Dispute with wedding photographers - Covid related!

davidmcn

CrippsCorner said:

I would say the expectations are now 'radically different' because we're not getting photographs of family etc. only being allowed 15 guests, rather than the 120 we originally invted.

It's still a wedding which can be photographed. I really don't think that qualifies as being frustrated.

Consider that things like commercial leases aren't being treated as "frustrated", even if e.g. you're a shop which hasn't been allowed to open to trade for months.

Undervalued

CrippsCorner said:

We were offered two new dates by the venue, that being April & September - Reason being no one was sure if we'd be out of lockdown by April.

These were told to the photographers, who basically said okay we are good to go on the April date.

We were later contacted again by the venue to say it looks like the possibility of a full wedding isn't going to be possible in April, so we can change your wedding to September - We agreed. They had no other dates available until 2022.

We then told the photographers, who replied said we can't do the September date, therefore you have cancelled the contract and you will not receive any refund.

We could have waited for date when both the venue and photographers were available, sure, but that would be at least another 6 month postponement, when we have already postponed it 16 months so we simply thought the best option was to get our money back and look elsewhere. Honestly it was a very polite message we sent them but they got so aggressive it really put my back up! Maybe we're the first people to ask for refund.

The wording on the CMA/GOV website is:

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.

In some circumstances, due to lockdown laws, a contract cannot go ahead as agreed or at all, and is therefore ‘frustrated’. A contract will be frustrated as a matter of law if, due to no fault of the parties, something happens after the contract was entered into which means it can no longer be performed at all or performance would be radically different to what was agreed.

As a result, the contract comes to an end and, where consumers have paid money in advance for services or goods that they have yet to receive, they will generally be entitled to obtain a refund.

I would say the expectations are now 'radically different' because we're not getting photographs of family etc. only being allowed 15 guests, rather than the 120 we originally invted.

"We could have waited for date when both the venue and photographers were available, sure"
But you didn't. Your choice but in making it you imposed a date on the photographer which he couldn't manage. How is that his fault in any way?

"I would say the expectations are now 'radically different' because we're not getting photographs of family etc. only being allowed 15 guests, rather than the 120 we originally invted."
Again, your choice. The photographer can obviously only photograph those who are there. You could have opted to wait until 120 guests are allowed but you decided not to. Again, how is that the photographer's fault?

In any case it is a moot point as you have unilaterally decided on a date when the photographer is not available.

I am sorry your wedding plans have been disrupted (like thousands of others) but it my view, both morally and legally, the photographer is entitled to most or all of his deposit unless he can easily get another another booking.

Sandtree

CrippsCorner said:

I would say the expectations are now 'radically different' because we're not getting photographs of family etc. only being allowed 15 guests, rather than the 120 we originally invted.

I think this is in the agree to disagree category now. You have had your professional legal opinion, and you've had the opinion of strangers that come on this forum who may or may not be who they claim. The ball is in your court if you want to take the matter to court.

As previously stated, I personally think that photographing a wedding is photographing a wedding if you have the 30 or so guests we had, the 120 or so you had hoped to have or the 750 or so guests our colleague had in his wedding in India. I clearly don't know the conversations you had with your tog but for us the focus was all on what sections we wanted him to attend for, if we were wanting more the formal set photos or candids etc and it really didn't focus on guest numbers. 

Therefore assuming the only change is the headcount I struggle to see that as being a frustration to the contract, matters are different if you'd paid for reception photos, prewedding photos in your home/hotel suite etc all of which cannot happen because of lockdown but all you've mentioned to date is headcount.

Manxman_in_exile

You should have got your deposit back when the original contract was frustrated by Covid because your wedding had to be postponed.  That was the point of frustration when you should have acted.

But why has your venue said no to the April date?  Is that their decision or do we know that we will still be in lockdown?  If the April date were to be cancelled because lockdown was still in effect, then I presume the contract would be frustrated again by Covid, and you could claim your deposit back from the photographer (and the venue if applicable!).

But if the venue is simply saying they don't think they can do April, then they may be in breach of any agreement you have with them and it's got nothing to do with the photographer.  So what actually happened?

You had a date agreed for your wedding.  But that had to be postponed to an unknown date because of Covid.  I would say that at that point the contracts with the venue and and the photographer were both frustrated and you could have claimed back any deposits, if you wanted to.

