Payment problems, a bit long

[jonj]

Don't give up the photos that's the only card you have to play.

If she owes you for prints/photos that are in her hands then why should she get the rest for free?

I have had brides wanting photos prior to payment that's just a bad idea you will never see that money if you turn those photos over.

[les_baldwin1]

Hi Steven,

 

Sorry about the hassle, but to be blunt you created the mess to start with. Every photographer learns this lesson at

some time or another, no good deed goes unpunished.

 

You failure to act as a professional is your own undoing, but I think you alredy know that too.

 

So here are some guidelines to help you out.

 

1. Do not work just for expenses, period. Charge for profit on all shoots except direct family.Your "friends" will shaft

you faster than just about anyone.The fact that you got no respect from your "friends " says alot about your

business practices. They have no CASH involved yet, no signed contract from you and just a loose verbal contract.

Don't expect others to hold up their end just because you did. Why show up for a meeting with you when you don't

act as a professional?

 

2. Always get a signed contract that spells out exactly the terms of the deal, any changes - get it in writing.

 

3. And most important if you don;t know what you are doing, assist for a few years then start your own gig.

 

Weddings are really hard and can be a disaster under the best circumstances..

[bjscharp]

As said before, don't hand over the pictures. If they claim there is no contract, so they don't have to pay, then you can simply reply there's no contract, so you don't have to hand over the pictures.

 

If they really plan on going to court, you have a rock-solid case. You already gave them pictures for nothing, they have no right whatsoever to demand more without payment.

[petersh]

Well, you've learned the contract issue.

 

I would send them lo-res files with either a copyright watermark or "Pre-Payment Proof" on jpg's. That way they

can't argue that they didn't get a record of the event. They're just unusable for display or distribution. You

own the photos. If they want prints they have to pay.

[rayt]

When it comes down to a he said/she said the judge will almost always rule in your favor unless money has been paid. Until that is done there is no verbal contract as there have been no services provided because there is no proof from the plaintiffs that there was supposed to be any rendering of services. A judge can not and will not order that you provide your services and products for free.

 

Tell the couple that to get the images they will pay your price. If they don't pay they get no images. Do not give in to their demands. You hold all the trump cards. If they threaten to sue, let them as the judgement will be in your favor. Either you have to do nothing or the judge will order you to provide the images while ordering the plaintiffs to pay for the images.

 

This is one case where you are in charge. Be firm, be resolute, and do not give in to the couple. Send them a registered letter stating your terms, provide a deadline date, and if that date passes without payment ignore any future requests from the couple.

[john_h.1]

"I would set a date two weeks from now and tell them that if payment is not received by then, all images will be

deleted (don't actually delete them though)."

 

This is extremely poor advice. It is unprofessional conduct. Absent contract terms to the contrary, it will be a breach

of the photographers duties under any rational agreement merely by announcing this as it is a claim that the the

verbal contact will be repudiated. (No short term destruction should included in a contract anyway) The photographer

will be exposed to increased likelyhood of litigation and expense. lf there is litigation, it may cause grave disfavor

from the tribunal. It will needlessly aggravate an already volitile situation. It will promote further ill will which may be

broadcast to others.

 

Ignore this suggestion completely.

[jcurrie]

A verbal contract is a binding contract (just more difficult to enforce). HOWEVER, no contract is binding (written or verbal) unless Consideration has been made by both parties. Consideration in "contract law" means that BOTH parties must give the other party somthing of value (eg. money or services).

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract#Consideration_and_estoppel

 

For instance. A contract which states that the photographer will take photos for free and the client will do nothing to compensate the photographer is NOT binding (even if both parties agree to it). Therefore, if your client has not paid you anything, then they have not provided Consideration and their contract (written or verbal) is not binding and you have no obligation to turn over any photos to them.

 

I can see only two defensable positions on their behalf, but both are a stretch and they would have difficulty proving that these were the agreed upon terms of their contract.

 

1. If you ate at the wedding they could argue that providing your food was Consideration (I doubt any judge would buy this argument)

 

2. They could claim that providing their "modeling" services free of charge to you (IE allowing you to photograph their private event) is Consideration on their behalf. This is a far more defensable position for them as you have mentioned yourself that you have in interest in building your portfolio (I would recomend that you don't mention that again). If they argued this position, they would be burdened with showing reasonable evidence that you agreed to provide photographs to them free of charge in exchange for them allowing you to photograph their wedding. You would be burdened with showing reasonable evidence that this was not the agreement.

 

If in fact the agreement was that they pay your expenses in exchange for photographs and photography services, and they have not paid any of your expenses, then they do not have a case or a binding contract. If they have paid you a portion of your expenses or a down payment and they can show just cause for withholding the remainder of the payment, it is posable that you could be asked to provide some or all of the photos to them by a judge.

