Compensation for missing drone footage

Marium786

Hi, we paid a photography/videography company a total amount of 4,000 euro to cover photos/videos for 2 full days as part of my sister's wedding last summer.

- The company was to use drone footage on both events as this was stated in our contract. However, the company showed up to both events without a drone (claiming that it had not been working). They instead inserted 3 drone shots of the same venue from a different wedding video they had shot into ours. This was done without our consent or permission (never-mind the other party whose shots they used).

- Significant footage from one of the events is missing and not in the final video. The company were unresponsive to our concerns over this missing footage. We do not know whether it has been lost/misplaced or whether it was ever shot in the first place.

- Furthermore in response to our inquiry over the missing drone footage at one of the events which was hosted at our home, they informed us in an email that they had come to our home 'the other day' and shot drone footage of our property. This was done at a time after the wedding and we were not informed or asked whether it would be okay for them to tape our home. This footage is not in the final video.

I am wondering out of the total amount of 4K, what would be an appropriate compensation for the missing drone and footage?

Turbohymac

I'd be thinking that's a question for either a solicitor or consumer rights association.. simply asking over social media what ye. should deduct due to failure of a company to complete work in full is simply giving that company clear grounds to pursue ye for failing to pay for goods or services provided..
I would first ensure that the company is made aware of its failings / shortcomings by way of a solicitors registered letter or get free advice from consumer rights ..failing to pay either in full or part won't win over [legally]
Forget about deducting anything
Get proper advice..
Then proceed

Marium786

We paid the company in full for their services on the first day of the events, so it is not an issue of deducting, but rather getting back what we have already paid for an incomplete and unprofessional service.

I contacted a solicitor last year who advised me that pursuing this legally is a waste of money and won't get us far. I also contacted the consumer's right association (CCPC) in Dublin who advised me to write a formal letter of complaint to the company and send it via registered post -- which I did in October last year. The company didn't reply to my letter or email addressing our disappointment and concerns.

I finally contacted Small Claims Court who rejected my claim because there was no breakdown of the cost for the missing drone. For there to be a valid claim, there needs to be a specified amount for the missing drone and footage. There is no harm asking on social media to get an idea of the breakdown. I assume there are people on the Photography forum who know about photography-related costs.

Turbohymac wrote: »

I'd be thinking that's a question for either a solicitor or consumer rights association.. simply asking over social media what ye. should deduct due to failure of a company to complete work in full is simply giving that company clear grounds to pursue ye for failing to pay for goods or services provided..
I would first ensure that the company is made aware of its failings / shortcomings by way of a solicitors registered letter or get free advice from consumer rights ..failing to pay either in full or part won't win over [legally]
Forget about deducting anything
Get proper advice..
Then proceed

GeorgeBailey

Marium786 wrote: »

We paid the company in full for their services on the first day of the events, so it is not an issue of deducting, but rather getting back what we have already paid for an incomplete and unprofessional service.

I contacted a solicitor last year who advised me that pursuing this legally is a waste of money and won't get us far. I also contacted the consumer's right association (CCPC) in Dublin who advised me to write a formal letter of complaint to the company and send it via registered post -- which I did in October last year. The company didn't reply to my letter or email addressing our disappointment and concerns.

I finally contacted Small Claims Court who rejected my claim because there was no breakdown of the cost for the missing drone. For there to be a valid claim, there needs to be a specified amount for the missing drone and footage. There is no harm asking on social media to get an idea of the breakdown. I assume there are people on the Photography forum who know about photography-related costs.

Given that you seem to have exhausted all legal avenues and the supplier isn't replying I'm not sure that there'd be much hope of getting anything back to be honest.

MugMugs

No disrespects but they own the footage, not the client. Clent can use it under licence potentially but the copyright and ownership stays with the company.

What footage was missing?

And you're upset that they missed aerial footage of the venue and your home yet annoyed that they've given you footage of your venue and your home? Seems a bit out there if you ask me.....

magicbastarder

does the contract specifically state that the drone footage to be provided was *of the event*?
if so, they're in breach of contract. IANAL, and all that. i suspect you'd be better served taking this to the legal issues forum, to whatever extent they can discuss this. it's not a photography problem you have, it's a legal one.

pixbyjohn

You paid on the first day even though you were informed that the drone was not working, seems that you were happy at that stage.
So what is the problem?

Marium786

The day we paid them was during an event at our home for which they took photographs. This was a day before the 2 events on which they were to use the drone.

pixbyjohn wrote: »

You paid on the first day even though you were informed that the drone was not working, seems that you were happy at that stage.
So what is the problem?

elperello

Sorry to hear that you were let down.
If you take it over to Legal Discussion someone might be able to help.

Marium786

It is the way in which they have produced drone footage that is wrong. That is not what was promised to us in the contract and most certainly not what we paid for.

