Dispute with wedding photographers - Covid related!

CrippsCorner

arthurfowler said:

Glitter Bar? LOL. Did you pay with a credit card?

Unfortunately not, the missus did a bank transfer...

CrippsCorner

Diamandis said:

Well it all depends on if the courts would view this as frustrated or not. The service of taking photographs is still available. 

It is, but only for 15 people... whereas our contract was for 120 people. This is a radically different circumstance, one which in my opinion falls under something I stated earlier:

As some legal restrictions under the lockdown laws are lifted or eased, it may be the case that a business is no longer completely prevented from providing any of the services it agreed to provide. The CMA’s view is that if the service that can be provided would be radically different to what was agreed, for example, because lockdown laws or other restrictions would prevent key parts of the contract from being performed, then in most cases consumers should be entitled to a refund.

Has anyone here taken someone to small claims themselves? I definitely believe I have a case (as does my solicitor) but my worry is that I suffer from anxiety and the thought of going to court probably isn't worth it for my mental health, unfortunately 

davidmcn

CrippsCorner said:

Diamandis said:

Well it all depends on if the courts would view this as frustrated or not. The service of taking photographs is still available. 

It is, but only for 15 people... whereas our contract was for 120 people. This is a radically different circumstance

It might be radically different in the context of a contract to book a venue, or to provide catering - I'm not sure the number of guests makes all that much difference to a wedding photography gig though.

williamgriffin

CrippsCorner said:

Diamandis said:

Well it all depends on if the courts would view this as frustrated or not. The service of taking photographs is still available. 

It is, but only for 15 people... whereas our contract was for 120 people. This is a radically different circumstance, one which in my opinion falls under something I stated earlier:

As some legal restrictions under the lockdown laws are lifted or eased, it may be the case that a business is no longer completely prevented from providing any of the services it agreed to provide. The CMA’s view is that if the service that can be provided would be radically different to what was agreed, for example, because lockdown laws or other restrictions would prevent key parts of the contract from being performed, then in most cases consumers should be entitled to a refund.

Has anyone here taken someone to small claims themselves? I definitely believe I have a case (as does my solicitor) but my worry is that I suffer from anxiety and the thought of going to court probably isn't worth it for my mental health, unfortunately 

Was the contract with the photographer specifically to take photos of all 120 guests or to photograph the day?

unholyangel

Sandtree said:

unholyangel said:

You draw the line at whether the contract, as agreed, can be performed. It doesn't matter (in your example) that they can provide a wedding for 50 because the contract was for 51. Unless the other party agrees to the variation. 

It is highly unlikely that the contract with the photographer would include how many guests are to be there, the focus tends more to be on number of hours, which aspects they will cover and how many photos etc will be provided. All of these generally can be achieved irrespective of if there is 50 or 51 guests. 

Yes but the purpose of the contract with the photographer was to record their wedding, a wedding which could not go ahead due to a change in law. Ergo, contract with the photographer is frustrated. Or do you think the videographer/photographer wasn't aware it was for a wedding? 

Op has also told us they've been advised by their solicitor it's frustrated. Given solicitors won't advise professionally without establishing the facts and they are legally qualified/trained, I wouldn't expect them to say it's frustrated unless it is. 

Sandtree

unholyangel said:
Op has also told us they've been advised by their solicitor it's frustrated. Given solicitors won't advise professionally without establishing the facts and they are legally qualified/trained, I wouldn't expect them to say it's frustrated unless it is. 

Firstly, do you really think that everyone that comes on here who says their solicitor has given them X advice really has spoken to a solicitor and received such advice? If they've had professional advice it would beg the question of why they subsequently want random people online's advice, especially when the solicitor has supported their case.

Secondly, having been to court many times in my former line of work and had many barristers give legal opinion which ultimately the judge didnt agree with these things are rarely purely black and white.

unholyangel

Sandtree said:

unholyangel said:
Op has also told us they've been advised by their solicitor it's frustrated. Given solicitors won't advise professionally without establishing the facts and they are legally qualified/trained, I wouldn't expect them to say it's frustrated unless it is. 

Firstly, do you really think that everyone that comes on here who says their solicitor has given them X advice really has spoken to a solicitor and received such advice? If they've had professional advice it would beg the question of why they subsequently want random people online's advice, especially when the solicitor has supported their case.

