Sometimes the PROS ain't so PROFESSIONAL (WARNING... LOOONG POST)

[MRRiley]

I've debated not telling this story but decided it bore telling given the recent agonizing posts about "professionalism". Rather than hijack those posts though I decided to start a new thread... This is a bit long so settle in with a pot of coffee or a six-pack before reading.

Sometimes the PROS ain't so PROFESSIONAL.

Names have been changed to protect the innocent AND the guilty...

A co-worker of mine got married 2+ years ago (July 06) and had a beautiful wedding. They contracted with a very charismatic, personable and much ballyhooed wedding photographer (lets call him Stan) and paid $5000 up front for a custom album containing a set number of enlargements in various sizes. Wedding day came, the ceremony went well and Stan scurried around doing his job. All was right with the world.

After they returned from their honeymoon the happy couple (lets call them Mark and Betty) found a message from Stan pointing to their online proofs. They smiled as they went thru them and picked out what they wanted. They transmitted their selections to Stan, received a reply from him that things were on track, and waited in anticipation... and waited... and waited...

Now, their contract specified that they would have the completed album within 3 months so they didn't get worried until 4 months later. They knew Stan was very popular and figured he was just slightly behind. So now, at 5 months after the wedding they began e-mailing Stan. NO response. The tried calling him... NO answer.

After a couple of months of this Mark began digging and discovered that Stan had moved first to another part of Maryland and then on to Texas. After another 2 months, low and behold, an email appears from Stan saying that they needed to send him their selections as "their delay" was severely holding up their album. Mark and Betty replied that they had sent their selections a couple of weeks after gaining access to the proofs (6 months ago or more) and that his reply at that time indicated that he had received them. Never the less they sent the selections again and received a reply from Stan saying that he had them and that he didn't know what happened earlier. He guaranteed they would have their album within 2 months.

4 months later, still no album... and NO replies from Stan to the e-mails they have been sending for the past month or so. They are, by this time, naturally getting a bit miffed. Mark finally tracks down Stan's TX address (its not on his new website) and sends him a registered letter demanding their album. They get a receipt that Stan accepted the letter. Stan does not reply.

A month later (one whole year after the wedding), Mark gets an e-mail from Stan stating that there has been a problem at the printer and that they need to send their selections again. Once he has the selections, their album will go to the front of the line and they will have the album within 2 weeks. They resend the original e-mail stating their selections and include all of Stan's replies and assurances. Stan replies and guarantees the album will be in their hands in 2 weeks

Now a little sidebar... Stan uses a nationally known wedding album service and a call to them garners a statement that "there have been no problems with production of any albums in the last year or more". Of course they could be saying that to protect their reputation or it could be that Stan is LIEING! Either way something stinks. Also, they would neither confirm or deny any relationship with Stan or say if they had an order in for Mark and Betty's album.

Back to our story...

TWO months go by... Mark and Betty are considerably more than miffed now. They send another certified letter to Stan demanding that he honor his contract within 2 weeks or face legal action. Stan never signs for this letter. Mark then begins researching Stan on the internet and finds a couple of other couples that are having problems with him. Mark is techno-savvy so he starts a blog called "StanBlankPhotographyReviews.com". Within a week the site is inundated. After all the dust settled they had contact information for almost 30 couples that Stan owed albums to. The disgruntled people in Stan's life also included at least one photographer who worked for him when he couldn't make a wedding. She had not been paid for shooting 3 weddings.

Some of these couples are waiting for albums from weddings in 2005 and all tell the same story. Stan is great before and during the wedding but as soon as the ceremony is over and he has their money he falls off of the face of the planet.

Eventually Stan himself pops into the blog and begins trying to defend himself and explain the delays. Mostly he claims he is just too busy to get the albums done. Several people respond that he is still accepting new work and that he should stop shooting until he catches up with the wedding albums he is already obligated for. He replies that he can't afford to do that as it would dry up his income. Another couple replies that given 25 couples at $5000, he already has $125,000 in his pocket and that he can live on that until he delivers everyone's albums.

As time goes on, Mark discovers that Stan is facing several lawsuits in MD. Mark goes to the courthouses to try to speak to Stan but he doesn't even show up for these. Awards are granted to the plaintiffs by default.

Mark and the rest of the couples (2 of which finally did get their albums) have reported Stan to the BBB in every state where he advertises services. They have contacted attorney's general in several states and Stan is reportedly under investigation. Mark and Betty are considering a personal lawsuit as well.

Stan has ceased advertising wedding services on his website and is now concentrating on event photography and traditional and boudoir sittings. HE continues to accept work in these areas (including with several fairly high profile charitable organizations). He has yet to pay any legal judgments against him. Follow-on lawsuits seeking garnishment of his income or assets will likely be required to get anything out of him.



So, here we have the perfect example of why it is so hard to define “professional.” Stan is, on the surface, a “professional photographer” in that he is employed full time in the business of photography and is even a member of 2 professional photography organizations (WPPI and PPA). His behavior though, clearly defines him as, shall we say, “less than professional” and a criminal to boot.

Mark and Betty STILL do not have their album!!!

<disclaimer = certain details have been changed to protect the identities of all parties involved>

[MRRiley]

Quick update... Now even the album company cannot get ahold of Stan. They have admitted to at least 1 couple that their album is ready but that Stan has not paid for them so they will not release them. Their attempts to contact Stan have been fruitless. What a tool!!!

