedule:

30% to reserve wedding date; 40% two weeks before wedding; 20% upon delivery of proofs; remaining 10% upon delivery of Bridal Album.

 

All additional orders - family, friends, B&G, etc - over and above the initial contracted agreement, requires 50% down payment and the remainder upon delivery of the order.

 

Any thoughts??

 

Ray

[mark_hanegraaff]

I think Ray's clause on availability makes sense, because it covers things which are outside the photographer's control. "Scheduling conflicts" on the other sound a lot like double booking. A family emergency and a schedule conflict are very different things.

[Aoresteen]

Jay,

 

Contracts are MUTUAL. They are not one party's "contract". I negotiate contracts all the time and there is no such thing as a 'standard' contract. If I'm presented with a contract that has a clause I don't like, I strike it out. It then becomes a negotiation. When we reach a point that I think it is ok, I then send it to our attorneys for their review. The back for a last review and signing.

 

It's rare that a service provider walks away because I want changes. I will walk away and find someone else who will agree to a mutual contract if the provider will not come to terms with me.

 

When a lawyer drafts a contract for you, he will frame it to give you the best possible position. That is not a mutual contract. It is normal for the other party to want changes. If you can't live with the changes requested then politely end the negotiations and pass on the deal.

 

Now if both parties have signed the contract and now one party wants changes, that's a different kettle of fish.

 

I like Marc's post! That's a great way to save on legal fees.

[gina_marie1]

I would revise your contract for this and all future clients on the 'scheduling conflict' bit. I have the illness and nothing more. If there is a personal emergency, such as a death or illness in the family I doubt ANY client is going to sue you as long as you find a replacement. But scheduling conflict implies pretty much anything.

 

That is and was the only thing I changed in my contract. If you do not want to change the payment schedule, don't change it. You are not being forced to photograph the wedding, tell them that is your payment policy and stick with it. If they want YOU to be their wedding photographer they'll agree. 3 out of about 30 clients this year asked me to pay the balance on the day of. We kindly told them payment schedules are firm for ___ & ___ reasons. They understood and still signed.

[jay_maxwell]

We're going to change the "scheduling conflict" to something like "beyond the control of the photographer." Obviously, double bookings are within my control, so this should appease the client.

 

However, I still think it's important to have this protection.

[marcel_van_eerd]

I agree with what's been said above - your definition sounds too much like an "if something better comes along, I won't be there".

 

As for payments, I ask 25% at time of signing, 50% on or before three months prior to the wedding, and 25% upon delivery of images. (I don't "do" albums - strictly CD/DVD). In case of signing less than three months prior to the wedding, logically 75% is due at that time.

 

I like easy numbers. :o)

[visionzof]

I am going to hop in on this also.

 

As for payment - Since the beginning I have always asked for 1/3 deposit with contract, 1/3 at our 30 day meeting and final payment when I deliver proofs. (alot of my clients order their albums/prints after the wedding - in which case full payment is due before design begins!)

Now - I have run into a few issues this past year, where the final payment check bounced and it took me weeks to regain the money back. So for 2008 - the only change I am making is that final payment will be due at the rehearsal. I am thinking about making it due 2 weeks prior or just the final balance at our 30 day meeting. Not sure which way I am going yet.

 

As for the substitution clause: "...In the unlikely event that the photographer is injured or becomes too ill to photograph the event, Visionz Of... Photography will make every effort to secure a replacement photographer. If the situation should occur and a suitable replacement is not found, responsibility and liability is limited to the return of all payments received for the event package."

 

My contract was lawyer reviewed. Covers both parties.

 

The only change that I too have ever had to make is the use of the photos in any advertising I did, or online galleries, etc. Which of course, without question I changed to accomodate immediately.

[john_h.1]

I suggest getting a second opinion from an attorney about changing photographer replacement language such as "take the measures NECESSARY to find a photographer" or "EVERY effort" to more common and tested terms of art such as "best efforts" or "good faith efforts". When you say 'every' or 'necessary' you can box yourself in. If you are sick or something you need to be able to avoid exhausting every single possiblility of finding a replacement to something within the bounds of reason.

[ed_farmer]

I didn't read all of the responses in this thread, so some of this might be repeated information . . . I would not alter my payment clause, which indicates that I will be paid in full two weeks prior to the event. The client doesn't care that it is "industry standard" to be paid up front. They want to hold money back until they have recieved their product so that they can complain and withhold payment if they are not satisfied. This means that they are already looking for something to complain about. This means that they WILL find something to complain about! Also, I wouldn't even talk to their lawyer even if he is a past client. If they want you to talk with their lawyer before the wedding, they are certain to MAKE you talk with their lawyer after. Why would you even want a client like this? Remember, this past client of you yours will be working for them during the discussion, not for you.

 

If I intend to shoot a wedding myself, I remove the clause about scheduling conflicts. I only leave that in on the rare occasion that I book more than one job for a given day.

 

My advice is to politely decline to discuss the issue when the lawyer calls and then tell the client that you are no longer available to shoot their wedding. It may hurt, it may make you unhappy. But, at this point, even if they sign your contract, I expect that you are in for more trouble down the line.

 

Ed

[savagesax]

I wouldn't do the wedding myself. If you decide to agree to his/her terms do not give anything away, such as the album, until the checks have cleared.

 

Sounds almost like the client may nitpick everything in the album, every flaw, until it is perfect in their eyes, resulting on a lose of revenue for you because of doing the album over a few times.

 

Refer the client elsewhere.

[d_m7]

I am a working newspaper shooter, not a freelancer. Nonetheless, I know a bit about contracts. I agree that you are being hired because of your unique skill and artistic talent. However, you are presenting yourself as a businessman and, hopefully, one who is not going to disappear in the dead of night. As such, your business finances should allow for clients to hold back a percentage of their cost to ensure satisfaction with the finished product or service. As a homeowner holds back on a contractor pending completion, so should your client hold back a percentage - 10 per cent - of your contract until the goods are delivered to his satisfaction. This could be done in the form of a post-dated cheque, given at the time the contract is signed.

As a photog, I certainly sympathize with you. But as a consumer, there is no way I would pay 100 per cent up front before having received the goods. What recourse would I have otherwise?

[conraderb]

Jay - No need to contact a lawyer at this point. If you want to be a stickler, sure, but no need.

 

I would be most interested in WHY your clients wants to change the contract. Are they thinking that they won't be satisfied with your work? Then you need to convince them that you are wicked awesome.

 

If the clients have a budget crisis going on, find out what happened and why.

 

If the client is a lawyer, they should know the classic contract setup - offer, consideration, acceptance. They will also know that just 'wanting' to change the contract does NOT mean that they will change the contract. It takes two to do the contract tango...

 

Find out what is going on, and what is behind the concerns of your client, and I think that will make it clear what the path should be to move forward.

[daniellane]

Under NO circumstances would I alter my payment clause, nor is there any reason to speak with the client's lawyer about that. Actually, at the point the clients started referring their lawyer to me, I'd most likely be inclined to sever the relationship with the client.

 

Follow the advice in Michael Port's book "Book Yourself Solid," to wit: "Choose your ideal clients so you work only with people who inspire and energize you." People who say, "talk to my lawyer" don't inspire me.

 

I do think that some revision of the "schedule conflict clause" is in order.