What would you do? Drunk Guest & Kit!

Tigger.ufo said:
Is this not exactly what you have insurance for?

Why on earth would you even think of pursuing the happy couple who are your customers?


Heather
Click to expand...

:plusone:



Les :shrug:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
johnb said:
The OP was concerned & posted on here as many have done. Her first comment was that she was "in a bit of a mess" so she obviously is worried about putting in an insurance claim & also reiterated a comment made to her about persuing the B&G.

In the light of day I am sure that she sees sense in persuing the insurance route so why not cut her some slack.

Mention wedding & the baloon goes up!!!
Click to expand...

I don't think it has anything to do with mentioning wedding...I don't shoot weddings, tony (kipax) doesn't shoot weddings so we hardly have something to make out of this situation, and I think the OP has also come to the realisation that there was/is a flaw in her current set up in that it has this safety risk as she has suggested that she is looking to proceed on future photo booths with a different set up :thumbs:

It's a shame that she is being inconvenienced by damaged equipment but as least she had the cover someone less professional would have not bothered with insurance :( and she has learnt about minimising her risk in the future :thumbs:
 
What the others said.

1. Claim on insurance (if you want - it may not be worth it and depending on insurers they may say you were partly responsible)

2. Think yourself lucky the guest wasn't hurt and doesn't yet have a lawyer.

3. Make sure you never do this again. There was an angry thread recently about risk assessments. If there was enough risk to warn people there was enough risk to take other steps. E.g. hazard warning tape, sandbag, somebody to hold the stand all the time, using and auto pole instead, not doing it.....etc etc.....
 
Yv said:
Giving the OP the good advice she needs, instead of offering your bravado opinion isn't really your strong point is it? Being a keyboard warrior is easy until somebody in officialdom works out who you are and takes action on what you have said. Always worth remembering, the internet is never as anon as many seem to think... :|
Click to expand...


Being a mod I think you should lead by example and try to be a bit nicer.

There's a great moderator over at a forum I use that threatens to put clips of star trek on (the original series) if someone is being naughty. The person gets the warning but without being patronised and because of the light hearted warning, doesn't feel the need to argue back.
 
johnb said:
The OP was concerned & posted on here as many have done. Her first comment was that she was "in a bit of a mess" so she obviously is worried about putting in an insurance claim & also reiterated a comment made to her about persuing the B&G.

In the light of day I am sure that she sees sense in persuing the insurance route so why not cut her some slack.

Mention wedding & the baloon goes up!!!
Click to expand...

Really?

I think you might have been reading a completely different thread, or reading this one with your mind already made up about yet another wedding thread :suspect:. What I've seen are the topics the OP mentioned covered with great advice, which she's already taken on board.

1, The cause of the incident - she's changing her work practices

2, Bad advice from the venue - she's decided not to pursue

3, Worried about claiming on her insurance - she's putting a claim in.
 
fatmarley said:
Being a mod I think you should lead by example and try to be a bit nicer.

There's a great moderator over at a forum I use that threatens to put clips of star trek on (the original series) if someone is being naughty. The person gets the warning but without being patronised and because of the light hearted warning, doesn't feel the need to argue back.
Click to expand...

It is somewhat ironic that you should pull Yvonne up on this with her being one of the nicest people you could hope to meet...sometimes a sterner warning is needed from a mod in order for a reprimand to be taken seriously, though not too sure I'd consider what Yvonne posted as a reprimand, there was no threat of time on the naughty step or anything, it was I'd like to think a observation more than anything
 
JonathanRyan said:
What the others said.

1. Claim on insurance (if you want - it may not be worth it and depending on insurers they may say you were partly responsible)

2. Think yourself lucky the guest wasn't hurt and doesn't yet have a lawyer.

3. Make sure you never do this again. There was an angry thread recently about risk assessments. If there was enough risk to warn people there was enough risk to take other steps. E.g. hazard warning tape, sandbag, somebody to hold the stand all the time, using and auto pole instead, not doing it.....etc etc.....
Click to expand...

+1 :thumbs:
 
MWHCVT said:
It is somewhat ironic that you should pull Yvonne up on this with her being one of the nicest people you could hope to meet...sometimes a sterner warning is needed from a mod in order for a reprimand to be taken seriously, though not too sure I'd consider what Yvonne posted as a reprimand, there was no threat of time on the naughty step or anything, it was I'd like to think a observation more than anything
Click to expand...

I'm sure she is very nice. Most people seem nicer in real life (I've met a few forum members).
 
Phil V said:
Really?

I think you might have been reading a completely different thread, or reading this one with your mind already made up about yet another wedding thread :suspect:. What I've seen are the topics the OP mentioned covered with great advice, which she's already taken on board.

