Welcome to The Purse Forum.

Ellie Mae · Oct 28th, 2009, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by Charles

This is the bottom line. You waited 4 years. Within that time, her standard procedures for storing photos was carried out (meaning you are responsible for storage fees), as well as, her decision to move forward with digital photos in order to further her business. On top of that, part of your side of the contract was to meet with her to pick out 20 pics. You did not do with within a reasonable amount of time. A contract isn't infinite (even without termination/expiration dates specificed), and no matter how much you want to try to justify your actions, you're still holding her to unreasonable standards. If you present this in front of a judge, s/he'll tell you the same. Based on your actions, the contract you signed was not performed within a reasonable time, and therefore cannot be held to the stipulations set forth 4 years ago.
Can you please stop trying to get something for free here and admit that this is your fault?

Well, thank gosh! ASK CHARLES

olive519 · Oct 28th, 2009, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Charles

This is the bottom line. You waited 4 years. Within that time, her standard procedures for storing photos was carried out (meaning you are responsible for storage fees), as well as, her decision to move forward with digital photos in order to further her business. On top of that, part of your side of the contract was to meet with her to pick out 20 pics. You did not do with within a reasonable amount of time. A contract isn't infinite (even without termination/expiration dates specificed), and no matter how much you want to try to justify your actions, you're still holding her to unreasonable standards. If you present this in front of a judge, s/he'll tell you the same. Based on your actions, the contract you signed was not performed within a reasonable time, and therefore cannot be held to the stipulations set forth 4 years ago.
Can you please stop trying to get something for free here and admit that this is your fault?

Thanks for the pro bono advice...

Since I don't plan on having an earth shattering, Dr. Phil like breakdown/plea for forgiveness, I'll respectfully agree to disagree.

ilovepinkhearts · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:05 PM

http://law.freeadvice.com/general_pr...e_contract.htm

What is the performance of a contract?

Performance is actually completing the deal according to the terms given in the contract. For example, you want to buy that snazzy looking 1998 Ferrari at your local dealer's clearance sale. Your dealer, Mr. X, offers to sell you that slick-looking Italian car if you pay him $97,000. After a bit of bargaining, you agree to the terms and get the car at a reduced price of $96,995, signing on the dotted line. A contract has been accepted. Mr. X, your car dealer, will deliver the 1997 Ferrari and then you pay him the balance due. The dealers delivery of the car and your payment of $96,995 are the performance of the contract.

Both parties must live up to their end of the bargain in the contract to have closure. In other words, until both parties have properly performed under the contract, the contract remains open.

amanda · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:18 PM

^^^When I worked in sales during college, we held items that were ordered but unclaimed for 30 days after purchase. After that, we weren't responsible for them and they were usually sold to other customers or sent back to the warehouse. It was the responsibility of the customer to return to collect their product and carry out the contract in a reasonable time frame. As long as one party makes a good-faith effort to carry out their part of the contract, they can't be responsible for the failings of the other party to do so. In this case, it seems like that would be the failure of the OP to choose the photos for her album in a timely manner before other fees were incurred. The photog isn't refusing to make the album, she just asking for compensation to be made for expenses encountered as a direct result of the OP taking her sweet time in getting around to doing her part. I don't think a judge would find that unreasonable, as long as she can document the expenses she's attempting to charge for.

alliemia · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by olive519

Had anyone in the studio told there was a time frame, an expiration date, etc I would have acted quicker but don't do well without deadlines.

And everytime I called the office, her partner would tell me "oh it'd no big deal, people are still calling me from '99"...so he gave me a false sense of security

in no way did I say this did not drag on.

And for the person that indicated I was a deadbeat, how? They were paid for something they have not yet delivered and I'm a deadbeat, for what, paying them in advance?

i think if you go to court you'd lose. the contract is not lifetime. whether there is a date of expiration or not. what if she went out of business, died or the negatives were unviewable with current technology? i think a judge will say that the fact she held onto the negatives for 4 years, plus is even offering to do the album at this point is well within the contract.

you're saying the wedding photos were so important to you, yet you let it go for 4 years? so what if you had called her now and she was closed down? then you'd have nothing at all. so obviously you weren't so heartbroken without the photos or negatives. basically taking a chance you'd even have the option to get them.

and what it cost to make the album with negatives years ago is not how they do it now.

i think if you start filing all sorts of claims, not only will you spend way more than $1500, but it's sort of laughable...aren't you a little embarassed to all of a sudden be so gung ho on photos that you are going to sue, meanwhile you didn't even bother to pick out 20 photos within 4 years?

i recall getting my entire album in like 2 months from the wedding. it's been 8 years for me, but the photographer isn't even there anymore.

irishlass1029 · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:26 PM

The photographer had the foresight to put in the contract a set fee if longer than 12 months, which was $250 if I am not mistaken.