How was the arrangement then carried forward?  The venue offered you dates in April or September, you chose April and your photographer could do then.  So did you agree a contract with the venue with that April date?  If so, why is the venue now cancelling it if they don't know for sure that it can't go ahead because of Covid?  And did you actually agree an April date with the photographer.

To me it all revolves around what agreements you had for the April date, and why the venue is saying April can't now be done.  If it can't be done because of Covid, that's frustration, but if it can't be done for some other reason, it's not frustration.  I don't see how the venue knows it can't go ahead in April because of Covid.  Do we know lockdown will last that long?  (I don't keep uptodate on this).

Indigo_and_Violet

CrippsCorner said:

These were told to the photographers, who basically said okay we are good to go on the April date.

We were later contacted again by the venue to say it looks like the possibility of a full wedding isn't going to be possible in April, so we can change your wedding to September - We agreed. They had no other dates available until 2022.

We then told the photographers, who replied said we can't do the September date, therefore you have cancelled the contract and you will not receive any refund.

I'm interested to know how much time passed between booking them in for April and asking to move to September. It's possible they turned down other work for the April date in the meantime.

CrippsCorner said:

I would say the expectations are now 'radically different' because we're not getting photographs of family etc. only being allowed 15 guests, rather than the 120 we originally invited.

As a neutral observer, I'm not sure your argument is overwhelming. I can see why to your mind your 15 guest wedding is radically different to a 120 guest one. However, I can also see how to a photographer a wedding shoot is x hours on the day plus y hours in post. Instead of capturing and editing say, one photo each of your 120 guests they could now expect to capture and edit 9 photos each of your 15 guests. The volume of work and the total output (measured in number ad quality of photos) is the same. If you want to try and argue it in court then that's up to you, but unless the contract (or perhaps emailed discussions) have a very clear specification on exactly which shots you want taken, I don't think it's as clear cut as you feel it is.

sheramber

We were later contacted again by the venue to say it looks like the possibility of a full wedding isn't going to be possible in April, so we can change your wedding to September - 
So, it is not that the venue cannot do the wedding. It is because you can only have 15 guests and want 120 so you have changed to September, assuming you will be able to have 120 then.
But, you had booked the photographer for April.   Was 120 guests part of the contract?
You are now cancelling that booking and not  moving to a date that the photographer can attend.
That is the cancellation that is relevant.
 

Confusedman123

Having a very similar problem also with wedding photography 

CrippsCorner

The guest number definitely seems key here. I am going to have a read through the contract and see exactly what it says... bear in mind I was not involved in booking the photographers at all, until asking for the refund. So I am trying to get my other half to send stuff over to me (she's a stress head and tends to run away from anything like this)

Regarding the venue conversation, again I wasn't involved at all... but it seems basically the venue said something along the lines of, "We can see that a full wedding isn't going to be possible in April, therefore, if you wish, we can re-arrange to the September date to give you more chance of having the full wedding experience you obviously desire."

So it's not that they can't do it, and it's not that we said we didn't want it. It was merely their recommendation which we were happy to go with.

Another point which annoys me is what they deem the deposit to warrant; in their words: Covers administration and holding of the wedding date, also any correspondence time taken.

This seems unreasonable. There was no administration or correspondence other than a couple of emails (which were general emails to multiple clients)  a single phone call, and the occasional Facebook message. There was nothing bespoke made for us, no actual meetings etc. I do not deem this to warrant costing £394, and looking into it, this would likely to found unfair and therefore unenforceable under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

Maybe I should pursue a partial refund of 50% to stop this going any further, but somehow I don't think they'd go for it.

FaceHead

Phew. That's all taken a while to read through. 

Another opinion here in favour of 'not frustrated'. As I see it the original contract was updated to the new date and both parties accepted this variation. On the new date the wedding can go ahead and the photographer can take photos. The difference in number of guests does not, for me, rise to the level of radically altering the services to be provided.

Proposed action: Send the letter before action, which should include standard wording around being prepared to consider reasonable offers and mediation. Don't slave over it for too long as it has a limited chance of a decent outcome and then put the matter behind you. 

They may offer a token £50 or £100, which in my view you should accept as I don't think you actually have a valid claim. Actually paying the MCOL fee or going to mediation would just be throwing (a small amount of) good money after bad. 

Confusedman123

I have sent a pm