1, The cause of the incident - she's changing her work practices

2, Bad advice from the venue - she's decided not to pursue

3, Worried about claiming on her insurance - she's putting a claim in.
Click to expand...

All of your comments are totally accepted. All I saw was someone upset about having kit knocked over & asking a question that in the cold light of day was not the logical way forward as well as receiving some criticism that was probably not welcome at that time
 
Whats the camera used in the booth? Would the cost of a replacement second hand be close to you have used anything from 400D's to 550D'sr excess?

Only the ones I've seen before have used 400D's and 500/550D's.

Is the booth sturdy? The one we had at my son's wedding was quite a decent setup, took several people in it and the processing part had a sturdy wooden stand in it with the camera and printer attached.
 
I like Yvonne...:D

When we went & got lunch for a few TP's she acted as my mum -(& I'm older than her :lol:)

:yv:
 
Drunk Guest.

She is responsible for her own behaviour.
Venue has to be culpable for allowing her to get into a state, was it a free bar?

Glaw99:

In spite of your precautions and good intentions it takes one idiot to make you realise that your set up needs modifications to make it IDIOT PROOF. I would also be disappointed by the lack of compassion by the B&G, but I wouldn't pursue them for a claim, just hope the idiotic drunk guest doesn't capitalise on the situation.
 
gadgeteer said:
Claim on the insurance and move on. And say a little prayer that the woman doesn't find some no-win-no-fee leech to try & claim from your insurance.

I'm sure one of those leeches could find some reason to claim it's all your fault that their client is now suffering from post traumatic stress, whiplash and depression.
Click to expand...

^^^^ This isn't scaremongering! It's the REAL world! If you are going to act against someone, irrespective of whether you think they are in the right or wrong, they are likely to react. Remember that attack is the best form of defence.

There are always two sides to every story and we are only hearing your side as you percieved it.

People here keep advising you to act through your insurers, so why don't you?

Why a temporary structure photo booth at any event where alcohol is being consumed? I think it's asking for problems.
 
Last edited:
By the way, I just checked out your Gemma Lawrence wedding photography page and there are some very cool images.

I would dump the booth!
 
fatmarley said:
Being a mod I think you should lead by example and try to be a bit nicer.
Click to expand...
I think you should read the bit in the rules about not challenging Mods' decisions. Either that or demand your membership fee back.
 
DemiLion said:
Actually they don't. They're function is to ensure that Safety at Work policies are properly conceived, understood and executed, thereby saving companies thousands of pounds in insurance premiums and preempting claims.

Don't get me wrong I'm no fan of idiotic jobsworths, but H&S is an essential part of the modern workplace. Done correctly it benefits both staff and employers/ organisers and members of the public. Done badl, of course, its farcical.





Next time, carry out a proper risk assessment and mitigate any potential hazards properly! :)
Click to expand...

Exactly:)
I think that in the OPs case tho they did take reasonable precautions to prevent hazards and have learned from the experience to change their set up:)
 
Unfortunately these things happen, we've all had accidents etc. Luckily I'm usually the cause of one, in the past I wrote off a 1D body by tripping over being too busy looking at the screen and not where I was walking. I smashed my 16-35mm F/2.8 while taking it skiing and not looking (again). I just had the screen replaced on my 1DX after smashing it against my belt buckle :(
 
.
Hopefully we all learn from our mistakes.

The problem is that even with great big black & yellow warning signs etc etc too many people lack awareness (putting it very kindly). Add alcohol and even more brain cells are getting switched off!
 
I have a line in my contract that states the B&G are responsible for the cost of replacing or repairing any damage to kit caused by them or their guests... however I wouldn't even go down this line unless there was something really dodgy happened like the groom got drunk and threw my camera in a lake or something, the rest of the time it would just go through the insurance.

Those who have stated that the leg should have been blocked from guests are correct... part of my day job is health and safety and risk assessment. Standing there telling drunk people not to trip on it or lean on it isn't managing the risk properly I'm afraid and I think as others have alluded to I'd be very careful how you word your claim, as if they think you've not taken the correct measures to avoid the issue then they may try and get out of paying.

It's tricky though as a tog... I mean during the 1st dance I have 2 light stands that have flashes on them and I'm nowhere near them, and they aren't coned off in any way... it would be easy for a drunk guest to knock one over and I too wouldn't have really managed that risk well, but at the same time I can't start sticking traffic cones all over the place at someone's wedding.
 
ajax_andy said:
I have a line in my contract that states the B&G are responsible for the cost of replacing or repairing any damage to kit caused by them or their guests... however I wouldn't even go down this line unless there was something really dodgy happened like the groom got drunk and threw my camera in a lake or something, the rest of the time it would just go through the insurance.
Click to expand...

