Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
Thread started 05 May 2014 (Monday) 19:03
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

My photos submitted for evidence in a trial without consent or subpoena

 
memoriesoftomorrow
Goldmember
3,846 posts
Likes: 289
Joined Nov 2010
     
May 21, 2014 20:05 |  #46

cory1848 wrote in post #16921111 (external link)
How is helping an insurance company deny a claim morally correct? Do you think the insurance company cares about morals?

No. It is about verifying the fact that the friend did in fact perform when the insurance company says they did perform. This is about the undeniable true fact that the friend did in fact perform on the time and date stated.

Whether the claim is denied or not should hinge on what the friend can prove with regards to the nature of their injury and its restrictions. Which is another matter entirely.

It is not "helping" the insurance company to deny a claim, it is "helping" the insurance company to verify a fact which both parties (and every one at the performance and who has seen the photograph) know to be 100% true.

To try and hide something you know to be absolutely true is a clear demonstration of dishonesty. Now if we are talking morals... is it morally right to be deliberately dishonest? I think not.

Furthermore any failed attempt made in court during proceedings to try and prevent the use of the publicly available photograph is only going to make the friend look like a con artist in front of a jury or judge.


Peter

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
cory1848
Goldmember
Avatar
1,884 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Kissimmee, FL
     
May 21, 2014 20:24 |  #47

memoriesoftomorrow wrote in post #16921139 (external link)
No. It is about verifying the fact that the friend did in fact perform when the insurance company says they did perform. This is about the undeniable true fact that the friend did in fact perform on the time and date stated.

Whether the claim is denied or not should hinge on what the friend can prove with regards to the nature of their injury and its restrictions. Which is another matter entirely.

It is not "helping" the insurance company to deny a claim, it is "helping" the insurance company to verify a fact which both parties (and every one at the performance and who has seen the photograph) know to be 100% true.

To try and hide something you know to be absolutely true is a clear demonstration of dishonesty. Now if we are talking morals... is it morally right to be deliberately dishonest? I think not.

Furthermore any failed attempt made in court during proceedings to try and prevent the use of the publicly available photograph is only going to make the friend look like a con artist in front of a jury or judge.

Who said anything about dishonesty? Again, something is not true unless it is proven to be true. Whether or not you or anyone else "knows" or "thinks" it is true is irrelevant. Being morally right or helping might offer up information that wasn't asked for. No need to answer a question that wasn't asked and there is nothing dishonest about that.


Gear List
"Those are some mighty fine pots and pans you have, they must make a great dinner!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
djphotosyd
Member
90 posts
Joined May 2014
     
May 21, 2014 20:50 |  #48
bannedPermanent ban

The only thing I know about the legal system apart from the Golden rule that it is best entirely avoided all together is that it's a game. It's NOT about the truth or whats right or fair or decent or anything else.
It's merely a set of rules that Lawyers bend and twist and manipulate to get the outcome they want and will do anything within or outside of those rules they can get away with to achieve it.

It's not about the truth or fact or what you know, it's about what you can prove and are allowed to admit as evidence. 100 people can witness something but if they are deemed inadmissable as witnesses in court and you have no other way of proving anything, Your screwed.

Apologies to anyone that thinks the law and legalsystem is about truth, fact, decency, morals, justice whats right or fairness, but you are dangerously Naieve and hoplessly ignorant to the reality of this world.

As for insurance companies, they are the most low down, sleazy, dishonest pack of blood sucking con men in the world. After polititians.

An uncle of mine was a director of an insurance company and his often stated assesment is " The first thing insurance companies do when you make a claim is look for a way out of it. If there isn't any way too straightforward then they decide if the cheaper out is to pay or fight it. Now the tactic is to stretch out any claim as long as possible with apparent incompetence so the claimant gets fed up and drops it so they can just get on with their lives".

Insurance companies deny completely just and moral claims every day on the most insignificant technical grounds when the truth and fact they should pay are clearly known. This is where the law comes to their advantage, they write policys with such complex conditions and disclaimers that there are a 100 escape hatches for them to open, none of them being about the truth or fact or any other logical standard of decency a Naieve person may expect.

The idea of taking the moral high ground and fighting against those that will use the lowest of tactics and ploys is also Stupidly ignorant. That will get you beaten every single time but if people think they won when they get their arses handed to them because they ruined any chances of winning because they Stuck to their lofty morals, Congradulations.

No doubt the other side will be well pleased with their win as well which will be a lot more financially tangible than your percieved victory.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dave3222
Goldmember
Avatar
1,366 posts
Gallery: 165 photos
Likes: 675
Joined Jul 2013
     
May 21, 2014 20:59 |  #49

cory1848 wrote in post #16921111 (external link)
How is helping an insurance company deny a claim morally correct? Do you think the insurance company cares about morals?

It doesn't matter. I was talking about one individual doing the right thing. To say the "system" is messed up and I have to go along with it is incorrect. You always have the choice to do what is right.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CRCchemist
Senior Member
961 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Apr 2014
     
May 21, 2014 22:50 |  #50

memoriesoftomorrow wrote in post #16920868 (external link)
Hang on you are willing to assist in hiding a fact which you know full well to be true. You are agreeing with it through your actions of trying to suppress a fact which you know full well is true. Basically assisting a lie.

He greatest legal system in the world! That's us! And we elected a president that was a lawyer too! We're awesome!!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dave3222
Goldmember
Avatar
1,366 posts
Gallery: 165 photos
Likes: 675
Joined Jul 2013
     
May 21, 2014 22:54 |  #51

The bottom line is that you have to be your own moral compass. What you can do and what you feel morally obligated to do are not always the same. The right choice is not always the most popular choice.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
memoriesoftomorrow
Goldmember
3,846 posts
Likes: 289
Joined Nov 2010
     
May 21, 2014 22:57 |  #52

CRCchemist wrote in post #16921447 (external link)
He greatest legal system in the world! That's us! And we elected a president that was a lawyer too! We're awesome!!

