I have recently been involved in a county court case. In my 13 yrs of business this was a first. A new one for me.

So how did I manage to end up in court?

I asked someone to conduct a photo shoot of our family. Some of the images were to be used in my then upcoming Now What? book, plus used on social media to promote its publishing.

After approaching a photographer I asked them to deal with my wife aka PA.

My wife exchanged some emails with them. She asked for digital prints only and that they invoice her with the cost

An invoice for £437 was emailed to her. My wife opened the invoice attachment and paid the total immediately. The email body text was never read, acknowledged or responded too - nor a response ever saught by the photographer

Photoshoot took place.

Some hi-res images were rushed across to me ahead of the others as my book needed to go to print and an image of me and my wife as a couple was needed for the dedication page.

1 image was selected by the photographer and 1 other by me when we viewed some low res versions.



Nowwhat? by 4Publishing a trading name of Brad Burton Ltd.

When the remaining low res versions were sent over, we selected another 23 images and asked for the hi-res versions. These were sent across - quickly followed by another invoice for £1675!

It transpired that my wife had missed an additional price point from the photographer who had included that all hi res digital images would be charged at £67.

This was included once in the email the photographer sent to my wife when the 1st invoice was sent over.

The email was never read as my wife, having asked for the cost to be invoiced over to her believed the invoice completed the transaction.

And let me be quite clear. I would never have hired any photographer on this basis. I'm not Wayne Rooney.

You can imagine how happy I was when hit with this invoice.



It's a good job I didn't say I wanted all 100 photos.

As soon as we realised the error, we informed the photographer we didn't want the additional images @ 22 x £67. Do the math.

Images; in this case being digital files. Ie; a Dropbox with them in.

We agreed to pay for the 2 hi-res images previously sent over, including the 1 selected by the photographer that we have never used for the fee of £67 each.

They sent an invoice for £134, this was paid immediately.

They asked us to delete the images and confirm in writing we had done so.

We complied with both these wishes - again immediately.

End of story so I thought .

A few months later a court claim notice arrived addressed to me personally.

I was being sued for the full cost of all the hi-res images we'd been asked to delete, and the 2 hi-res images we'd already paid for, plus interest.

We took legal advice and on the advice of the solicitor spent months trying to negotiate and settle this.

These attempts were knocked back or not responded to at all.

I agreed to mediation, but when the date arrived it was one I couldn't do as I was heading up an event.

The court was informed, they acknowledged our request to rearrange but couldn't and so I heard no more about mediation taking place.

We also informed the court that the proceedings were going ahead against the wrong person, and that if anyone should be being pursued it should be the company - from which the previous invoices had been paid.

The court wrote to the claimant giving them the opportunity to amend their claim ahead of the court date, they declined.

They did amend the total they were attempting to claim for to allow for the 2 we'd already purchased however.

On the day of the court case, I repped myself and had 5 points of defence.

Point 1) Why am I here? Me, Brad Burton, I have had no dealings whatsoever beyond the initial enquiry. Surely if anyone should have a case against them here it's Kerry Burton.

Point 2) What's the difference between a £3 high res digital print, and a £67 high res digital print. At which point I presented to the judge the attached piece of paper. Taken directly from the photographers website. Here's the photo of it.

At this point the judge, appeared taken back and asked.

"So if I have a photo of me in the woods with my dog it's £3, but if you use the same camera to take a photo of me working behind my desk its £67?".

The judge said, "is there any additional work for the 2 different environments?" They said no.

At which point the judge dismissed the case. 6 minutes after I began speaking, case midway though point 2.

The judge said It could have been dismissed on point one, but she wanted to give the case the benefit of the doubt and a fair hearing.

Our defence was based on 5 points. We never got beyond 2.

It was being claimed against me personally even though I had had beyond the initial contact ZERO dealings, after I passed it over to my wife/PA in regards to any of the costing, payments or date of shoot.

The judge also took issues with the fact that they were trying to charge us £67 per high res image whilst advertising £3 per high res image photo here from their site.

And also why we were also being pursued for images that we'd been asked to delete so no longer owned and that the claimant had never offered to return if we paid the amounts they wanted. Blah blah blah.

So in summary - My wife on behalf of my company Brad Burton Ltd paid a total of £568 to the photographer in question, this was in return for a 90 min shoot and just 2 hi-res images. One of which was used.

£68 more than the day rate of ALL other photographers I have ever used in over 10 years.

Now, I have been made aware of a thread/video on Facebook recently regarding this case and claim. I have seen the inference (without actually naming me) that I don't pay my bills and the other jibes at my reputation and business.

I could have of course responded in the same manner online. I could try to rip apart another's hard won reputation or damage their business they have worked hard to build up and protect or invite others to do the same by starting a public thread.

That's not my style.

Maybe a decade ago yea. But not now. I stand by the facts stated above regarding the case and I have the evidence to prove the payments made in return for all products and services received from the claimant.

The truth is, when the case was dismissed I could have easily gone for costs which are pretty hefty when you take into account the solicitors time plus my own.

But I chose not to.

Despite the vitriol spat publicly against me I am still happy with that decision.

Yikes. I really have grown up.

So what's the difference between a £67 digital photo and a £3?

6 months of legal too'ing and fro'ing and a dismissed case.

I can continue to sleep soundly in the knowledge that in my 13 years of business I have paid for every single thing I have ever ordered and that I can continue to live my life and business in the manner in which it should be lived.

Honest.

Choose an appropriate Braddism to this blog

“Just because small print works, doesn’t mean it’s right.”

“Experience is what you win when you lose.”

“Some people are never happier than when they’ve just missed a bus.”

“You could be Gandhiand someone would want to put a bullet in your head for your views on world peace.”

“People who place Minefields don’t put a warning sign up.”

The Braddism I would choose would be

Help Many.

Hurt Few.

Live Life.

Brad. Xx

So, in summary, the difference between a £67 and £3 photo. £64 of bullshit.

FREE AT LAST ✊🏻

Have a nice day squad!

P.S. Every photo of my family within this blog has been taken by me using my iphone X. For FREE.

Brad Burton is the UK’s #1 Motivational Business Speaker

and is available to headline your event or speak at your organisation.

Please contact Pippa@BradBurton.biz

to discuss your requirements.