There's nothing in contract law that would support failing to show up and perform to your obligations.

"Pros" market on the idea that the pictures (and memories) are all that will last. Fail to show up on the day of the wedding and take the pictures? That can't easily be made whole. Even if damaged by breach of an agreement, the parties have to use reasonable diligence and care to avoid aggravating or increasing the damages.

You should make any decisions on what to do based on the advice of your attorney - they should be the ones that assisted or wrote up your contract and they know how to protect you in court.

unforged wrote:


Sidewa- So you'd say to take a payment on the day of the wedding?


I require payment at least 2 weeks before the date. If the payment is not made, I will contract the couple and see what is going on. From there I handle it case by case, but if worst comes to worst and they ask to pay the day of (happened once). I let them know "cash on the spot or no shoot, no if ands or buts"!

The chef made a case earlier for not showing up based on losing money and whatnot, but it's just not the same situation. Assuming the OP is shooting all digital, all he is out is a day off. If we look at this strictly with the desire to run a money-making business, I have to think that the better option is to shoot and hold.

Option A: (don't show up) You will get a day off, sure, but you will never see that money. It would make winning in court difficult if you haven't provided any service.

Option B: (shoot and hold) Six months from now the couple's finances may turn around and they could come back to see if you still have the images. You could potentially get the entire payment and look like the good guy.

I get being indifferent about it if you're a $500 shoot 'n' burn photog, but if you stand to make or lose a few thousand bucks, we like to do what we can to lean to the make side.

- Jeff

p150 wrote:
Assuming the OP is shooting all digital, all he is out is a day off.

- Jeff

Jeff, that's not entirely true. Wear and tear on your gear is certainly a factor. Annual depreciation is a recognized write down and most likely figures into every photog's business who uses proper accounting. A day of shooting costs money on the back-end, not to mention gas to/from the location, plus the 41 cents per mile of wear and tear on your car.

Once, and only once, I showed up to shoot when the remaining 50% was still due. An anonymous drunk guest knocked my 5D, 24-70, and 580EX off the table and onto the dance floor (back when 5D's were expensive). I didn't see it happen and no one volunteered the individual's identity. Total repairs came to $300.

Luckily, the family came through and paid (as they promised they would) but it left me very uneasy about doing the same thing in the future. Interestingly enough, when I delivered their photobook about 2 months later, the aforementioned drunk guest actually contacted me, tail between the legs, and had me forward the repair invoice... a full check and handwritten apology showed up in the mail 2 weeks later.

And as food for thought... actually, wedding photographers have it GREAT. In the commercial world, I usually deal with Net30 (or even worse, Net90) terms. Once even laid out a substantial amount of my own money for a shoot (pre-production, scouting, gear rental, and NYC location permit fees) that wound up being canceled less than 24 hours prior to the shoot. I had to wait nearly a month to be reimbursed, while at the same time the company was in negotiations to sell to a competitor. They sold about 4-5 days after I was reimbursed. I got very, very lucky.

I'm small potatoes... the guys who do it on a big scale (James Russell comes to mind) will easily drop $20K or more on a shoot a month before it even happens.

Jonathan,

Of course there are smaller niggles that can be thrown in, cost wise. But I'm still with Jeff that, in the end, good business sense says to shoot the wedding and hold the images. That is, for THIS instance. In the future, his contract would provide more of an option... late fees, earlier due date, and as a last resort, refusal to show.

At a wedding workshop a couple of years ago I listened to some very experienced photographers. They said if they weren't paid in full they wouldn't show up. I was a little horrified at this until they explained it this way:
If the couple's priorities have photography so low that they haven't paid by the agreed date (and it's not just forgetfulness), then this is a sure sign they are not worth dealing with and they would not show up. No money = no show.
You are pretty sure they would have to pay for the venue, the cake, the flowers etc in advance. Why is the photography taking a second place?
It sounds brutal but increasingly i can see the logic in it. I have been burned once with a no pay, they didn't even come to collect the photos, moved house with no phone contact to follow up.

Hi everyone-

Very, very good stuff. Lots of food for thought. And one clarification: the OP (me) is a woman.

Anyway, I spoke with the bride, who called in a panic after she heard my voicemail. She said she sent the check and was surprised I didn't have it yet. Offered to give me her fiance's debit card number, which I refused. I said if it wasn't here today, we could arrange a cash or credit card transaction.

