First all-Asian wedding - a complete disaster!

Sirrith wrote in post #12903694
It is definitely within his right to sue. He performed his part of the contract, at least in part, they failed to perform theirs at all, he has the right to sue for performance. He spent time taking the photos, and has the right to be compensated for that time.

Whether or not it is the right thing to do morally or economically however, is a different story.

But having the right to something, isn't an argument for or motive to do something. It just means that it is an option.

The question I asked whas the motives to recommend that he takes it to court.

To motivate a specific action is to show what advantages there are, and show that it is likely that the advantages are bigger than the disadvantages. What is the cost, and what is the probability of a net gain (money, goodwill, freedom to control own time, ...)

dariussutherland wrote in post #12903325
I don'y know if your just looking for attention on this site or this is really happening.

YOU ARE JUST MAKING A COMPLETE MEAL OF IT.

It's SIMPLE. Either He Pays & Get The Images OR He Doesn't Pay & Doesn't Get The Images.


TELL HIM HE IS WASTING YOUR TIME. WHEN HE IS READY TO PAY LET YOU KNOW AND YOU WILL DO THE IMAGES. UNTIL THEN CEASE ALL COMMUNICATION

Calm down. That caps lock key is only needed in case of imminent injury to people, animals or similar. Think fire, murder, rape, or if you see someone with automatic carbines visiting the local bank

SMP_Homer wrote in post #12903810
Funny!
I've had a few PMs already today asking me to ignore those that think I'm looking for attention or want no further updates...

You can't put it behind you or to the side if you're constantly updating the forum every time the couple decides to jerk you around some more.

SMP_Homer wrote in post #12903457
But if they communicate - I have to communicate back, even if it's just to remind them my position. I can't ignore them.

No you don't, and yes you can.

D Thompson wrote in post #12903570
Just my .02, but I believe he does need to keep the lines of communication open. Otherwise, they could possibly go to court with "he will not respond to our email, phone call, etc." and will end up screwing him even more. Give them a response, however brief.

He does have to answer the phone but he does NOT have to respond to any text, email, or voice mail message that delays the payment. As long as he keeps those messages, the judge will look at them and ask the couple "where exactly in these messages are you offering to hold up your end of the contract?"

OP, I think what you should do is create a PayPal link they can click on to pay the remaining balance. That's their exact and only way to pay, and they and you would both have electronic proof that it was paid or unpaid.

Then you can tell them straight. Resolve this by paying with this link. If you don't pay with this link then it's not resolved, if you do pay with this link then it is resolved.

That's as binary (true/false, on/off) as you can get and no one can refute that. There is nothing to arrange, no emails to be sent back and forth, no phone calls needed. Just click the link and pay.

cdifoto wrote in post #12904222
OP, I think what you should do is create a PayPal link they can click on to pay the remaining balance. That's their exact and only way to pay, and they and you would both have electronic proof that it was paid or unpaid.

Then you can tell them straight. Resolve this by paying with this link. If you don't pay with this link then it's not resolved, if you do pay with this link then it is resolved.

That's as binary (true/false, on/off) as you can get and no one can refute that. There is nothing to arrange, no emails to be sent back and forth, no phone calls needed. Just click the link and pay.

Ran that by my lawyer friend... he sees good intention, but thinks its a bad idea...
Paypal isn't listed anywhere on my contract, and to remove every payment option that is on the contract and replace them with an option that isn't available would not look good from my side should this go further. Adding that option is fine.

Kinda silly that the contract still gets referred to even though the couple has demonstrated how badly they respect it...

Translation: I don't really want to resolve this. I just like drama

I too am starting to think you're enjoying the attention here. If you're as busy as you claim to be, you wouldn't have time to update the forum every time they do something.

cdifoto wrote in post #12904186
He does have to answer the phone but he does NOT have to respond to any text, email, or voice mail message that delays the payment.

No, he does not HAVE to respond, but I'm just saying I think it's in his best interest to respond, however brief the response may be.

To each his own.

D Thompson wrote in post #12904533
No, he does not HAVE to respond, but I'm just saying I think it's in his best interest to respond, however brief the response may be.

To each his own.

Every response on his part gives them an opportunity to respond. That's how you prolong things.

To each his own for sure, but OP says he wants to put it down. He's not helping himself by acknowledging their time wasting messages. I think it's very STUPID to keep replying.

If you wake up one day to find a check in your mail box, then go buy a lottery ticket.

I think people sometimes get upset when someone does not handle a situation the way "they" have advised them to...

In those instances it is best to step away from the problem...

A few posters on here seem to be getting quite upset by this thread because the Op has chosen to do things their way.

Liberty, such a wonderful thing.

mtimber wrote in post #12904694
I think people sometimes get upset when someone does not handle a situation the way "they" have advised them to...

In those instances it is best to step away from the problem...

A few posters on here seem to be getting quite upset by this thread because the Op has chosen to do things their way.

Liberty, such a wonderful thing.

+1

It's even better when people say "Go talk to a lawyer, do not listen to advice from a photography forum" and when he listens to his lawyer friend's advice he gets flack for following the advice.

Well. I think he's been doing it a certain way and it's getting nowhere. So I think he actually does not to stop all this nonsense and reassess the situation because it really doesn't seem to be going anywhere. That's what I am annoyed at, but I think annoyed is the wrong word, it's frustrated, even that's the wrong word. I really don't care

^^Still his situation to handle...

Not mine or yours.