# New low for clients.



## table1349 (Apr 3, 2016)

Sorry if this has already been posted.  Amazing how low some "clients" will go.
Photographer Threatened with Ruin if Refund Not Given


----------



## pixmedic (Apr 3, 2016)

the photographer actually had the client against a wall at the point they stalked him over the internet.
internet harassment/stalking is actually taken pretty seriously in a lot of areas. it is in Florida. can get you actual jail time.

plus, the photographer should have said hes gonna sue not only for the harassment, but also extortion. 
looked like he had all the evidence he needed.


----------



## table1349 (Apr 3, 2016)

Personally I think the photographer should have called in Chuck Noris.






Problem solved, no refund for you.


----------



## table1349 (Apr 3, 2016)

On a serious note, personally I would have gone to the police and reported the stalking as well as the extortion aspect.  That is the kind of publicity that the "client" would definitely not want, especially in the business world.  Being charged for those things in open court can easily be a career killer and life altering event.


----------



## tirediron (Apr 4, 2016)

I would say the client's reactions were somewhat inappropriate, but looking at this objectively, it doesn't appear that the photographer really lived up to his end of the bargain either.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 4, 2016)

tirediron said:


> I would say the client's reactions were somewhat inappropriate, but looking at this objectively, it doesn't appear that the photographer really lived up to his end of the bargain either.



So perhaps we should pause for a moment of introspective reflection, and seriously ask ourselves, WWCND?

What would Chuck Norris Do?


----------



## tirediron (Apr 4, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > I would say the client's reactions were somewhat inappropriate, but looking at this objectively, it doesn't appear that the photographer really lived up to his end of the bargain either.
> ...


 Definitely.


----------



## SquarePeg (Apr 4, 2016)

If it's true that the photographer used a venue he was not supposed to be using and that made the client uncomfortable then I have to say I think the client wasn't all wrong.  However, he should have spoken up at the time and not waited until after the fact to ask for the refund.  Sounds like there was no contract in place specifying what the photographer would be providing for the cost agreed to.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 4, 2016)

SquarePeg said:


> If it's true that the photographer used a venue he was not supposed to be using and that made the client uncomfortable then I have to say I think the client wasn't all wrong.  However, he should have spoken up at the time and not waited until after the fact to ask for the refund.  Sounds like there was no contract in place specifying what the photographer would be providing for the cost agreed to.



Right, but the important thing to consider here.. 

Would Chuck Norris scowl at the man and then beat him to a pulp, or would he instead give him an inspirational message before getting him involved in an after school program that teaches him karate so that he might learn self-discipline?

See.. tough call.  Not as black and white as folks might imagine.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 4, 2016)

Wasn't it nice of him to still want to take the client out for coffee

what was he thinking ????


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 4, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> Wasn't it nice of him to still want to take the client out for coffee
> 
> what was he thinking ????



Well maybe he got a bit confused and rather than channeling Chuck Norris for spiritual guidance instead went with Dog the Bounty Hunter.  It has been known to happen.


----------



## table1349 (Apr 4, 2016)

tirediron said:


> I would say the client's reactions were somewhat inappropriate, but looking at this objectively, it doesn't appear that the photographer really lived up to his end of the bargain either.


How so?


----------



## table1349 (Apr 4, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> Wasn't it nice of him to still want to take the client out for coffee
> 
> what was he thinking ????


That's exactly what Chuck would do.  Fill him full of coffee, when the dude goes to get rid of the coffee Chuck would follow him into the bathroom and beat the holy living $#!& out of him.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 4, 2016)

gryphonslair99 said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > I would say the client's reactions were somewhat inappropriate, but looking at this objectively, it doesn't appear that the photographer really lived up to his end of the bargain either.
> ...



Well from the email the client sent sounds like he had some very different expectations of the shoot, the number of photos that would be provided, method of payment, etc.  