I'll keep you posted!

C'mon people. We're talking about a bride who has been contacted several times, promises payment that never shows up, says "I Sent the check, what do you mean you haven't gotten it.", who's phone number has changed..... we're not dealing with walking a 3 year old thru something. This is a pair of responsible adults who have signed a contract and have failed to hold up to their part numerous times and offer nothing but excuses. I would defend this case in court in a heartbeat.

Doesn't cost you anything but time? My time is valuable, it really is what I sell. To devalue it by saying it's not worth money is to devalue my profession and how I feed my children.

Probably a misunderstanding? I would say the contract and the multiple phone calls and conversations with the bride have already cleared up any misunderstandings.

In this day and age you run a real risk of not being paid in this type of situation. Yes you can take them to court and get a judgment against them. First you have to know where they live, becuase it's not like newly weds ever move out of the apartments they had before they got married. Then you have to take them to court, take time off from your work (I forgot, my time's not worth anything anyways), win, pay your lawyer, HOPE to actually collect on the judgment (which will run up your lawyer's bill even more). A judgment to collect is worth the paper it's written on of the client has no money. Wonder why OJ still owes money? It's becuase he's broke.

So would I not show up? By the second or third time of not getting paid, yeah I would be seriously thinking about it. But I would definitely take it on a case by case basis.

It was resolved while typing my response...Glad to hear it..Y

We would not show up. Keep in mind that we would make it abundantly clear to the couple that unless full payment was received PRIOR to the wedding day, our contract was to be considered terminated and we would not be there to shoot the wedding. In no case would it be a surprise. It takes some clients months just to place PART of their order. Why would paying us be any higher on the priority list than that?

Craig Gillette wrote:
There's nothing in contract law that would support failing to show up and perform to your obligations.

This is pretty misleading, and not entirely true. If the situation was that a deposit was made but the final payment was not and the photographer did not attempt to contact the bride before not showing up, that would be one thing.

However, if the photographer makes many attempts to make contact with the client and does their best to rectify the contractual obligation on the part of the client, then the photographer would be contractually supported to 'fail to show up'.

I say all this because I second shot for a photographer in this exact situation. Retainer paid, the last payment not paid, made every attempt to contact and rectify but got the runaround from the client. He didn't show up to the wedding and returned 25% of the retainer to the client as his contract stipulated, and then got sued. The court agreed that he had done everything in his power to rectify the situation but the client had failed to fulfill their end of the contract.

Keep a paper trail on all the communication you've tried with the bride. Paper trail, paper trail, paper trail. Something that will hold up in court.

Craig Gillette wrote:
There's nothing in contract law that would support failing to show up and perform to your obligations.

Not correct. Payment before services means you have no obligation as a photographer because no services were paid for other than retaining a date. The client retained the date but the client did not pay for photography to be performed. This is the benefit of a thirds payment process (Retain + Performance + Goods). In other words the liability is on the client's end. On the photographer's side there is a receivables.

Peace,
Cordell

I would still show up, just not touch the images until paid in full and even then their images would be on the back burner.

Wow, I think a lot of you guys are incredibly harsh. What happens when there really is a genuine and serious issue that delays the bride from paying on time? When they do eventually pay do you consider the damage that that will do to your relationship with the bride and groom on the wedding day? Can you really take photos that are of the highest quality when the relationship between you and the couple is strained? That's not a chance I would take.

Sure, there couples who are lazy or whatever but they going to be just as many who get caught up in the whole stress of organising the wedding that they stuff you around although that may not have been their intention. It's supposed to be the most special day of their lives. I don't care enough about one lousy job to do ruin that day for them.

In the last 12 months I have had five brides who have been late in making payment. Three of those, also forgot to bring payment on the day. All three of them arranged a bank transfer while they were on their honeymoon. All of those wedding have given us referrals. What we didn't do was damage the relationship we have with them. We always assume our clients are honest and that people make mistakes. In 15 years when photographing weddings the only person who defaulted on me was a friend. And my wife was even a bridesmaid.

We simply tell them that will make a safe archival copy of the photographs but that we won't look at them or process any of them until payment has been made and that the delivery of their images will be delayed by however long it takes them to make payment.

The number one reason we get from our referral clients as to why they book us, is that we were be easiest people to deal with at the last wedding. We treat our couple so well that they would feel too guilty if they didn't pay us.

