Newlyweds anger after wedding photographer fails to hand over pictures despite court case success

STILL WAITING: Bianca and Chris Hanley, pictured with daughter Jasmine, are yet to receive their wedding photographs

STILL WAITING: Bianca and Chris Hanley, pictured with daughter Jasmine, are yet to receive their wedding photographs

First published in News
Last updated
by

NEWLYWEDS who won a court case against a photographer after he failed to deliver their wedding album have spoken of their anger that they still have no pictures.

Bianca and Chris Hanley married on June 8 2012 and had commissioned John Payne, of Special Occasions in Ashley Cross, to produce a lavish wedding album after being impressed by him at the BIC Wedding Show in February 2011.

After waiting more than a year for the pictures, which they say Mr Payne promised would be ready 14 days after the ceremony, the couple took Mr Payne to a small claims court where he was ordered to pay the couple £1,450 compensation, their £260.50 legal costs and to hand over the disc containing the photographs.

However, despite the order being issued on January 15 requesting payment within 28 days and a further letter from the court on February 5 stating Mr Payne did not have grounds for appeal; the couple said they have received nothing.

Mrs Hanley, 24, has since given birth to daughter Jasmine following a gruelling pregnancy which culminated in an emergency caesarean section.

“It has been so stressful and I have been left upset that I have no pictures to show my family so long after the wedding,” said Mrs Hanley. “He has ruined everything. We need that money and the discs so someone else can create an album.”

The new mother added that she liked Mr Payne when they first met and that his pictures were ‘amazing’ so was especially disappointed that no explanation has ever been given.

Mr Payne declined to comment.

Comments (114)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:55am Fri 14 Feb 14

BIGTONE says...

The sheriffs are coming.
See you on telly.
The sheriffs are coming. See you on telly. BIGTONE
  • Score: 20

6:41am Fri 14 Feb 14

hamworthygirl says...

Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.
Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook. hamworthygirl
  • Score: 33

7:15am Fri 14 Feb 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

More to this than meets the eye. Why would the guy not hand the photos over? The couple have left that important bit of info out of their story..........
More to this than meets the eye. Why would the guy not hand the photos over? The couple have left that important bit of info out of their story.......... Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: -22

7:22am Fri 14 Feb 14

Talkingheadera says...

Maybe cos he's angry he lost the case!
Perhaps they should name his address
Maybe cos he's angry he lost the case! Perhaps they should name his address Talkingheadera
  • Score: 30

7:43am Fri 14 Feb 14

kalebmoledirt says...

After loosing the case and face .I wonder if he's still around.
After loosing the case and face .I wonder if he's still around. kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 20

8:11am Fri 14 Feb 14

rudolph_hucker says...

He's lost them or never had them. Probably left the lens cap on or something.
He's lost them or never had them. Probably left the lens cap on or something. rudolph_hucker
  • Score: 30

8:18am Fri 14 Feb 14

MrPitiful says...

Letcommonsenseprevai
l
wrote:
More to this than meets the eye. Why would the guy not hand the photos over? The couple have left that important bit of info out of their story..........
Agree with this - there must be something going on that isn't being disclosed here.

However, the photographer concerned isn't doing himself any favours by declining to comment and therefore not putting his side of the story across.
[quote][p][bold]Letcommonsenseprevai l[/bold] wrote: More to this than meets the eye. Why would the guy not hand the photos over? The couple have left that important bit of info out of their story..........[/p][/quote]Agree with this - there must be something going on that isn't being disclosed here. However, the photographer concerned isn't doing himself any favours by declining to comment and therefore not putting his side of the story across. MrPitiful
  • Score: 19

8:20am Fri 14 Feb 14

BarrHumbug says...

I know it's no consolation for what he has done, as said it sounds to me like he's not got any pictures to give them for whatever reason and he's not man enough to admit that and just give them back their money, but I would ask friends and family for their photo's from the day and get my own album made from one of the online photo places, may not be as professional as the photographers but at least it's something?
I know it's no consolation for what he has done, as said it sounds to me like he's not got any pictures to give them for whatever reason and he's not man enough to admit that and just give them back their money, but I would ask friends and family for their photo's from the day and get my own album made from one of the online photo places, may not be as professional as the photographers but at least it's something? BarrHumbug
  • Score: 24

8:49am Fri 14 Feb 14

Townee says...