 

I don't think your main concearn should be if they will take you to court or not. Even if they do take you to court, they don't have much of a case and neither of you really have that much to lose (except perhaps pride). Your bigger issue here is loosing your friends and generating bad publicity.

 

It sounds like you may have a few hundered dollars in expenses (gas, hotel stay, prints, canvas). I know nothing about your financial situation, but a few hundered dollars is not an extreemly large expense considering that you learned a valuable lesson (always get a written contract and a down payment), built your portfolio, and gained some experience shooting weddings.

 

One word of advice. Never agree to do work for your expenses only. You are trying to be nice and do a favor to your friends, but two issues arise here.

 

1. A good dead never goes un-punished. I don't know why but this is a hard and fast truth.

 

2. You de-value yourself and your services by convaying to your clients / friends that your time and skill is worth nothing and you are so desperate to get experince that you will do anything as long as they pay your gas, room, and board. Once you de-value yourself like that, they will treat you like garbage. I'm not saying that you need to charge full rate, but make sure that they feel that they are paying somthing for your services. I guarentee that the bride would think twice about blowing off a photographer whom she is paying market rates for because "wedding pictures are the last thing on her mind". I would also recomend not discussing your expenses with them. Just tell them up-front the exact amount you need them to pay, that way their are no suprizes or arguments over gas prices after the fact. You can estimate your expenses up-front yourself, just give your client a set price.

 

My hard and fast rule. If I don't know / like you well enough to do it for free, then I don't know you well enough to provide services outside of my professional bounderies (IE written contract, down payment, reasonable rates for my time).

 

 

[jcurrie]

"Try to settle it peacefully.... otherwise call a lawyer."

 

Lawyers are not allowed to represent either party in small claims court and your attorney fees even for consult would FAR outweigh your possable gains in this issue. If it actually came to a point (unlikely) where lawyers got involved (no lawyer would take this case for either party, it's not worth their time), then just give them the photos and end it. The only way a lawyer would really get involved is if they wanted to sue you for damages and emotional distress for ruining their wedding. If it goes that far, then you need to lawyer up.

[daverhaas]

James -

 

Absolutely correct - lawyers are not allowed in small claims court... and most will give a brief (read 15 - 20 minute) free consult which should be more than enough for this...

 

You've hit upon the biggest question / challenge here: What's the real / hidden cost of the bad publicity / word of mouth that the bride / groom will spread if he doesn't give up the images?

 

You've also touched on a double edged sword which is probably enough to start a new thread about working for expenses or for free to build a portfolio.

 

Dave

[mike dixon]

<i>What's the real / hidden cost of the bad publicity / word of mouth that the bride / groom will spread if he

doesn't give up the images?</i><P>

It's probably exactly the same as if he <b>does</b> give up the images. The bride has already made her opinion

of him quite clear. It's incredibly unlikely that she'll change her tune even if he does turn over the rest of

the photos for free.

[carl_becker2]

I would take them to court. They are not "friends" and should not be allowed to get away with this sort of behavior. I have taken people to court before when I was right. Each time I got what I wanted - fair treatment. YMMV but I believe its very worth while. As far as bad publicity, that is water under the bridge and not likely to change.

[jcurrie]

Dave,

 

Agreed. Most lawyers will give a free consult. Didn't mean to step on your toes.

[john_h.1]

"Lawyers are not allowed to represent either party in small claims court" & "Absolutely correct - lawyers are not allowed in small claims court."

 

Maybe in some particular states but this is not the standard nationwide at all. Its unfortunate to lead people to believe that it is. What states do you guys attribute this to anyway?

 

I agree that the amount involved creates little justification for expensive lawyer involvement unless there is some claim of mental distress filed as mentioned. This is why I cautioned against the advice to delete files. BTW, mental distress is not generally recoverable for breach of contract actions but some rare exceptions have been found with respect to weddings and funerals. This is taking the issue way too far however. Its a simple but currently aggravating business dispute. Treat it as a business matter and go easy on the emotions. Be practical. Holding out until on the images is normal and practical leverage. You made a offer to compromise already and there is quibbling on the gasoline now. We don't know the terms of your agreement but it sounds like you are nearing the end of this as it is.

[jcurrie]

John,

 

You are correct. Not all districts prohibit representation in small claims court. Last I knew, eight states prohibit representation in small claims court State wide, and of those states that do not prohibit it, neither do they expressly allow it. Therefore, in such states, the local court juresdictions may implement their own regulations regarding the use of attorneys in small claims court. Many of those courts prohibit or at least discourage it. I did not mean to mis-lead anyone here. You should check with your own court juresdiction as to weather they allow representation in small claims court.