Gordon

"perform to obligations" can't be any clearer. Since we don't have her contract, it's cavalier to suggest she can safely blow off showing and taking the pictures. Particularly when ignoring the full advice which is to clear her actions with her attorney.

You guys may be safe in your contracts but it's a rotten assumption to make advice from when you also have no responsibility if your advice blows up.

I hate a late payer pay today that relieved me somewhat.

On the other hand another client for april next year is demanding she not pay the full amount upfront despite it being very clear on my website/booking terms and so on. I told her this morning I'll gladly refund her deposit so she can find a more suitable photographer.

Jonathan H wrote:

Jeff, that's not entirely true. Wear and tear on your gear is certainly a factor. Annual depreciation is a recognized write down and most likely figures into every photog's business who uses proper accounting. A day of shooting costs money on the back-end, not to mention gas to/from the location, plus the 41 cents per mile of wear and tear on your car.

Once, and only once, I showed up to shoot when the remaining 50% was still due. An anonymous drunk guest knocked my 5D, 24-70, and 580EX off the table and onto the dance floor (back when 5D's were expensive). I didn't see it happen and no one volunteered the individual's identity. Total repairs came to $300.

Luckily, the family came through and paid (as they promised they would) but it left me very uneasy about doing the same thing in the future. Interestingly enough, when I delivered their photobook about 2 months later, the aforementioned drunk guest actually contacted me, tail between the legs, and had me forward the repair invoice... a full check and handwritten apology showed up in the mail 2 weeks later.

And as food for thought... actually, wedding photographers have it GREAT. In the commercial world, I usually deal with Net30 (or even worse, Net90) terms. Once even laid out a substantial amount of my own money for a shoot (pre-production, scouting, gear rental, and NYC location permit fees) that wound up being canceled less than 24 hours prior to the shoot. I had to wait nearly a month to be reimbursed, while at the same time the company was in negotiations to sell to a competitor. They sold about 4-5 days after I was reimbursed. I got very, very lucky.

I'm small potatoes... the guys who do it on a big scale (James Russell comes to mind) will easily drop $20K or more on a shoot a month before it even happens.

I know your post is warning about the possible dangers and costs, but I just found it funny that each instance you listed from personal experience actually worked out OK.

And the camera getting knocked off the table is one of those things where you can look back on it and say "that wouldn't have happened if I never showed up", but it also COULD have happened at any full-payment-on-time wedding in which you just leave your stuff lying around unattended. That's like saying that because you got in a wreck driving to work on a tuesday, that you'll never go to work on tuesday again. I mean, it wouldn't have happened if you had just stayed home, right?

Anyway, it's all just food for thought, do what you feel is best.

Nathan Whitchu wrote:
Doesn't cost you anything but time? My time is valuable, it really is what I sell. To devalue it by saying it's not worth money is to devalue my profession and how I feed my children.


But that is really what I'm trying to get at here. I think the value of our time depends, in part, on what we earn from using our time. If I spend three hours raking leaves in my yard, I may save the 20 or 30 bucks that I would have to pay someone to do it. BUT, if I take that three hours and take on a shoot or some other work that will make me $400, then pay someone $30 to rake, I have just increased the value of that time. Yes?

Applied to the current topic:
Yeah, I could stay home if payment hasn't been made on time, but that's not making money except for getting some editing done or piddling around with other little tasks. Whereas if I shoot the wedding I put myself in a position to reap a few thousand dollars from the day. It's not a guarantee, so it comes down to calculated risk, but I have to feel like the possibility of that kind of profit may outweigh the time I could spend fiddling with stuff at the studio (which would likely turn into slacking off or even just staying home if I've got the day off. Not that that is completely without value, but still). It's more about looking for where the opportunity is (and looking generous doing it) than running around trying to convince everyone how valuable my time is. If it's done right, people will see that your time is valuable, and that you care enough to give some of it up to make sure that the couple's day is captured and preserved, even if they haven't met their end by this point.

NOTE: All this is purely from the business perspective, but there's also the personal, ethical, and spiritual side of me that urges me to give people as much benefit of the doubt as possible without leaving myself open to get completely screwed over.

unforged wrote:

Very, very good stuff. Lots of food for thought. And one clarification: the OP (me) is a woman.


I just... it was the angle... I couldn't see... I just assumed... I mean... oops!

Sorry!!