(Closed) Bride sue's videography company for $122,000, Whoa!

posted 6 years ago in Photos/Videos
  • poll: What she in the right?
    Yes : (11 votes)
    12 %
    No : (79 votes)
    88 %
  • Post # 47
    Member
    1893 posts
    Buzzing bee
    • Wedding: May 2013

    dear lord, if anything was bad… It was her hair with that dress!!! That video was great IMO.

    Post # 48
    Member
    563 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: June 2014

    @WeddingBecks:  +1 that’s what I’ve been hearing alot of people saying. 

    Honestly she’s every wedding vendors worst nightmare. 

    “Nikchemny says the video has ruined any memories of her special day.

    The young mother received the video while pregnant and claimed the distress led to some medical complications. But the emotional toll can last much longer, she added.”

    “How can I show my son this video?” she asked.

    “These memories, I’ll never be able to get back again.”

    Really? REALLY?? Come on. If you ask me, this is the classic case of buyers remorse. They spent too much on the wedding, now they’re pregnant and guess what? You can’t return the cake, or the shoes etc.. but you can sue the poor videographer. Suing because they didn’t bring as much gear as they promised? Sometimes less is more if you ask me. And the things that were missed.. like cocktail hour (wouldn’t the videographer be WITH the bride and groom having photos done then?), or the desert table? Come on. Do you really need VIDEO of your desert table? Pretty sure a photo would suffice. I think they saw something in the contract that they could nail the guy with, and trying to get back the money. It’s one thing to want a partial refund, or want the guy to re-edit the film… but to think that your ‘DISTRESS’ is worth over 110,000 is sickening.

    Post # 49
    Member
    923 posts
    Busy bee

    @SherryBlossom78:  my problem with it is that she’s suing for medical damages caused by the stress of the video. if she was suing for the price of the services+ lawyers fees that would be one thing. there is also no way she is spending 109k on legal fees, and if she is then she is incredibly stupid. 

    Post # 50
    Member
    379 posts
    Helper bee
    • Wedding: June 2012

    That amount is insane!  I also think it is really bad PR for the bridal store she owns.  I wouldn’t touch it with a ten foot pole since she seems to be a bit crazy.  Really pregnancy complications because of a video?  

    Post # 51
    Member
    371 posts
    Helper bee
    • Wedding: November 2013

    @SherryBlossom78:  I actually agree with you.  I didn’t think the video was BAD but I didn’t think it was great either.  Certainly not for $13k…..but I don’t think she should get $122k either!!!  I thought it skipped around way too much.  I didn’t think that it had a real order to it.  There is SO much more to your wedding day that just people dancing at a reception, and I really thought that was the majority of the 15 min video.  I wonder if she was clear on what all should be taped?  I would have liked to have seen more of the girls and guys gettting ready, more of the venues and the details that it looks like they spent a ton of money on.  BUT, I would have been very clear on my expectations in the contract.  Maybe she was, we don’t know.  Had I paid $13k, I don’t know that I would be happy with the output either.

    Post # 52
    Member
    9 posts
    Newbee

    I JUST read that article before coming across it on here. I could only sit through about 3 minutes of the video, with a whole lotta intermittent fast-forwarding. I’m not quite sure what she/they expected from the videographer, or where they came up with the over $100K dollar figure amount, but I think the whole thing is ridiculous. If the video was that important to them, they should have sat down and went through all of the couple’s expectations, or gone through some sample video’s and pointed out the ‘likes’ and the ‘no-no’s’. I mean, at $13,000, you better be doing your homework. There’s no problem w/ the actual picture or sound quality, so with something as subjective as wedding video content, I don’t think she has a valid claim.

     

    And in the article, the bride said the whole video reminded her of a Seinfeld episode?! Am I alone in having no idea what she’s talking about? I kept expecting the video to transition between scenes with the iconic Seinfeld bass synthesizer sounds

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD7PvtbkH0I

    Post # 53
    Member
    1213 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: September 2014

    @Lepidoptera:  I think the video quality is great, however if I paid $13,000 for a video (which I would NEVER EVER EVER DO BY THE WAY) I would expect a video of the entire ceremony and a much longer montage of the reception, not a 3:28 minute video of the speech from the reception and me getting ready.

    HOWEVER I think the bride saying it caused her medical issues is bogus. I have to judge her for even spending that much to begin with honestly.

    Post # 54
    Member
    1213 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: September 2014

    @Soon_to_be_wed:  Where are people finding a 15 minute video, I can only find the three minute one.

     

    Post # 55
    Member
    371 posts
    Helper bee
    • Wedding: November 2013

    @nattiejeanne:  It was posted by KingsDaughter….#4 on this thread.  Let me know if you can’t fidn it, I will just copy and paste it for you!

    Post # 56
    Member
    1213 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: September 2014

    @Soon_to_be_wed:  I found it. Now that I’ve seen the full video my I think it’s great. I’d still want something closer to a half hour for that kind of money, but it came out beautiful. My only complaint is the wierd echo during the ceremony, that was a lame effect they added.

    The topic ‘Bride sue's videography company for $122,000, Whoa!’ is closed to new replies.

    Find Amazing Vendors