Sure, I will give you that the OP shouldn't have waited so long - she has admitted that herself several times. But clearly the photographer knew there would be some people wait more than 12 months, therefore the $250 fee. Let's call it a $250 procrastination fee. Okay, so she procrastinated. The fee should be $250.

If I read correctly, the photograhper even gave her a false sense of security by saying it wasn't a problem - that she still had people calling her from 1999.

2009 - four years = 2005. In 2005 the photographer said she was having people call her from 1999. That's 6 years. Two years longer than OP waited. So she knew this kind of thing happens and chose to use a $250 figure to cover her costs, whatever they may be by then, if it did take longer than a year.

$250 is NOT $1500 + $275.

I have to respectfully disagree with the majority of posters. IMO, the OP should be charged $250 as the contract stated she would be charged. And I am sure if the photographer explained that it really was costing her more for storage fees, etc. and that she didn't quote a high enough price because even though some wait more than a year, 4 years IS a bit much, the OP would probably be prepared to pay more than the $250 so that everyone was happy - or at least that's the vibe I get from the OP. But $1,775.00??? That's over the top.

I don't think the OP expected everyone to agree with her or she wouldn't have started this thread. She wanted input. I don't think she has a problem with the input, but the tone and meanness of the responses would certainly put me off to asking anyone for reasonable input. Input and insults are two different things.

Some of you people are just mean.

RTA · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by olive519

Is reasonable time a legally defined period or is it just IMO's.

I've aleady stated it's been a long time. A contract clearly defining time frames and with a stated effective end date would have prevented this, and gotten my ass into gear much faster.

But alas, it did not.

In contracts like this where there is no time period specifically written in the, common law in many states implies a "reasonable" time to complete the contract. So reasonable will vary depending on the type of contract.

You waited an unreasonable length of time to complete your end of the contract. As I understand it, the photographer could not produce an album without your input. A court could easily conclude (and likely would) that you failed to perform your end of the contract and thus your failure to act will weigh against you in small claims court. I think you really are better off trying to resolve this without litigation.

irishlass1029 · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by RTA

In contracts like this where there is no time period specifically written in the, common law in many states implies a "reasonable" time to complete the contract. So reasonable will vary depending on the type of contract.

You waited an unreasonable length of time to complete your end of the contract. As I understand it, the photographer could not produce an album without your input. A court could easily conclude (and likely would) that you failed to perform your end of the contract and thus your failure to act will weigh against you in small claims court. I think you really are better off trying to resolve this without litigation.

^^ Now there's a reasonable response has an opposing view but isn't mean.

See, it's not that hard, people.

natalie78 · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by ilovepinkhearts

http://law.freeadvice.com/general_pr...e_contract.htm

What is the performance of a contract?

Performance is actually completing the deal according to the terms given in the contract. For example, you want to buy that snazzy looking 1998 Ferrari at your local dealer's clearance sale. Your dealer, Mr. X, offers to sell you that slick-looking Italian car if you pay him $97,000. After a bit of bargaining, you agree to the terms and get the car at a reduced price of $96,995, signing on the dotted line. A contract has been accepted. Mr. X, your car dealer, will deliver the 1997 Ferrari and then you pay him the balance due. The dealers delivery of the car and your payment of $96,995 are the performance of the contract.

Both parties must live up to their end of the bargain in the contract to have closure. In other words, until both parties have properly performed under the contract, the contract remains open.

That's a simple explanation of contract law, but not a full explanation. There is a "reasonable time" issue in contract law which is not even touched on in that scenario. If you as the buyer don't show up to get your car from Mr. X within a reasonable time period, he's going to charge storage fees. And I have serious doubts about any free legal advice given on of the internet.

alliemia · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by Charles

This is the bottom line. You waited 4 years. Within that time, her standard procedures for storing photos was carried out (meaning you are responsible for storage fees), as well as, her decision to move forward with digital photos in order to further her business. On top of that, part of your side of the contract was to meet with her to pick out 20 pics. You did not do with within a reasonable amount of time. A contract isn't infinite (even without termination/expiration dates specificed), and no matter how much you want to try to justify your actions, you're still holding her to unreasonable standards. If you present this in front of a judge, s/he'll tell you the same. Based on your actions, the contract you signed was not performed within a reasonable time, and therefore cannot be held to the stipulations set forth 4 years ago.
Can you please stop trying to get something for free here and admit that this is your fault?