So, if we were to channel Chuck Norris, I'm guessing that he would likely have arrived on the scene and mediated the situation nicely while taking the time to point out to the kids at home that this would be a proper way to manage their anger.  Assuming of course neither party did anything horrifically stupid and inexplicably caused him to lose his gun, in which case a serious beating would have ensued.

If however we were take spiritual guidance from Dwayne The Dog Chapman, well odds are good he'd be haming it up for the cameras and talking a good game while Leland was actually running after the guy by himself.


----------



## tirediron (Apr 4, 2016)

gryphonslair99 said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > I would say the client's reactions were somewhat inappropriate, but looking at this objectively, it doesn't appear that the photographer really lived up to his end of the bargain either.
> ...


 
[As alleged by the client]:

-A change of venue 7 minutes before shoot time;
-failed to put the client at ease;
-apparent unfamiliarity/lack of confidence with equipment;
-no standard way of accepting payment; and
-didn't process the client's choice of image.

To me, this all sounds grossly unprofessional, and looking at the image that is [apparently] the headshot in question, if I was charged $350 for that, I would be spitting venom too.  There's no question that the client's reaction was out of proportion to the problem and I don't for a second believe everything he said in his statement, but I think those points have some degree of credibility, and, as in pretty much all cases, there are two sides to every story and invariably neither one is totally correct.


----------



## KmH (Apr 4, 2016)

Proof it pays to qualify your customers?


----------



## table1349 (Apr 4, 2016)

tirediron said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > tirediron said:
> ...


According to the extortion eMail.

-A change of venue 7 minutes before shoot time; Would it have been more professional to shoot him in the rain in his "starched white shirt?"

-failed to put the client at ease; Before or after the client decided he didn't want the photo?

-apparent unfamiliarity/lack of confidence with equipment; the "Client" goes into a long resume of his business dealing and abilities.  If he is that professional of an event planner shouldn't he know the kinds of questions he should ask up front?  

-no standard way of accepting payment; and Venmo is a part of  Pay Pal, Apple Pay, Google Wallet, Samsung Pay etc., all legitimate forms of payment that are the popular these days.   

-didn't process the client's choice of image. or did he?  This is one of those he said/he said topics. 

A lot of the he said by the "client" was about himself and his supposed greatness and professionalism.  Tell me, would you act like the "client" when you are presenting yourself to a prospective client.  Would you go into a long diatribe about your self, how good you are and then threaten to ruin them if they didn't use you?

Having been in the business world the customer is not always right.  Secondly, there is that portion of "customers" that frankly are dishonest.   The customer could have done due diligence when he spoke to the photographer but he did not.  The customer could have stopped the shoot from the beginning when he felt "uncomfortable" but he did not.  The customer apparently didn't feel this way when he reviewed the photos and when he accepted the product from the photographer.  The customer could have handled this in a legal, proper, fashion if he felt that he did not get the service that he wanted.   There is the BBB, the are courts for just this kind of dispute.  The customer chose to stalk and threaten the photographer instead.  Per the customers own words there were multiple photos as the customer advised that he would not use "any of the photos that you provided during our session....

This isn't like buyers remorse and you can just take the still in the package item back for a refund.  This is a service business and the service was performed.  It will be interesting to see if the "client" ends up using the now free photos he extorted from the photographer.

About the only that the client failed to do in his followup was to cut off a horses head and leave it in the photographers bed.


----------



## tirediron (Apr 4, 2016)

Don't get me wrong; I'm not defending the client, and I am quite sure he's more than a bit of a d-bag, but I am saying that there are two sides to this story, and there's enough of a ring of truth to the client's statement, that I think it has some credibility.  Just a couple of thoughts based on the way I do business:  If I'm planning an out-door shoot, I always have a back-up location, that's just common sense. I've found more often than not Mother Nature doesn't pay a lot of attention to my shooting schedule, and while all those forms of payment are legitimate, they're not in my mind, what a business owner should be using to the exclusion of all others, especially when services like Square are so easy to set up.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 4, 2016)

tirediron said:


> Don't get me wrong; I'm not defending the client, and I am quite sure he's more than a bit of a d-bag,



I got that too just from the haircut.  




