Legal Advice for Sole Trader

stuleech

Hi,

I'm a freelance photographer and last year I set up an agreement with an estate agent in the NW. I provided them with professional photography and related services.

The agreement was that I would be paid £200 per house but only when the house was sold. This was a trial and the thinking was that vendors wouldn't want the initial outlay and the estate agent also didn't want to pay outright for it initially untill it was tested. Seemed fair enough to me.

I provided these services for 3 houses. 1 of which sold and I was paid £200. The other two didn't sell and went to other estate agents and I wasn't paid. The risk I had taken didn't pay off so that was that. I have no problem there.

However I received an email from one of the vendors asking for copies of the images, I said he could have these if he covered the fee that I would have received for producing them (£200) he replied stating that he had already paid the estate agent half upfront (£100) for the services and would happily pay me the remainder which he did.

It turns out the estate agent without my knowledge had charged each vendor £100 upfront to cover some of his costs even though he stated that he wasn't going to ask vendors. To me this seems quite straightforward. He has sold my services to a vendor and they have paid for the services but I have never recieved this money but in my mind this is due to me. When the vendor found out that I had never been paid he was quite unhappy also which is understandable because he believed he had paid me through the estate agent.

Anyway I have not had much luck contacting the estate agent, he has been quite abrupt and is now ignoring me. Its not a lot of money but its more the principle for me especially as I am starting out.

My question really is would I have any chance with small claims or is it just a case of writing this one off?

steve1980

Not a chance. They can say that it's for the initial marketing of the property, rightmove listing, printing up detail sheets etc etc etc.

Unless the vendor of the property has an agreement saying that the £100 up front was for photographs then you'll never get it.

Personally, why would an agent pay a photographer to take photos of a property. You can buy a wide angled camera for £100 or a basic SLR for £350.

Acc72

stuleech wrote: »

The agreement was that I would be paid £200 per house but only when the house was sold.

I provided these services for 3 houses.

1 of which sold and I was paid £200. The other two didn't sell and went to other estate agents and I wasn't paid.

Based on the above, the estate agent has fully complied with your agreement.

Whatever the agreement between the estate agent and his customer is completely seperate to your agreement.

stuleech

Personally, why would an agent pay a photographer to take photos of a property. You can buy a wide angled camera for £100 or a basic SLR for £350.

Not only is that beside the point but have you seen some of the photos that estate agents use to sell houses? It was actually more complicated than just straight photographs but that detail is really irrelevant and they were also premium properties of £1m+

I have an agreement from the vendor to the estate agent stating that the money paid was for the photographs.

I also have this in writing as one of the agreements - "6. to all intents and purposes – stuart will conduct himself as NAME OF ESTATE AGENT's photographer"

steve1980

stuleech wrote: »

Not only is that beside the point but have you seen some of the photos that estate agents use to sell houses? It was actually more complicated than just straight photographs but that detail is really irrelevant and they were also premium properties of £1m+

I have an agreement from the vendor to the estate agent stating that the money paid was for the photographs.

I also have this in writing as one of the agreements - "6.to all intents and purposes – stuart will conduct himself as NAME OF ESTATE AGENT's photographer"

I was in estate agency for 12 years and we never used a professional photographer. I took the majority of the photos myself and always received compliments about them. Even the nasty looking ones!

I assume you have access to a solicitor? Might be best asking them for their advice.

InsideInsurance

For top end photos you really need a tilt and shift lens on that dSLR of yours and that's going to cost the best part of a grand new.

Your contract was directly with the estate agent, the estate agent wasnt acting as your agent in that they would be a paid an amount by the vendor and they would pay you £200 for your services. Unless your contract with the estate agent stated that your monies would become due if they received any remittance from the vendor and detailed how that money would be proportioned between the parties then your up a certain creek without a certain implement

If you ever do shared success/ risk type contracts you always have to be very careful of whom you enter into the agreements with and that your contract is very tight. When entering into an agreement which helps derisk something for an organisation there is a significant chance that their attitudes may change, levels of effort etc go down. You need to protect yourself from this type of eventuality.... mainly by chosing partners carefully, as well as contractually.

stuleech

Fair enough! As I said it was more of a marketing package including an interactive presentation and stuff but essentially tagged as pro photography.

After I posted on here I realised that I have been working for a lawyer so gave her a call. She reckoned that the vendor would be in a position to retrieve the money if they so wished as it was a third-party contract as you rightly said.

I'm not trying to be naive about it, its just obviously not quite black and white, hence me posting on here and personally I do feel like the estage agent has acted immorally whatever the legal standing.

Acc72

stuleech wrote: »

I do feel like the estage agent has acted immorally whatever the legal standing.

But the estate agent has done nothing wrong - the agreement was to pay you £200 per property when it was sold, and he did this.

You are possibly annoyed at yourself that you entered into this agreement, but that is not the Estate Agents "fault".

At the end of the day, you both had a mutually beneficial relationship.

With hindsight, you may have agreed to a (possibly lower) fee per property, irrespective of whether it sold or not, however at the time you were happy to take the "gamble" of a (possibly higher) fee when the property was sold.

stuleech

InsideInsurance wrote: »

If you ever do shared success/ risk type contracts you always have to be very careful of whom you enter into the agreements with and that your contract is very tight. When entering into an agreement which helps derisk something for an organisation there is a significant chance that their attitudes may change, levels of effort etc go down. You need to protect yourself from this type of eventuality.... mainly by chosing partners carefully, as well as contractually.

It was a bit of a punt to be honest. The estate agent was working closely with my Uncle who had been selling lots of high end property through him so I assumed that relationship would not be an issue. You live and learn, wouldn't do the same now but thankfully we're only talking a couple of hundred!

stuleech

Acc72 wrote: »

But the estate agent has done nothing wrong - the agreement was to pay you £200 per property when it was sold, and he did this.

You are possibly annoyed at yourself that you entered into this agreement, but that is not the Estate Agents "fault".

At the end of the day, you both had a mutually beneficial relationship.

With hindsight, you may have agreed to a (possibly lower) fee per property, irrespective of whether it sold or not, however at the time you were happy to take the "gamble" of a (possibly higher) fee when the property was sold.

Yes he kept to that part of the agreement. That agreement was based on the fact that according to him vendors would not cover the cost up front and on that information we entered into this agreement. He has then decided that he was wrong and without my knowledge taken money from the vendors to pay for the photography of their properties and left me out of pocket for 2 of the 3 properties when he has in fact been paid the funds to reimburse half of the agreed fee. How is that not immoral?

steve1980

It's makes my 500 wedding photos all on DVD great value for money at £395!

You say you lost a couple of hundred, but in all fairness, the outlay for the two properties didn't cost you £200.