exactly. just because there is no expiration date on a contract does not mean you have an infinite amount of time to hold a party to the contract. a judge may even find that the reasonable period is past and will absolve the photographer of any and all obligations to you.

your best bet is to either pay her the fees, after all you said it was your fault it took this long. the cost of an album using film in 2005 and the cost of an album using film in 2009 is very different. a lot of companies don't even make film anymore. it is almost obsolete in a lot of ways. you can't expect that time stood still while you procrastinated for 4 years. so the photographer should be out the extra money to process your film?? why??? because she didn't have an expiration date?

contracts aren't infinite. and you yourself said it was YOUR procrastination, so why are you trying to go after the photographer because she didn't have an expiration date? that is like using a loophole to your benefit. you wait around for 4 yrs while this photographer is stuck keeping your negatives safe for years, and then she has to lose money to print you an album because you're bad with projects?

in a way it sounds selfish.

i'd be embarassed to even call 4 yrs later, and would probably be so thankful they even had them plus the option to even get an album at this point.

amanda · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by irishlass1029

^^ Now there's a reasonable response has an opposing view but isn't mean.

See, it's not that hard, people.

Responders here often reply negatively when they sense an air of entitlement or something similar from a poster. I think that the OP starting off by threatening litigation and explaining just exactly how much free time she had on her hands that she intended to use to make her photographer's life miserable (and possibly impact her business - she mentioned the BBB) was exactly the wrong way to elicit any sort of friendly responses. Particularly when she appears to be in as clear a violation of her contract as she claims the photographer is. People usually get back the kind of energy that they exude.

alliemia · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:50 PM

i agree amanda. starting with 'i want to virtually strangle my wedding photographer' and then go on to say you waited 4 years just because you are bad with planning, but that the photographer should eat the extra costs because you found a loophole in their contract? really selfish, IMO.

even if it has no expiration date, someone waiting 4 years to pick out 20 pics has to know that is THEIR fault, and not try to bind a photographer into something for an unreasonable time frame.

you want the photos because the photographer did a good job, no? so why try to screw them?

you paid for an album, but you paid for an album for the price it was 4 years ago, and any reasonable person will know it is not the same price now, and arguing over an expiration date when the delay was your fault is just wrong.

alliemia · Oct 28th, 2009, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by irishlass1029

Some of you people are just mean.

how was anyone mean? i think it is just a bit shocking for people to read someone asking for advice on how they can screw over a photographer.

olive519 · Oct 28th, 2009, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by alliemia

how was anyone mean? i think it is just a bit shocking for people to read someone asking for advice on how they can screw over a photographer.

Hmmm... I don't recall asking for advice...I do recall venting though...fruitlessly

Advice was offered free of charge though, some of it really helpful

Yup, my sense of album entitlement is fully intact, I'm entitled to an album and if negotiating fails, will go up the ladder, starting with BBB

nycfashionlvr · Oct 28th, 2009, 06:02 PM

Is it only me or are some of the posters on here being really rude and nasty to the OP for no reason? IMO you all need to take a chill pill lol! OK so yes she waited a ridiculous amount of time but I'm taking business law this semester and from what I've been learning....basically a contract is a contract. The contract did not state any sort of "expiration date" after the 12 months where the fee would pass the $250 so she has to follow the contract regardless of how ridiculous the amount of time was or how much of an inconvenience it was so I am going to go ahead and disagree with the majority of you all. Yes if she went to court a judge would probably be annoyed and think its ridiculous but I don't think the photographer would win.

Oct 28th, 2009, 05:05 PM	#63
ilovepinkhearts team edward. always. Joined: Dec 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 4,390	http://law.freeadvice.com/general_pr...e_contract.htm *What is the performance of a contract?* Performance is actually completing the deal according to the terms given in the contract. For example, you want to buy that snazzy looking 1998 Ferrari at your local dealer's clearance sale. Your dealer, Mr. X, offers to sell you that slick-looking Italian car if you pay him $97,000. After a bit of bargaining, you agree to the terms and get the car at a reduced price of $96,995, signing on the dotted line. A contract has been accepted. Mr. X, your car dealer, will deliver the 1997 Ferrari and then you pay him the balance due. The dealers delivery of the car and your payment of $96,995 are the performance of the contract. Both parties must live up to their end of the bargain in the contract to have closure. In other words, until both parties have properly performed under the contract, the contract remains open.
	__________________ Please educate yourself about pancreatic cancer, and then share that knowledge with a loved one. http://www.pancan.org i will lose the weight...1 lb at a time!! i CAN do it! i'm not sure how many lbs to go - skinny jeans here i come!!