> but I am saying that there are two sides to this story, and there's enough of a ring of truth to the client's statement, that I think it has some credibility.  Just a couple of thoughts based on the way I do business:  If I'm planning an out-door shoot, I always have a back-up location, that's just common sense. I've found more often than not Mother Nature doesn't pay a lot of attention to my shooting schedule, and while all those forms of payment are legitimate, they're not in my mind, what a business owner should be using to the exclusion of all others, especially when services like Square are so easy to set up.



I got the impression there was a serious breakdown in communication from the get go, my guess is the client was really expecting more than one image and when he only got the one that's when it really became a big issue for him.  Of course since he was disappointed he's going to naturally look back on everything he felt was unsatisfactory and bring that up to strengthen his case.

The fidgeting with the gear thing and the smile but don't smile thing - had the shoot gone well and the client gotten something more along the lines of what he was expecting, a set of edited images to choose from, odds are good they never would have been an issue.  Since he was so dissatisfied with the end results, well suddenly these things become huge issues.

I don't think the photographer here did a good job of communicating with the client, if he had most of this could have been avoided.  And like you, having a preplanned backup for bad weather would have been priority one in this circumstance as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## table1349 (Apr 4, 2016)

tirediron said:


> Don't get me wrong; I'm not defending the client, and I am quite sure he's more than a bit of a d-bag, but I am saying that there are two sides to this story, and there's enough of a ring of truth to the client's statement, that I think it has some credibility.  Just a couple of thoughts based on the way I do business:  If I'm planning an out-door shoot, I always have a back-up location, that's just common sense. I've found more often than not Mother Nature doesn't pay a lot of attention to my shooting schedule, and while all those forms of payment are legitimate, they're not in my mind, what a business owner should be using to the exclusion of all others, especially when services like Square are so easy to set up.



I would agree that the Photographer may not be without some fault here. 

 I see no evidence though that they were not supposed to be in the ballroom used.  It is the hotel's decision whether to allow it or not.  God knows we have had enough "discussions" about shooting various locations, legality of such, first amendment, trespassing  yada...yada...yada...etc, often with the mods bring out the trusty MASTER LOCK.   This was apparently a "rush job" of the clients choosing. 

I don't see Square as being any more or less viable then what was used.  With square I trust you and your phone to be secure.  With Venmo I trust that I have my phone secure when doing the transfer, plus there are no user fees involved, unlike some forms of payment nor do I provide you any of my information.  I have yet in my 61 years ever run across any business big or small that does not accept cash.  A lot don't take checks anymore, but cash is always welcome, as long as it is not all in pennies.  Cash may not have been the most convenient thing in this situation, but there surely was at least ONE other options.  

As for the mention earlier of cost for the product.  I did a quick google search, apparently the Photographer was towards the bottom end of the scale for such photos in that market.  $450.00 to $500.00 seemed to be the median.  Not a bad gig in that market if you can get it.  But then my $250,000.00 house here would go for around 5-7 million in California.  They are a crazy lot out there.  I know, I have family in California.


----------



## bundleofjoy (Apr 13, 2016)

Yes, It is necessity to keep prices low in starting business because it will attract clients .


----------



## Mr. Innuendo (May 20, 2016)

I would verbally disembowel the client online.

I would return every favor he would choose to visit on me. He's made it clear how valuable his time is. Imagine if _he _had to go find the negative (and false) reviews someone was leaving about _him_.

And it would all be done without him ever being able to trace any of it back to the source...


----------



## cauzimme (May 22, 2016)

I did had a bad experience with a client when I was still in school (17) I charged my friends friends 40$ each to cover their pre graduation, (so photos with boyfriend-girlfriend, outdoor and at the hotel location) One of the girl litteraly gave me **** because she expect all photo I took from her, she told me she would sue me, when we did settle before for 5 edited photo by person and I even had a contract....


----------

