So... threatened with legal action from first time client

I haven't dealt with this sort of thing as a Photographer, but I have as the technical director of a large venue.

We would events ., fund raisers (losers) etc. booked and produced by everyone from the best most organized, to the worst.

Anytime any of the clients totally blew it, did not market the eent enough and therefore lost money, the firs thing that would take place was the leveling of blame on every one else involved, from us, the venue down to the there own light board operator etc...

Hacks all over this business. The trick is to spot them early on and not go forward with the event at all. Hard choices to do when your livelihood depends on it.

No advice from me, just saying, I know how it is!

However, I am more inclined to agree that the only option for you that makes any sense is to simply do nothing, and wait for an offer if they actually want the photos. My guess is they don;t, and they are trying to justify the lack of payment to you aggressively in advance, as they already know they intend to write the hole event off as a huge loss.

plusnq wrote in post #7776389
I wouldn't send them an invoice as that would imply a contract.

A contract doesnt have to be written to be a contract though
(not in the uk anyway).

cdifoto wrote in post #7776553
All of this advice is horrible.

yikes.
Sorry, would you elaborate though. I understand not everyone would agree. That is just how I would attempt to settle the situation.
A contract is not written but is implied. In the absence of a signed contract a Judge would have to figure out what is likely to have been agreed upon. In that case I personally think that being the client has emailed a proposed shot list, a time line of events to be covered and even extra duties the photographer was going to accomplish it would be difficult to explain how there was no agreement.
I immediately apologize if any or all of you disagree with me.

zagiace wrote in post #7776717
yikes.
Sorry, would you elaborate though.

Sure.

Give them the pics, they win. These guys are dishonest to the core. They're not going to pay up after they get the images, invoice included or not.

mmm
I understand what you mean, but IMHO this is not a winning situation. He can stand his ground and not deliver anything. They can take him to court and maybe he will win.
The way I see it he has a few solutions:
1. Not deliver anything and wait for them to make the first move. Then equally react to what that move may be.
2. Deliver the images with an invoice requesting to solve the situation.
3. Destroy the images, block their emails and ignore telephone calls.
4. Give the images freely.

Currently that is all I can think of, I am sure there are more and probably better ones. So, in your opinion which is best (if that in fact is one I have listed)

cdifoto wrote in post #7776723
Sure.

Give them the pics, they win.

zagiace wrote in post #7776756
mmm
I understand what you mean, but IMHO this is not a winning situation. He can stand his ground and not deliver anything. They can take him to court and maybe he will win.
The way I see it he has a few solutions:
1. Not deliver anything and wait for them to make the first move. Then equally react to what that move may be.
2. Deliver the images with an invoice requesting to solve the situation.
3. Destroy the images, block their emails and ignore telephone calls.
4. Give the images freely.

Currently that is all I can think of, I am sure there are more and probably better ones. So, in your opinion which is best (if that in fact is one I have listed)

Giving them the images without payment would reward their behavior.

cdifoto wrote in post #7776763
Giving them the images without payment would reward their behavior.

I agree. But it is not giving away the images I recommended. I suggested billing the client assuming the typical price the photographer typically charges would be fair.
Did you have another approach?

zagiace wrote in post #7776783
I agree. But it is not giving away the images I recommended.

Yes you did:

zagiace wrote in post #7776008
Personally, I would ship them a CD with the images along with a bill consistent with what you would typically charge via certified mail and email them noting that.

Including a bill doesn't mean you're not giving the images away.

cdifoto wrote in post #7776797
Yes you did:

Including a bill doesn't mean you're not giving the images away.

I know what you mean but invoicing a company is a standard practice. Just because a company has not paid up front does not constitute services provided are free. Often I am paid after the fact. It is only in the wedding market that I require payment up front.
If it ends up in court you have to give the judge enough evidence for He or She to Assume you expected to be paid for the services provided.
It is terribly obvious the OP did not expect to be paid up front so invoicing after the fact would be expected behavior.
If you invoice them for limited use and then copyright the images you have a lot of ground to stand on.
Provided that there was no written agreement I believe thats the way to go.
What was your option?

zagiace wrote in post #7776833
What was your option?

Invoice them without giving them the images. They can have the images after they pay the OP with a legitimate check or money order that has cleared his bank account. If they don't want to pay, they're gonna have to sue OP to get the images. They wouldn't win though, since there's no contract or verbal agreement from the OP to render the services and deliver the images for zero fee.

I wouldn't sue them as it wouldn't be worth the time and there's no amount to sue for (it was a "pay me what you think I'm worth" situation) but if they don't sue me either it's just a stalemate (nobody gets anything) and I could write off the costs at tax time and consider it a lesson learned.

That is another good option. The only reason I suggest shipping the images is because then you have helped define the original agreement. he has already shot the job which is part of the agreement. It could easily be interpreted that was the total of the required work since they never clearly explained how the images were to be delivered. If it ends up in court you can show that you did everything you could and have yet to be paid for services.

cdifoto wrote in post #7776852
They wouldn't win though, since there's no contract or verbal agreement from the OP to render the services and deliver the images for zero fee.

That really depends on where he is. I suggest Google

"absence of a written contract" and your state/country name
as in the US it varies per state.
Here in California the courts would decide based on the submitted evidence what the likely agreement would be. You would then be held to it.
(In CA.) Just because you did not write down a contract does not mean you did not agree to an implied one.

cdifoto wrote in post #7776462
They don't have attorneys. Heck they were **** about how much they paid for the friggin' business cards.

BINGO lol

Heck these guys sound like real losers! I have an guarantee to make, their business will close within 1 year! lol

Anyone else want to take that bet

zagiace wrote in post #7776904
That really depends on where he is. I suggest Google

"absence of a written contract" and your state/country name
as in the US it varies per state.
Here in California the courts would decide based on the submitted evidence what the likely agreement would be. You would then be held to it.
(In CA.) Just because you did not write down a contract does not mean you did not agree to an implied one.

Right. If it gets to court, the court says "photographer, hand client the disk. client, pay photographer." - which is fine. If it gets that far.

But if neither the photographer nor the client sues, and the photographer already gave the client the disk, the photographer will never see a penny.

cdifoto wrote in post #7777028
Right. If it gets to court, the court says "photographer, hand client the disk. client, pay photographer." - which is fine. If it gets that far.

But if neither the photographer nor the client sues, and the photographer already gave the client the disk, the photographer will never see a penny.

Well, there are court costs and lawyer fees. Their intent to hire him certainly wasn't solely for the memories so they may try to make a case for damages. May or may not be as neat as "hand it over."
If he delivers the product and bills the client it is definitely easier for him to sue though. I imagine he would appreciate being paid. I believe currently he is looking at getting nothing from them anyway.
If he does deliver the CD, copyrights the images, and bills them for limited use with information on how to achieve additional usage he has a case that could be worth much more then that if they use his images. That literally could be worth much more then he would have initially charged them.

Sauk wrote in post #7776992
BINGO lol

Heck these guys sound like real losers! I have an guarantee to make, their business will close within 1 year! lol

Anyone else want to take that bet

Totally agree,
They appear to have severe organizational issues.