TBH the bit about them being responsible for the guests damaging kit is never going to be enforceable. Why have it?
 
boyfalldown said:
TBH the bit about them being responsible for the guests damaging kit is never going to be enforceable. Why have it?
Click to expand...

I heard a story once where a drunk guest pushed a fully armed photographer into a swimming pool.

Yeah, that would be enforceable.
 
ajax_andy said:
Is it not?

Like I said the chances are I'd never need to chase the B&G for the money anyway, but I'd rather have something in there in case I did.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't of thought so. You can't really be held responsible for the actions of another not under your control


JonathanRyan said:
I heard a story once where a drunk guest pushed a fully armed photographer into a swimming pool.

Yeah, that would be enforceable.
Click to expand...

Blimey. Bet the guest was popular. Do you mean enforceable against the B & G
 
JonathanRyan said:
I heard a story once where a drunk guest pushed a fully armed photographer into a swimming pool.

Yeah, that would be enforceable.
Click to expand...

What on earth did you do to deserve that Jonathan? :D
 
JonathanRyan said:
I heard a story once where a drunk guest pushed a fully armed photographer into a swimming pool.

Yeah, that would be enforceable.
Click to expand...

Exactly mate, and it's only in this type of situation where I'd want to enforce it.

An accident or whatever isn't an issue as I would go through the insurance, but something like your example I'd expect the B&G to pay up who I'm sure would get the money off the guest
 
Exactly, as the venue rules also state that guests are the responsibility of the B&G (or who ever paid for the venue and signed the agreement to state such)
 
Flightphoto said:
Exactly, as the venue rules also state that guests are the responsibility of the B&G (or who ever paid for the venue and signed the agreement to state such)
Click to expand...


I wish them the best of luck if they ever need to enforce that infront of a court.
 
StewartR said:
I think you should read the bit in the rules about not challenging Mods' decisions. Either that or demand your membership fee back.
Click to expand...

If I replied to this message in a nasty way, you would want to retaliate - but I wont because i'm happy :)
 
Personally I think it's shocking to saddle the Bridle & Groom with responsibility for their guests' behaviour. Is that really valid or enforceable in a court of law? It's very unfair in my opinion.

There must be hundreds if not thousands of guests at weddings who have misbehaved such that someone would like to take them to court. But is there a legal precedent?

Now this is the sort of behaviour at weddings I very much approve of....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeUSo8voIXM
 
boyfalldown said:
I wish them the best of luck if they ever need to enforce that infront of a court.
Click to expand...

Sometimes people see things in writing and on messageboards and they all agree yes.. thats the way it should be...Thats how its going to be...

They seem to have a total lack of understanding regarding the real world and how things actually work :)
 
KIPAX said:
Sometimes people see things in writing and on messageboards and they all agree yes.. thats the way it should be...Thats how its going to be...

They seem to have a total lack of understanding regarding the real world and how things actually work :)
Click to expand...

....Hear! Hear!

Some people aren't able to be truly objective and to accept that there are always at least two sides to every story. They merely follow the opinions of their peer group like sheep. Thank goodness the mob doesn't rule.
 
JonathanRyan said:
I heard a story once where a drunk guest pushed a fully armed photographer into a swimming pool.

Yeah, that would be enforceable.
Click to expand...

You would not be able to make the bride and groom liable for the guest.
Drunk or sober, he is responsible for his own actions.

All you can do is claim on your insurance, and try to claim against the drunken guest.


Steve.
 
Steve Smith said:
You would not be able to make the bride and groom liable for the guest.
Drunk or sober, he is responsible for his own actions.

All you can do is claim on your insurance, and try to claim against the drunken guest.

Steve.
Click to expand...

If that were the case, how can a venue hold the contracted party ( ie the people that hire it) liable for any damage that occurs during an event? If they hire you, the couple then have a duty of care. It's that obligation that makes them liable.
 
glaw89 said:
I will call the insurers in the morning and thank-you all for your advice & comments!
Click to expand...

Any luck with the insurers, or do you have to go through the whole claims process before you know?
 
boyfalldown said:
Blimey. Bet the guest was popular. Do you mean enforceable against the B & G
Click to expand...

Not in any real way. But I'd use the clause to encourage the B&G in the spirit of friendly cooperation to give me contact details for the guest.

Basically I'd suggest they were "liable" like the owner of a car is liable if it is seen speeding - they can pay up or tell me who did it. Realistically I'd expect them to help me pursue my very valid claim against the guest.

IIRC in the case I'm thinking of (which happened in America, so, you know...) the guest ran off and wasn't seen again. But most people at a party would know exactly who was likely to push somebody in a pool even if they didn't see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top