withholding images from wedding

[William Michael]

<p>Then I think that it is best that your solicitor manages the next steps for you.<br>

Again, sincerely, good luck with it.</p>

<p>WW</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>I still am of the opinion that visiting her in person is most likely to yield a positive outcome (ie. you get your pics). In your shoes, I would probably visit her with your solicitor (or have them go knock on the door while you sit in the car - better). Such conduct would give her the opportunity to provide the images (to your solicitor) easily and quickly, would detach your emotions, and would also demonstrate clearly that you are willing and able to take it to the next level, should she choose (for some reason) not to provide your pictures. I would also have him offer a signed waiver that you agree not to sue her for this with the exchange. Also, a solicitor is far less likely to elicit a police complaint. ie. it gives her an easy out, and a reason to take that easy out, while keeping your guys' emotions out of play. If she chooses not to provide a solicitor with the images, I think you can chalk them up as unrecoverable, and proceed with a suit for damages.</p>

<p>As far as the FB 'defamation' goes. Defamation is only defamation if it is untrue. While opinions are opinions, as long as statements of fact are truthful, it doesn't qualify as defamation - I know of no civilized region in the world where defamation is a legally valid complaint if the statements in question are true (but I certainly could be wrong ;) ). Regardless of the legal definition, I would keep my mouth shut on FB about it, at least until you've determined whether or not you are going to be able to get your pictures back. All those comments are likely to do is upset her more. Which decreases the likelihood of a positive outcome.</p>

<p>This whole thing kind of mystifies me though. And I keep thinking that there has got to be some rational REASON she won't provide the images. No one is such a glutton for punishment when a simple drag of the mouse will relieve her of all liability. </p>

[michaelchadwickphotography]

<p>I respectfully disagree with those who tell you to keep quiet about it, IF this is the only way you ever get a response from her. I do not know her side of this, but if what you are saying is true, if she is holding your photographs ransom, and if there is no ethically viable reason she is doing so (such as non-payment), then you are perfectly within both your legal and ethical rights to describe objectively (without name calling or slander in the process) what she is doing to you.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>... of course you <em>can</em> talk all the smack about her that you want, on FB, or any other medium you want. But is that course of action one which would likely yield the desired results? I'd suggest that at this point it's not likely to help, and is only going to add fuel to the fire. While she is holding your pictures, <em>and there is a chance of getting them back,</em> <em>antagonizing her serves no beneficial purpose.</em> Doing so is also going to show how much of a hothead you are if it ever gets to court. Heck, one might even argue that the OP is harassing, or FB stalking the photog. </p>

<p>The responses to the OP's 'FB defamation' are NOT likely going to magically someday have a link to download his pics from. Relying on that as your method of getting your pictures is pure farcical nonsense.</p>

[michaelchadwickphotography]

<p>Marcus, the OP stated that the only time she gets <em>any</em> response at all is when she posts something on Facebook or another review site. If that is the only way she can get through, what other method would you prescribe? </p>

<p>I do feel that anything you post, as I said previously, should be objective and just tells what happened. It shouldn't be antagonizing or hot-headed, rather simply an objective telling of the facts.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Yeah, I can't argue that it's a way to get a response, but clearly no response from the photog is going to magically and suddenly include access to her pictures. In this case, no contact (at least while the OP decides how to proceed) seems better than contact which annoys, and possibly infuriates the photog. Letting things cool off until the OP has a clear plan of action seems a better course - certainly one that seems more likely to result in images. </p>

<p>While I wouldn't suggest that the OP has lied about what she has said on FB, a response that includes "That's defemation, I demand you remove it!" <em>clearly</em> has upset the photog - perhaps rightly so, but it doesn't matter how 'right' you are if your pictures all get deleted in a fit of anger at you. In a situation like this, controlling yourself usually yields a better result than trying to assert your 'rights'... Once she's got her pics (or not), then would be the time to take it to FB (if you still felt necessary). Venting all your frustration <em>after the person can't hurt you anymore</em> seems a better choice than while they still have a loaded gun (aka sole possession of the pics)</p>

[michaelchadwickphotography]

<p>There is no way to know both sides of this argument, definitely, so we're all only going by what is being posted here. It most certainly takes two to tango. However, this is a service industry, and ultimately we are providing a service. Yes, we are artists, but if the photographer was paid (if not contracted properly) to provide that service, why be concerned about infuriating the photog? Who's working for who here? The photog has already shown they're not going to deliver. How could that situation be made any worse at this point? If the photographer is holding the pics <em>and has no ethical or legal reason</em> <em>to be doing so</em> (again, I don't know the situation), then not providing the service which she was paid to provide and not delivering the photographs is fraud. Period. IF (again, IF) this is the case, then I have no sympathy for the photog. The fact that the photog's own site is not publicly accessible certainly doesn't help steer me in any direction other than the OP's.</p>

<p>Any communication at this point which can be achieved, is the only way for anything productive to come out of it. And failing that, go to the press, and go after her with everything you've got. There is no place for people like that in this industry.</p>

[lindsay_dobson]

<p>I'll preface this by saying that I haven't had time to read this thread in its entirety, so I apologies if I have missed something. I saw it mentioned that this situation may be UK-based so on that basis I will offer some advice.</p>

<p>It appears that the OP enlisted a friend to photograph the wedding, considering that a friend's word would be binding and that no formal agreement would be required. Most of us here know that it doesn't matter who we are dealing with - a written contract (even a basic one) is very important. But as has been said, hopefully there is sufficient evidence within e-mails to support the complaint. So long as there is some documentary proof of the agreement, you should be okay.</p>

<p>It is inexcusable for somebody to accept money, and to fail to supply what has been agreed, or else to fail to refund the money paid. In some cases court action becomes inevitable, however in order to put yourself in the best possible position it's important to follow what is known as a pre-action protocol. This demonstrates to the Judge that you have tried all reasonable means to recover your goods or your money.</p>

<p>First of all write a proper letter setting out once again what was agreed, and describe your complaint. Decide what you want (the photos or a refund) and give the photographer 14 days to respond. If she fails to do so write another letter (send these by recorded delivery) saying that you will be forced to consider legal action if you do not receive restitution within seven days. If that does not elicit a response then you will need to construct a Letter Before Action. This letter once again sets out your grievance but it also makes it clear that it is a final demand and if you do not receive what is required the next thing you will do is start court proceedings. Remind the photographer that once you start proceedings she is then likely to become liable for certain costs (such as court fees, your travel fees and any costs she may incur in attending or seeking legal advice which will not be claimable in Small Claims Court).</p>

<p>If you are in England or Wales you can fill in the Small Claims Track forms online, if you wish to have a refund from the photographer then you can fill in a money claim. There are modest fees for this. Courts will often recommend that you take part in mediation - I would encourage you to do this (even though you may not want to) because it shows a willingness to settle the problem yourself, if you can.</p>

<p>Do not even think about going to the press if you intend to follow action in court - which in my opinion is the correct route given that the small claims track is fairly simple and will not cost you very much at all. As it is, the photography world is a small one, and word will get around if this photographer has indeed behaved as described. </p>