MugMugs wrote: »

No disrespects but they own the footage, not the client. Clent can use it under licence potentially but the copyright and ownership stays with the company.

What footage was missing?

And you're upset that they missed aerial footage of the venue and your home yet annoyed that they've given you footage of your venue and your home? Seems a bit out there if you ask me.....

pixbyjohn

Marium786 wrote: »

Hi, we paid a photography/videography company a total amount of 4,000 euro to cover photos/videos for 2 full days as part of my sister's wedding last summer.

- The company was to use drone footage on both events as this was stated in our contract. However, the company showed up to both events without a drone (claiming that it had not been working).

???

Marium786

Yes they did. We expressed our concerns over the missing drone immediately, but had no choice but to proceed with whatever equipment they brought on the actual day, hoping they would compensate us for it afterwards, which they refused to do and instead went about it in the most unprofessional way.

Sheeps

Give them a poor review on yelp, trust pilot etc. Move on with your life.

CabanSail

I take it that when you were negotiating the contract you made sure the company was fully insured for both Public Liability and Professional Indemnity?

The insurance should be part of the contract. It would be the Professional Indemnity part which you should now be making a claim.

If you have skipped that part then it's not going to be easy.

AndrewJRenko

CabanSail wrote: »

I take it that when you were negotiating the contract you made sure the company was fully insured for both Public Liability and Professional Indemnity?

The insurance should be part of the contract. It would be the Professional Indemnity part which you should now be making a claim.

If you have skipped that part then it's not going to be easy.

Don't think PI insurance covers somebody doing a crap job. It would only cover damage arising from the crap job.

Charmeleon

If they had a half decent contract it would say drone footage cannot be guaranteed as it is heavily dependent on weather conditions and temporary restrictions etc.

Charmeleon

CabanSail wrote: »

I take it that when you were negotiating the contract you made sure the company was fully insured for both Public Liability and Professional Indemnity?

The insurance should be part of the contract. It would be the Professional Indemnity part which you should now be making a claim.

If you have skipped that part then it's not going to be easy.

I think that would depend on what is agreed in the contract re. coverage. The OP says in the first post that ‘significant footage’ is missing, I wonder does that mean a significant amount of time or a significant moment in time (long lost Aunty Betty made a surprise entrance or something like that). The first option might be considered breach of contract if the contract states the entire event will be filmed from start to finish. The second option would be far easier for the provider to defend.

The OP doesn’t seem to have any issue with the quality of the footage/photography? If the footage that has been provided is up to standard I can’t see this going too far.

awec

pixbyjohn wrote: »

???

The couple are not exactly in the best position to be dealing with photographer's technical problems and re-negotiating on the day of their wedding.



It seems pretty shoddy that they had no backup equipment.



OP - was everything else up to standard? Photos and other video all good?

radia

Marium786 wrote: »

We paid the company in full for their services on the first day of the events, so it is not an issue of deducting, but rather getting back what we have already paid for an incomplete and unprofessional service.

I contacted a solicitor last year who advised me that pursuing this legally is a waste of money and won't get us far. I also contacted the consumer's right association (CCPC) in Dublin who advised me to write a formal letter of complaint to the company and send it via registered post -- which I did in October last year. The company didn't reply to my letter or email addressing our disappointment and concerns.

I finally contacted Small Claims Court who rejected my claim because there was no breakdown of the cost for the missing drone. For there to be a valid claim, there needs to be a specified amount for the missing drone and footage. There is no harm asking on social media to get an idea of the breakdown. I assume there are people on the Photography forum who know about photography-related costs.

If it's the breakdown between the (missing) drone and other costs that you're interested in, could you get a friend to seek quotations for their fictional forthcoming wedding with and without drone footage? Ideally by email/text so it's in writing.

Splinters

It sounds like the company may deserve a bad review, as maintenance of their equipment is a requirement to them fulfilling their obligations. It could have been a case of bad luck with their drone malfunction but that's still their responsibility. A fair and honest bad review sounds justified.

Regarding compensation though, that sounds less likely. Unless they violated terms specified in the contract, they have no legal obligation to return any payment. Remember a contract is there to protect both parties, not just the client. That's just the way it is unfortunately.

If there's a clause in the contract they broke, that's a different matter entirely.

Effects

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Don't think PI insurance covers somebody doing a crap job.

It does with my insurance. For instance, if my gear gets stolen and I've no backups made of the cards.

Balfey1972

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Don't think PI insurance covers somebody doing a crap job. It would only cover damage arising from the crap job.

PI (Professional Indemnity) cover would provide them with cover for this, as Effects says if you data was corrupt or cards got stolen. If a client is unhappy with the level/quality of your work this is why you would have this cover.

I would always recommend a wedding photographer has this cover and PL as a minimum.

The problem with drone footage and any decent T&C's would have that it is very much weather dependent and also subject to permission from the property owner and that they had relevant permissions depending on what class airspace they were flying in.