Secondly, having been to court many times in my former line of work and had many barristers give legal opinion which ultimately the judge didnt agree with these things are rarely purely black and white.

No, but given they're the ones who will suffer the consequences if they've lied, I don't see it as a constructive use of my time to second guess what they've said unless there is an inconsistency which would affect the claim. Could you image how long a consultation with a solicitor would take if they work on the basis that every word out their prospective clients mouth is a lie? 

As for why ask on here, my reading of the OP is they're looking for guidance on how to proceed, rather than whether they have any legal basis to proceed. 

As for second point, something I've said myself is that you need to remember there is always a losing side in any court case. But that's not necessarily because the solicitor has been convinced they were right/going to win. If you're experienced with courts then you should be well aware that a solicitors job is to advise their client and act on their instruction. Sometimes that involves trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. They also have a duty surrounding prospect of success and not to encourage claims with no merit.

Therefore, if they've advised it's frustrated then we, with very few relevant facts and most posters not having any training or qualifications in law, aren't really in a position to disagree. 

Plus if the solicitor is wrong, OP can always claim off their PII.

davidmcn

unholyangel said:

Sandtree said:

unholyangel said:
Op has also told us they've been advised by their solicitor it's frustrated. Given solicitors won't advise professionally without establishing the facts and they are legally qualified/trained, I wouldn't expect them to say it's frustrated unless it is. 

Firstly, do you really think that everyone that comes on here who says their solicitor has given them X advice really has spoken to a solicitor and received such advice? If they've had professional advice it would beg the question of why they subsequently want random people online's advice, especially when the solicitor has supported their case.

Secondly, having been to court many times in my former line of work and had many barristers give legal opinion which ultimately the judge didnt agree with these things are rarely purely black and white.

Therefore, if they've advised it's frustrated then we, with very few relevant facts and most posters not having any training or qualifications in law, aren't really in a position to disagree. 

For what it's worth, I'm a solicitor who is far from convinced (from the information given) that the contract with the photographer is frustrated.

Sandtree

unholyangel said:
As for second point, something I've said myself is that you need to remember there is always a losing side in any court case. But that's not necessarily because the solicitor has been convinced they were right/going to win. If you're experienced with courts then you should be well aware that a solicitors job is to advise their client and act on their instruction. Sometimes that involves trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. They also have a duty surrounding prospect of success and not to encourage claims with no merit. 

Therefore, if they've advised it's frustrated then we, with very few relevant facts and most posters not having any training or qualifications in law, aren't really in a position to disagree. 

Plus if the solicitor is wrong, OP can always claim off their PII.

The other issue is even if they have seen a lawyer we are now in chinese whispers territory and what may have been "it may be possible the contract is frustrated" becomes a definite thing on retelling. Certainly in my more recent experience of dealing with commercial lawyers they will very rarely give you a definitive answer but protect their PII by acknowledging there are multiple possible outcomes. This is clearly why contractual wording gets so convoluted trying to deal with all possible scenarios and interpretations but still get another lawyer to look at it and they'll suggest further changes.

I think we are in a position to disagree however ultimately the advice to the OP would always be to go with the paid for advice they've gotten as at least there is an option of a PII claim if it turns out to be wrong (though maybe double check its as certain as they believe it was). 

unholyangel

davidmcn said:

unholyangel said:

Sandtree said:

unholyangel said:
Op has also told us they've been advised by their solicitor it's frustrated. Given solicitors won't advise professionally without establishing the facts and they are legally qualified/trained, I wouldn't expect them to say it's frustrated unless it is. 

Firstly, do you really think that everyone that comes on here who says their solicitor has given them X advice really has spoken to a solicitor and received such advice? If they've had professional advice it would beg the question of why they subsequently want random people online's advice, especially when the solicitor has supported their case.

Secondly, having been to court many times in my former line of work and had many barristers give legal opinion which ultimately the judge didnt agree with these things are rarely purely black and white.

Therefore, if they've advised it's frustrated then we, with very few relevant facts and most posters not having any training or qualifications in law, aren't really in a position to disagree. 

For what it's worth, I'm a solicitor who is far from convinced (from the information given) that the contract with the photographer is frustrated.

Then you should see the logic in what I've said regarding not second guessing and not being in a position to disagree.

I would expect any practicing solicitor to conduct themselves in a certain way when holding themselves out professionally. Ergo I take it on faith they have given professional advice and haven't given advice without ascertaining the relevant facts.