[daverhaas]

John - I was basing my agreement and statement on Minnesota rules...which state:

"Do You Need An Attorney?

 

No. However, you may have an attorney if the judge lets you. Also, the judge can decide in which ways the attorney can help. Court procedures are simplified to allow you to represent yourself. "

 

Key words there being "If the judge lets you" and "the judge can decide in which ways the attorney can help"

 

I too apologize if anyone is mislead by the statements... but one really should not be coming to a photography forum for legal advice.

 

Dave

[david_amberson1]

Quoting David Haas> "What's the real / hidden cost of the bad publicity / word of mouth that the bride / groom will

spread if he doesn't give up the images?

 

Forget word of mouth or bad publicity. Thats gone! If you give them the photos for free with a smile, he/she will still

give bad publicity when speaking about you. Even if they get what they want, they will still act very unpleased. Dont

you back off now! You tell them right now, "No money...No photos" And thats it. You have very little to lose anyway

and its better to prove a point. Dont reward this behavior. Use this as a lesson for next time, but you better not give

in.

 

If you called a random, reputable Photographer today and asked him to shoot your wedding. He'd ask for half as a

deposit up front, then the balance due before wedding. If you dont pay the balance before, he doesnt show up and he

keeps the deposit. By doing this, he has something of value of the customer that if they dont pay the balance, they

lose($500) for nothing. Good for him too because he made (500) for nothing as well. The customer wouldnt think

badly of him because he is running a business. They expect you to require payment. Anything less and they look at

you as weak/nonprofessional and you are not all that interested in making a profit.

 

If they went to a boat dealership and said,

 

Customer - I want a boat.

 

Salesman - Whattcha like?

 

Customer - I want that yellow one in the corner.

 

Salesman - Ok thats 20,000. I'll sell it today for 18,000.

 

The customer would expect nothing less than to pay full payment(whether by loan or cash) for that boat before

taking it. Otherwise its stealing.

They wouldnt expect him to say, pay me for my time and document fees and just give me the rest later after you run

it a while. And the customer

wouldnt be upset. They expect this behavior. Its business. Your demeanor portrays your intentions. If you portray

you are not all that worried about compensation, then you'll get that attitude right back. I suspect you were trying to

come across as being a generous/very nice business man that really wants only what makes the client completely

happy and helps their situation the most and not yours. I know the feeling. Been there. But look where it gets you.

You can still

be very helpfull make them very happy, but also get what you want. Its ok to let them know you are in it to make a

profit. They dont work for free. I promise if their boss decided not to pay them, they'd get pissed. Good luck and

stand your ground!!

[david_amberson1]

David Haas, please dont take my post the wrong way. This wasnt a stab at you. Just a statement based on my

opinion/experience. I used your quote because this thread has gotten so long.

[reichard]

This week alone I've had to collect on two customers. Here in PA, lawyers are allowed in a magisterial court (like small claims). However, even under order to pay, its often difficult to collect on such for various reasons.

 

I've found that offering to accept payments will often "warm them up" to paying. In most instances, finance charges aren't allowed by law unless disclosed initially, but you can charge a service fee :^)

 

If a payment plan fails and you can weather the financial hit, see if you can accept something tangible in trade. Barter is getting quite popular now with the current economy. I've bartered for many many a situation.

 

Best of luck!

[mtrejo6]

Just tell them that you consulted a laywer as well and thinks that you should also go to court and sue them for unpaid services. You can bluff as well. One thing is to learn from mistakes and another is to let people think that they can take advantage of you. Good luck!

[short1]

The last thing I'd do is play hardball. The legal issue is, as far as I can see, null: Circumstances clearly favor the existence of an oral contract, and I'd expect you'd prevail since only expenses are at issue. Beyond this, though the amount varies from state to state, I can't imagine your expenses exceeded the limit for small claims court - a recourse for you, really, since you're the injured party, and would likely be either the plaintiff or make a cross - claim - in which case the couple might find themselves liable for additional damages. The heart of this matter is your reputation: You apparently knew these people, and it is possible that, if you have friends in common, the couple will not only besmirch your reputation as a photographer, but engage in character assasination ( in which case, of course, you'd have cause - defamation). Personally, I'd not admit any wrong-doing on your part, but tell them there was an apparent misunderstanding, and take what they are willing to give in exchange for the photos you've held back ( which is your work product, not their property ); and go beyond this, smoothing over the bad feelings ( again, never admit you were in the wrong ). Your reputation as a photographer translates into future earnings, and these should be substantially more than any loss you sustain in this case. The issue of a contract is key: Had this been a big money event, and the couple tried to stiff you; and presuming it went before the bench, the judge would have to accept their testimony as valid, unless you could disprove it. Presumption ( in this case, that two newly weds are being truthful about a spoken agreement ) would prevail unless you had traversing evidence or witnesses of your own. I'd suggest that since there is no implied contract or standard fee in these situations, that you to make a contract for any assignment - even if it involves relatives. A written contract, like a poker hand, speaks for itself, and cannot be attacked except by a claim of coercion, fraud, and other ( not likely to be be believed) affirmatrive defenses. On the flip side, if there is no contract, there is nothing at issue - and your case would probably be dismissed. Chalk it up to your trust and honesty against their duplicity, make nice, and move on , all the wiser for the lesson they taught you. C. Unger

