Cameraman sued for bad wedding video

Hey, yeah. The stills were beautiful. At least they got away with that.

Video guy sounds like a scammer though, now he's declaring bankruptcy to skate around paying the judgement, what a creep

DennisW1 wrote in post #12073622
Hey, yeah. The stills were beautiful. At least they got away with that.

Video guy sounds like a scammer though, now he's declaring bankruptcy to skate around paying the judgement, what a creep

It sounds like the couple made some efforts to report him to the local media as well--which is obvious since they even picked up the story here in the states.

With all the bad publicity, I'm not too surprised he had to fold. I wonder if they'll get their money back.

You guys did pay attention at the part where he charged them 500$ right ?

Wedding video for 500$, like what were you expecting ? I am wondering if he even told them that for that low he would not be there and just set up remote cameras...

I don't know this story seems incredibly one sided.

But its still his fault for doing what he did, don't offer ****ty packages if you don't want to face the consequences.

Csae wrote in post #12073849
You guys did pay attention at the part where he charged them 500$ right ?

Wedding video for 500$, like what were you expecting ? I am wondering if he even told them that for that low he would not be there and just set up remote cameras...

I don't know this story seems incredibly one sided.

But its still his fault for doing what he did, don't offer ****ty packages if you don't want to face the consequences.

It's one-sided because the guy refused to comment--you did pay attention to that part at the end, right? . They even sent someone to interview the couple. He had his chance, and only said that he would pay them back in small installments. They certainly did pay this guy bottom-dollar, but the "job" he did was absolutely laughable. He probably used webcams. For $500, he overcharged by about $300.

You saw the tapes. The judge sided with the couple. The guy refused to comment. He chose to file for bankruptcy to top it all off. How much more do you need? I also like to give the benefit of the doubt, but it'd be really, really difficult to spin this one in his favor...

i shot for a guy who booked 4 weddings in a single day, luckily he had 2nd photographers for all four jobs so no important moments were missed.

Correction. For $500, he overcharged by $500.

So, some feel the couple somehow deserved this because they paid "only" $500. Really? The amount they paid is irrelevant. This guy didn't even make an honest effort.

Oh the guy did a horrible job!

I never said otherwise.

But i still think that if you're looking at the cheapest of the cheap, then yes you are gonna get people who aren't going to put in the effort.

Am i against the couple winning the amount ? No, its great. Stuff like this just makes pros everywhere more valued, next time i get a "oh my thats expensive theres a guy doing it for xxx$! I'll just point em to the video "

Csae wrote in post #12074309
Oh the guy did a horrible job!

I never said otherwise.

But i still think that if you're looking at the cheapest of the cheap, then yes you are gonna get people who aren't going to put in the effort.

Am i against the couple winning the amount ? No, its great. Stuff like this just makes pros everywhere more valued, next time i get a "oh my thats expensive theres a guy doing it for xxx$! I'll just point em to the video "

Just a comment on this--the judge only awarded them < $1000. Minus lawyer fees, they'd have done well to just skip the videographer altogether...

And whether the guy will end up paying them back is questionable...

photoguy6405 wrote in post #12074284
So, some feel the couple somehow deserved this because they paid "only" $500. Really? The amount they paid is irrelevant. This guy didn't even make an honest effort.

Agreed. His was about the worst effort you could imagine. I could have done better by handholding my PowerShot S3 IS in video mode.

Filing bankruptcy is a drastic personal event. At least in the US. Is it similar in the UK? If so, it says a lot about this guy and his self-destructive personality if he filed bankruptcy over a mere $1000.

Yes, but after the deevorce all parties are gonna wanna burn their copies. So this video guy did them a favor. Its a blessing in disguise!

photoguy6405 wrote in post #12076444
Filing bankruptcy is a drastic personal event. At least in the US. Is it similar in the UK? If so, it says a lot about this guy and his self-destructive personality if he filed bankruptcy over a mere $1000.

Well, bankruptcy is requested of the court, actually. It's "declared" by court order. The court can say, "No."

RDKirk wrote in post #12078250
Well, bankruptcy is requested of the court, actually. It's "declared" by court order. The court can say, "No."

*fp*

If you want to get technical to a gnat's ass beyond the scope of this conversation, yes that is correct, but... I also clearly said "filed", as in 'sought or seeking bankruptcy protection', not "declared". My point was his decision and attempt at seeking to escape financial liability for the incident, and what it says about him, not the minutiae of bankruptcy law.

photoguy6405 wrote in post #12078358
*fp*

If you want to get technical to a gnat's ass beyond the scope of this conversation, yes that is correct, but... I also clearly said "filed", as in 'sought or seeking bankruptcy protection', not "declared". My point was his decision and attempt at seeking to escape financial liability for the incident, and what it says about him, not the minutiae of bankruptcy law.

Yes, I agree with what it says about him. My point was that he might not get away with it. I suspect a judge is not going to allow a bankruptcy over a $1000 debt.