Along with the greatest financial system regulations in the world... oh wait... :lol:


Peter

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CRCchemist
Senior Member
961 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Apr 2014
     
May 22, 2014 00:03 |  #53

memoriesoftomorrow wrote in post #16921463 (external link)
Along with the greatest financial system regulations in the world... oh wait... :lol:

Haha and guess what! Before we elected the current lawyer that is trying to use courtroom tricks to work our government, we elected a businessman! Yay.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
moose10101
registered smartass
1,680 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 247
Joined May 2010
Location: Maryland, USA
     
May 22, 2014 08:22 |  #54

CRCchemist wrote in post #16921447 (external link)
He greatest legal system in the world! That's us! And we elected a president that was a lawyer too! We're awesome!!

We've done that 25 times. What's your point?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nathancarter
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
5,474 posts
Gallery: 32 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 601
Joined Dec 2010
     
May 22, 2014 08:23 as a reply to  @ CRCchemist's post |  #55

Dave3222 wrote in post #16920985 (external link)
You too can be morally correct and just submit the photos rather than "play the game."

I was never asked to submit the photos. They were taken off my website without my knowledge, permission, consent. If the insurance company's lawyer wants to use them, all they have to do is go through the process of sending a subpoena. When that happens, I'll submit what they formally request, without argument.


http://www.avidchick.c​om (external link) for business stuff
http://www.facebook.co​m/VictorVoyeur (external link) for fun stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Willie
Senior Member
959 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Feb 2004
     
May 22, 2014 09:12 |  #56

First point: A company cannot exhibit morals. Morality is on the individual. The term morality should never be used with companies nor governments.

Second point: If the claim is legitimate the insurance company should pay out. If it is not legitimate then they should not pay it out. If the person was able to perform then she should not expect to receive any money. To say that it is a greedy, sleazy company so it is ok is wrong. Whenever false claims are paid out it affects everyone's premiums, including mine.

Disclaimer: I have received money from insurance company that I didn't deserve, but I knew it to be wrong. I never justified it by saying well they have the money, or they are all corrupt, or I paid all this premium so therefore I should get it. I knew it to be wrong but I chose to live with it. I am ok with that.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
archer1960
Goldmember
Avatar
4,930 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 81
Joined Jul 2010
     
May 22, 2014 09:25 |  #57

Willie wrote in post #16922181 (external link)
First point: A company cannot exhibit morals. Morality is on the individual. The term morality should never be used with companies nor governments.

Second point: If the claim is legitimate the insurance company should pay out. If it is not legitimate then they should not pay it out. If the person was able to perform then she should not expect to receive any money. To say that it is a greedy, sleazy company so it is ok is wrong. Whenever false claims are paid out it affects everyone's premiums, including mine.

...

I wouldn't necessarily agree with this, because there are degrees of disability, and it varies with what the person's profession is. A friend of mine lost an eye in Afghanistan; for some jobs that is essentially a total disability because they require binocular or good peripheral vision, while for other jobs it would be only a minor inconvenience.

In the OP's case, If she was able to perform, but not do certain things she could do before, or missed significant time before she could perform again, then a claim should be paid, but perhaps not as much as is being requested.


Gripped 7D, gripped, full-spectrum modfied T1i (500D), SX50HS, A2E film body, Tamzooka (150-600), Tamron 90mm/2.8 VC (ver 2), Tamron 18-270 VC, Canon FD 100 f/4.0 macro, Canon 24-105 f/4L,Canon EF 200 f/2.8LII, Canon 85 f/1.8, Tamron Adaptall 2 90mmf/2.5 Macro, Tokina 11-16, Canon EX-430 flash, Vivitar DF-383 flash, Astro-Tech AT6RC and Celestron NexStar 102 GT telescopes, various other semi-crappy manual lenses and stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cory1848
Goldmember
Avatar
1,884 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Kissimmee, FL
     
May 22, 2014 09:29 |  #58

Willie wrote in post #16922181 (external link)
First point: A company cannot exhibit morals. Morality is on the individual. The term morality should never be used with companies nor governments.

Second point: If the claim is legitimate the insurance company should pay out. If it is not legitimate then they should not pay it out. If the person was able to perform then she should not expect to receive any money. To say that it is a greedy, sleazy company so it is ok is wrong. Whenever false claims are paid out it affects everyone's premiums, including mine.

Why do you assume that performing makes a legitimate claim a false claim? Maybe she healed up enough that she could start performing again and THEN the photos were taken. That doesn't negate the fact the medical bills were still incurred and need to be paid for by the responsible party.


Gear List
"Those are some mighty fine pots and pans you have, they must make a great dinner!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DocFrankenstein
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,324 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2004
Location: where the buffalo roam
     
May 26, 2014 21:43 as a reply to  @ post 16884961 |  #59

Sometimes I batch edit and change exif date without paying much attention to how many pictures I select. If a picture was taken before the accident, but exif got edited by mistake, your friend would appreciate your testimony to that effect.

Just talk to YOUR friend and her lawyer.


National Sarcasm Society. Like we need your support.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CRCchemist
Senior Member
961 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Apr 2014
     
May 27, 2014 01:58 |  #60

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #16932488 (external link)
Sometimes I batch edit and change exif date without paying much attention to how many pictures I select. If a picture was taken before the accident, but exif got edited by mistake, your friend would appreciate your testimony to that effect.

Just talk to YOUR friend and her lawyer.

:-)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,843 views & 0 likes for this thread
My photos submitted for evidence in a trial without consent or subpoena
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Sofun111
1124 guests, 321 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.