Wonder if the bride (who passed away) was the one who signed the contract?
This is possibly a guy not charging much for their services and thus can't afford to give a refund because they don't have the money to give a refund.
Wonder if the bride (who passed away) was the one who signed the contract?
We wouldn't be reading this story if there were decent individuals involved.Oh man, didn't even think about that nifty little wrinkle. So bride (or her family) pays the deposit (typical situation). She dies, then the fiance is requesting a refund to him? Seems like this videographer probably had a LOT of plausible outs on this one, all without starting a net fight.
Wonder if the bride (who passed away) was the one who signed the contract?
... and the surviving fiance' is also an antagonist.
He may very well be. I am of the opinion that the contractee should be given a full refund as a gesture of compassion and fairness.Can't agree with that because I believe he has a legal right to all or some of the money being returned.
Step one after a contractual conflict arises and the parties cannot agree to terms for settlement of the conflict is either legally binding mediation of judicial redress. These are precisely the sort of conflicts that small claims courts were created to address and for far less cost than District Courts. In the present circumstance, I see no reference that any legal pleadings were filed.Thus, if preserving his rights requires him to take the gloves off - I'm okay with that.
Can't agree with that because I believe he has a legal right to all or some of the money being returned. Thus, if preserving his rights requires him to take the gloves off - I'm okay with that.
There's an important lesson here for every wedding vendor that applies regardless of whether you're dealing with a righteous customer or relentless antagonist:
Be damn sure you know the difference between your rights and your posture before you fire that first volley.
I see no evidence that the surviving fiance' is the contractee.
I'd say there's actually another rule, that supercedes yours above............."It's always about the money".
Who said anything about signatures?None of what you included in that post has merit, because the signature is of no legal impart with respect to disposition of the funds.
The bride's estate survives as a legal entity, and the undelivered product is clearly defined. It's entirely possible that neither of them signed the contract and that the deposit was actually paid by some other relative on their behalf.
Since there is no evidence of any legal action being filed, your argument is inconsequential.It won't be addressed unless filed as independent actions and subsequently allowed and enjoined by a judge. You can't simply show up in court and start adding complaints to the basket as if you were grocery shopping. If it's not on the docket - you don't get to talk about it.
Only a party to the contract has any standing for any relief from said contract.
For the sake of discussion, if fiance' had any standing and filed suit, the douchbag vendor can still make counter/cross claims that are directly related to the allegations/claims in the petition/complaint and have all matters addressed by the same court.
Consider a booking priced at $5,300 (bat mitzvah.) You collected 33% at the time of booking 18 months in advance, and another 33% six months prior to the event date, and the final 34% for full payment 30 days prior to the event. Then along comes Covid-19 and the event is cancelled.
NO he has not. That isn't PURE speculation.Simply not true.
The bride's death does not change the matter of the contract - it changes the balance of equity and consideration, and that issue remains actionable.
The vendor has already acknowledged the groom to be a party to the agreement both in word and action, so all other speculation is for not.
More speculative fodder.I not only predict legal action to be filed but, my money is on the groom getting free legal help as well. Once the story made the television news it became a public relations product for legal aide. Free advertising for whoever steps up.
For the sake of discussion, if it has stripes it's a zebra, no stripes it's probably a horse.
The burden of proof is on the vendor because he isn't simply holding a date. If the down payment is substantial (50% or more), and no work has been performed, then the lack of that material product becomes an issue that can easily pierce the claim for liquidated damages.
The deposit and any alleged 'defamation' are separate issues, they would be addressed in two separate actions. Even if the two cases were enjoined (requires consent of both parties or the order of a judge) it is more likely any defamation claim would be thrown out. Courts prefer to address the issue at cause and not wade into the subsequent mud of bad personalities gone wild.
With respect to THIS vendor: Bad reviews are not defamation when the review results from an actual business relationship. A vendor soliciting online reviews who then retaliates in the wake of a negative review can easily cross the line to defamation. Be careful what you wish for.
My philosophy: Don’t be a d*ck. Do the right thing. It will help solve 99% of issues you encounter. The other 1%, let the lawyers handle.