[john_h.1]

"..presuming it went before the bench, the judge would have to accept their testimony as valid, unless you could disprove it. Presumption... ...would prevail unless you had traversing evidence or witnesses of your own. "

 

Wrong. Judges and juries (triers of fact) do NOT have to accept testimony, contradicted or otherwise, as truthful. Indeed, its their job to decide credibility. There is more on this subject but it is too removed from this photo business topic to get into. This misinformation, however, does illustrate, yet again, that this is a poor place to obtian legal infomation. The business practice and practical advice is often very useful though and there are some great comments about such things in this thread. My take is that this is so close to being resolved (gas expenses, rightly or wrongly the remaining dispute) is that either side will be foolish to go to court.

[ellery_chua___singapore]

Steven,

Most things have been said. Whtat has not been touched on are:-

 

1. you are expected to be on time which translate to you better be there early. If you are there early even 3 hours

early as a professional you will start work on what ever is there to be shot ie the preparations, candid moments - you

do not expect the client to tell you what to do. If you are 3 hours early and do not want to start work wait near by till

its about 30 mins before call time - yoiu will need about 10 to 15min to unpack and gear up and the rest of the early

time to look at angles. Being super early does not count when the brown stiuff hits the fan. After getting or not a list

of must have moments from client you as a professional need to know what is it that you would need to cover for the

client - eg your shoot list - it is not all creative shooting events are a lot about knowing what is a significant moment

that is what the client is paying for and not a full artist interpretations of what the event is to you without those

significant moments. Only except is if the job was sold as you will get what I think you should get, no formals, no

must have shots, no can you take a picture of us shots.

 

 

2.If you are on job even for a freebie it is not a date a vacation so park the significant other at home - would you bring

the significant other to a job situation ? Leaving earlier even for freebie is a no no (what you did was unprofessional in

my book)- the client never remembers the freebie part only that there are not enough pictures because you were not

there do them. Always confirm with client that the shoot is a wrap before you go... do not ever quietly walk off that's a

dang sure fire way to get the you did not take this or we looked for you and found you left before our weddding was

done compliant.

 

3. collect what ever not paid yet on hand over to client - one point to note never inovice severval sessions as one job

then you avoid not being able to collect as you deliver once delivered and no payment is collect you run risk to

collection issues plus is a hassle to have to chase for payment.

 

4. In some cases even if morally you are right (debatable in most cases) for a business and health pov eating a loss

is better for the business and you. It is not the fear of bad mouthing once a complaint has surface it likehood of

getting a referal from the party is nil the best damage control can do is limit the amount of bad mouthing. As a

professional damage control is a skill that has to there and ready to work as the saying goes some times the brown

stuff does hit the fan.

[short1]

To John H.:

 

I should qualify my statement. Testimony is parol evidence. The trier of fact will certainly be attuned to credibility, and one can , with proper examination, impeach a witness. However, barring this, in Louisiana, where case (common) law carries little wieght, legislative law ( statute ) dictates what the bench should accept as probative evidence.

 

La. C.C. Art.305: Effect of presumption if there is no controverting evidence: " If the trier of fact finds the existence of predicate fact to be inferred, the trier of fact is required to find the existence of the fact to be inferred".

 

I'm not a lawyer, and not giving legal advice. Statute varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and one should be familiar with local jurisprudence, or consult an attorney. In Louisiana, however, non-traversed testimony, supported in some manner ( as by another witness), must be inferred to be factual.

 

I rest my case, counselor, and this is about as far into left field as I'm willing to go - especially since this matter is unlikely to come to issue.

 

Perry Mason ( A.K.A. C. Unger)

[short1]

John H.

 

By the way, attorneys are permitted to file a claim on their own behalf, defend themselves, and represent corporations being sued in small claims court. In addition, as Melvin Belli writes, ..."some states do allow attorneys to represent clients" in small claims court. I have no idea where this prevails, but apparently it is permitted in several states. If you disagree, argue with Melvin ( of course, you'd need a medium to contact him in the Great Beyond ).

 

That's it...coming back in from left field...

 

C.U.

[john_h.1]

I don't think Steven cares about any of this.