[JCSullivan]

Sorry to hear about your friends Mike.
Would you open yourself to legal action if you mention this a-hole's name so that it would come up in a google search?

Have Mark and Betty reported this idiot to the ASSociations he belongs to?

[MRRiley]

Originally Posted by JCSullivan

Sorry to hear about your friends Mike.
Would you open yourself to legal action if you mention this a-hole's name so that it would come up in a google search?

Have Mark and Betty reported this idiot to the ASSociations he belongs to?

Since everything I have written/reported here would be considered "hearsay" I don't want to actually mention his name but if someone needing a wedding photographer (in a far southeastern state that is rumoured to have a fountain of youth) were to PM me I would provide the actual address for "Mark and Betty's" blog.

And, yes, he has been reported to both associations... one of which took down a very favorable article about him when they learned about his lack of performance. I have not heard if he has been kicked out of either group (but we are hoping)...

[khardur]

Wow... Tool is an understatement.
I don't know how one could accept payment for a service and not deliver.

Not that it would be right, but I would understand that mentality more if he was totally just a con artist and ran around at weddings saying "click" and then skipped town because he wasn't actually taking pictures at all... But to post the actual pictures on a website and have people pick out what they want - go through all that trouble and then not finish the last step... what the heck?

What a bum.

[Damn Brit]

Pisses the hell out of me that the system is so toothless that ass holes like this can get away with shit like this.
Chances are this dude could be suffering from depression or something and is in denial so he keeps booking the work and not completing the jobs.
Whatever the reasons, the system is broken as well.

[séamuis]

Im pretty sure I know who you are talking about.

[Denis]

Buyer beware.

To me I should have been a contract with $500 down not refundable. Next do the wedding and take the photos. Make selection for the albulm within a month, with proof of albulm ready to forwarded to production, collect $2000. The remainder on delivery.

It sounds to me like this guy is doing jobs to keep up with the bills. Borrowing from one job to pay for producing an other is not good business practices. I would avoid any businesses working that way. A good business has cash flow to finish the job.

[daacon]

What a tragic story what a a-hole "Stan" is - this is why we have people like Tony Soprano around ..................... man to meet him in a dark alley alone - would not get the Album but I suppose some satisfication.

Sooner or later the law will catch up with him - while this will satisify no one - at least it will prevent further incidents.

I truly hope they can at least get the jpg's or raw files and continue on with their life.

[vievetrick]

What a sleeze!!! check you PM I want to check out this blog. By the way I had to add here screw the guilty post his name.

[little laker]

Sorry to hear about your friends mis-adventure Mike.
I imagine that they'd be happy with just a disk of photographs at this point

Personally I don't think that they'll see a dime from a lawsuit. And it would cost them so much more in both legal expenses, and stress.

Originally Posted by Denis

Buyer beware.

To me I should have been a contract with $500 down not refundable. Next do the wedding and take the photos. Make selection for the albulm within a month, with proof of albulm ready to forwarded to production, collect $2000. The remainder on delivery.

I will very rarely shoot anything now without payment in full up-front. It just took getting stung once.
And I'm not alone there.

A reasonable solution would be for a third party to hold the $, until they see and inspect the images. Then for them to release the funds and send the pic's on.
But you know how middle men always need their cut, so that'd have to come from someones pocket.

[ftpaddict]

I'm sure we would all like to know who this person is, to avoid getting duped ourselves. (not the case for me since I'm too far away, but there's lots of Americans here on the forum)

[MRRiley]

The blog address is available to anyone who asks me via PM but I will not post his real name here on the forum

I do not wish for this thread to come up when someone does a search on his name.

In keeping with this, please do not post his real name in any replies to this thread.

This will help keep all of us and Pentax Forums itself out of the fray.

[woof]

Originally Posted by MRRiley

Since everything I have written/reported here would be considered "hearsay" I don't want to actually mention his name

Hearsay is simply an attempt to use a statement to prove the truth of the matter stated. It is an evidentiary objection used to exclude this kind of evidence in a court of law. It is not an actionable thing.

I THINK what you are trying to say is that it is libelous or slanderous and therefore is actionable by the person who could bring suit against you for publishing this material in conjunction with his name.

To that, I will tell you that the legal defense to Libel/Slander is TRUTH. In law, they say "Truth is a complete defense." You can be sued for slander/libel and that would be a pain in the ass. True. But if it was all true, that would be your defense and he would NOT win; moreover you could no doubt collect attorney fees (yours) from him as well. Or that is your lawyer could.

I am not trying to convince you to come up with his name. I am just filling in some legal truth here. I am NOT a lawyer and this is not advice, but let's just say for very, very concrete reasons I KNOW what I am talking about.

woof!

[MRRiley]

Woof,

Everything I posted above is essentially the truth, as I have been told by my friends who have shown me the e-mails and filled in details which are not outlined on their blog.

The possibility of being drawn into a lawsuit by this photographer is the reason I was hesitant to even tell the story in the first place. As I stated in the OP, certain details have been changed but none that alter the basic events.

I do understand that the defense for libel or slander is the truth. Where the truth has been told, no libel or slander charge will stand. However, that does not protect you from extended litigation brought by parties with more financial means than you.

Not an experience I wish to share with you (as you seem to indicate). Hope your situation came out OK.