It really perturbs me to read this thread. As a society, especially in America (I live in Canada), we have an agressive
litigations environment, when in reality the courts should be used as a last resort to deal with damages. You will not get
what you want; the images if you sue at this point. In fact by posting public negative feedback within 4 months of the
shoot, bring in the authorities (BBB, etc..), and threatening to sue significantly reduces the chance to acheive your
objective, and shows a level of immature impatience on your part. Slamming the the photographer and initiating a law suit
will only get you at best a result of having your money returned with no images. All the photographer has to say is "the
hard drive crashed".
Did you check out the photographer's portfolio and references before your hired him/her? Was this an outdoor shoot with
high contrast sunlight and heavy shadows? Sounds like the photographer was inexperienced in this type of envirinment
and as a result the images are sub-optimal. That said, you have to make a decision: do you want the less than perfect
images taken at the time of the actual event or your money back? You do not get both. So, follow the forgoing advice and
all you wll get back at most, is your money and do another staged shoot.
I suggest you contact a reputable congenial professional photo editor, check out their references/portfolio, explain the
situation, and ask them to engage the photographer with a written authorization from you to get copies of the RAW
images. At that point you can meet with the photo editor to see what can be done with the images. Do not bring-up the
threat of litigation, otherwise no one will want the hassle of delaing with you. You may also want to contact an associated
of the photographer in a friendly manner to elicit their assistance in securing the raw images.