Oct 28th, 2009, 05:18 PM	#64
amanda RIP Uga VII Joined: Oct 2005 Location: Athens, GA Posts: 11,734	^^^When I worked in sales during college, we held items that were ordered but unclaimed for 30 days after purchase. After that, we weren't responsible for them and they were usually sold to other customers or sent back to the warehouse. It was the responsibility of the customer to return to collect their product and carry out the contract in a reasonable time frame. As long as one party makes a good-faith effort to carry out their part of the contract, they can't be responsible for the failings of the other party to do so. In this case, it seems like that would be the failure of the OP to choose the photos for her album in a timely manner before other fees were incurred. The photog isn't refusing to make the album, she just asking for compensation to be made for expenses encountered as a direct result of the OP taking her sweet time in getting around to doing her part. I don't think a judge would find that unreasonable, as long as she can document the expenses she's attempting to charge for.
	__________________ PROUD TO BE A UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA BULLDOG! Follow me on Twitter

Oct 28th, 2009, 05:26 PM	#66
irishlass1029 KOFYTYME Joined: Aug 2008 Location: State of Confusion Posts: 12,173	The photographer had the foresight to put in the contract a set fee if longer than 12 months, which was $250 if I am not mistaken. Sure, I will give you that the OP shouldn't have waited so long - she has admitted that herself several times. But clearly the photographer knew there would be some people wait more than 12 months, therefore the $250 fee. Let's call it a $250 procrastination fee. Okay, so she procrastinated. The fee should be $250. If I read correctly, the photograhper even gave her a false sense of security by saying it wasn't a problem - that she still had people calling her from 1999. 2009 - four years = 2005. In 2005 the photographer said she was having people call her from 1999. That's 6 years. Two years longer than OP waited. So she knew this kind of thing happens and chose to use a $250 figure to cover her costs, whatever they may be by then, if it did take longer than a year. $250 is NOT $1500 + $275. I have to respectfully disagree with the majority of posters. IMO, the OP should be charged $250 as the contract stated she would be charged. And I am sure if the photographer explained that it really was costing her more for storage fees, etc. and that she didn't quote a high enough price because even though some wait more than a year, 4 years IS a bit much, the OP would probably be prepared to pay more than the $250 so that everyone was happy - or at least that's the vibe I get from the OP. But $1,775.00??? That's over the top. I don't think the OP expected everyone to agree with her or she wouldn't have started this thread. She wanted input. I don't think she has a problem with the input, but the tone and meanness of the responses would certainly put me off to asking anyone for reasonable input. Input and insults are two different things. Some of you people are just mean.
	__________________ *sigh* Next target grail: 32 cm HAC or 35 cm Birkin - Black w/PHW - Leather Veau Box or Chevre

Oct 28th, 2009, 05:50 PM	#72
alliemia love shopping!!! Joined: Jun 2008 Location: NY Posts: 3,280	i agree amanda. starting with 'i want to virtually strangle my wedding photographer' and then go on to say you waited 4 years just because you are bad with planning, but that the photographer should eat the extra costs because you found a loophole in their contract? really selfish, IMO. even if it has no expiration date, someone waiting 4 years to pick out 20 pics has to know that is THEIR fault, and not try to bind a photographer into something for an unreasonable time frame. you want the photos because the photographer did a good job, no? so why try to screw them? you paid for an album, but you paid for an album for the price it was 4 years ago, and any reasonable person will know it is not the same price now, and arguing over an expiration date when the delay was your fault is just wrong.

Oct 28th, 2009, 06:02 PM	#75
nycfashionlvr Member Joined: Apr 2009 Location: New York City Posts: 420	Is it only me or are some of the posters on here being really rude and nasty to the OP for no reason? IMO you all need to take a chill pill lol! OK so yes she waited a ridiculous amount of time but I'm taking business law this semester and from what I've been learning....basically a contract is a contract. The contract did not state any sort of "expiration date" after the 12 months where the fee would pass the $250 so she has to follow the contract regardless of how ridiculous the amount of time was or how much of an inconvenience it was so I am going to go ahead and disagree with the majority of you all. Yes if she went to court a judge would probably be annoyed and think its ridiculous but I don't think the photographer would win.

Welcome to The Purse Forum.

Our Purse Forum, or TPF, is the #1 online social network for everything designer handbag related. Join over 200,000 enthusiastic members in this friendly community and start engaging in the discussion today.