| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/25/2006 05:13:27 AM · #1 |
Hi Guys,
I have a friend who's wedding I recently attended. I took a load of pictures, mostly for my own use, though obviously offered them prints if they wanted. I gave them a disk with (Watermarked) images on and they loved them.
Now the question I wanted to ask, they hired a pro photographer for the day. They got their images from him this week and are not impressed at all, so much so that the bride has been in tears (I have not seen them yet...).
They want to know where they stand in terms of full or part refund as they are not happy with the outcome?
I believe they paid £600 for a typical traditional package where they get to chose 40 prints from the proofs supplied.
Would it depend on the detail of the contract, if there was one?
It's a bum deal for them, but not for me, as they are now going to come to me for prints!
Thanks,
AL. |
|
|
|
09/25/2006 05:24:51 AM · #2 |
The terms of the contract will be critical to determining the parties' rights. The b&g will have to argue that he is in breach of the contract.
It is probable that there is an actual or implied term requiring the photographer to provide a reasonable quality of service. If he has failed to do so (which would depend on all the circumstances), then there is a potential claim.
In practice, it is unlikely that the b&g would recover significantly more than the £600 they paid. It is unlikely that the cost and time that it would take to bring a formal claim would be worthwhile. In these situations and for claims of this size, it is often the better case for the parties to talk and come up with some other arrangement, and for the b&g to make do with whatever they can (your images, guest images, plus any salvageable images) to pull together an album.
Ultimately, the best advice I can give is that they should try and forget about the unsatisfactory bits of their wedding and don't let them spoil all the good bits.
|
|
|
|
09/25/2006 05:33:15 AM · #3 |
Hi - Thanks for the response...
I don't think they want to re-claim more than they paid, just get a proportion of it back.
They are lucky in a way that I was there, as I seem to have captured pretty much most of the day for them (I went to each house before hand too...), so they will still have good coverage for their album.
I appreciate what you say about forgetting the bad bits and remembering the good, I'll have to pass that on...
AL. |
|
|
|
09/25/2006 06:25:22 AM · #4 |
The photographer did his job and delivered the product, he is not in breach of contract. Whether the bride and groom like the pictures or not, they do not have a case in court as it is a subjective matter. I suspect the photographer had them sign a contract that probably said that there will be no refunds. This is a sad situation but unfortunately for them, there is not much they can do besides not recommending him to family and friends.
June
|
|
|
|
09/25/2006 06:35:28 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Chiqui:
The photographer did his job and delivered the product, he is not in breach of contract. Whether the bride and groom like the pictures or not, they do not have a case in court as it is a subjective matter. I suspect the photographer had them sign a contract that probably said that there will be no refunds. This is a sad situation but unfortunately for them, there is not much they can do besides not recommending him to family and friends.
June |
I think this is probably the case... I don't think there is anything techniclly wrong, just that they are not happy with the amount of posed shots that just look the same... |
|
|
|
09/25/2006 07:26:59 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Chiqui:
The photographer did his job and delivered the product, he is not in breach of contract. Whether the bride and groom like the pictures or not, they do not have a case in court as it is a subjective matter. I suspect the photographer had them sign a contract that probably said that there will be no refunds. This is a sad situation but unfortunately for them, there is not much they can do besides not recommending him to family and friends.
June |
If a photographer does a bad job (like anyone providing a service), then there is a claim, and a "no refunds" clause will not protect the photographer. However - "bad job" would have to be demonstrable and would depend on the quality of the job contracted and paid for. This is what a court would decide: what was agreed upon, and what was delivered. If every pic was, say, out of focus, then there would probably be a decent claim. If the pics are simply reportage when the couple wanted formals, then the issue would be much harder to argue.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/21/2025 11:58:02 PM EDT.