I'm sure that friends and family took picture of the wedding. So if the photograph has lost or deleted them, at least they will have something may not be professional but better than nothing.
I'm sure that friends and family took picture of the wedding. So if the photograph has lost or deleted them, at least they will have something may not be professional but better than nothing. Townee
  • Score: 12

8:49am Fri 14 Feb 14

jennyb292 says...

That's rediculous, why on earth is he refusing them their photos. It's good that they've gone to the echo as now noone else will have to go through this disappointment. It's a such a shame they don't get to have photos of their own wedding to look back on and share with family and show their daughter when she's older.
That's rediculous, why on earth is he refusing them their photos. It's good that they've gone to the echo as now noone else will have to go through this disappointment. It's a such a shame they don't get to have photos of their own wedding to look back on and share with family and show their daughter when she's older. jennyb292
  • Score: 4

8:50am Fri 14 Feb 14

snowdrop13 says...

I am friends of Chris & Bianca Hanley and was present at their wedding day. My Fiance and I are disgusted at what this crook of a man has done to our friends! Their wedding day was perfect for them and it was everything they ever dreamed of. John Payne is a nasty piece of work and he clearly has no conscience or simply doesn't care what he's done to them! Does he really have no heart?? By the sounds of it he doesn't!! This man is a LIAR and a CON and I hope everyone reads this article and I hope no bride EVER goes near him!! What kind of human being does something so awful to this couple and thinks he can get away with it? He's clearly noyt a very intelligent man to say the least! How on earth did he think this wouldn't go in the papers?? He's an idiot to himself! I hope brides cancel and I hope his business does start to fail because karma comes back around John and it will come back to bite you! John has never apologised to them for what he's put them through and even now not giving them their money and photos back who does this man think he is? I have seen how this has destroyed my friends and I'd never wish this on anyone. John Payne is a heartless, selfish liar of a crook and he should be well steared clear of FOREVER!!
I am friends of Chris & Bianca Hanley and was present at their wedding day. My Fiance and I are disgusted at what this crook of a man has done to our friends! Their wedding day was perfect for them and it was everything they ever dreamed of. John Payne is a nasty piece of work and he clearly has no conscience or simply doesn't care what he's done to them! Does he really have no heart?? By the sounds of it he doesn't!! This man is a LIAR and a CON and I hope everyone reads this article and I hope no bride EVER goes near him!! What kind of human being does something so awful to this couple and thinks he can get away with it? He's clearly noyt a very intelligent man to say the least! How on earth did he think this wouldn't go in the papers?? He's an idiot to himself! I hope brides cancel and I hope his business does start to fail because karma comes back around John and it will come back to bite you! John has never apologised to them for what he's put them through and even now not giving them their money and photos back who does this man think he is? I have seen how this has destroyed my friends and I'd never wish this on anyone. John Payne is a heartless, selfish liar of a crook and he should be well steared clear of FOREVER!! snowdrop13
  • Score: 14

9:08am Fri 14 Feb 14

RRYFS55 says...

My daughter and son in law had the same problem, with a different photographer. He was contracted a year before the wedding, and I paid in regular instalments over that year. If I was late, he was on the phone instantly chasing the payment. After the wedding it took over 3 years to get the agreed albums, with regular e-mails, phone calls, and unfulfilled promises. Although the pictures were very good, the hassle was not. It appears that couples need to check testimonials before booking their photographer.
My daughter and son in law had the same problem, with a different photographer. He was contracted a year before the wedding, and I paid in regular instalments over that year. If I was late, he was on the phone instantly chasing the payment. After the wedding it took over 3 years to get the agreed albums, with regular e-mails, phone calls, and unfulfilled promises. Although the pictures were very good, the hassle was not. It appears that couples need to check testimonials before booking their photographer. RRYFS55
  • Score: 22

9:22am Fri 14 Feb 14

tricky1007 says...

Letcommonsenseprevai
l
wrote:
More to this than meets the eye. Why would the guy not hand the photos over? The couple have left that important bit of info out of their story..........
what important bit? the court has said the photographer is in the wrong, has no grounds for appeal, dont think it gets any more clear cut than that!
[quote][p][bold]Letcommonsenseprevai l[/bold] wrote: More to this than meets the eye. Why would the guy not hand the photos over? The couple have left that important bit of info out of their story..........[/p][/quote]what important bit? the court has said the photographer is in the wrong, has no grounds for appeal, dont think it gets any more clear cut than that! tricky1007
  • Score: 30

9:26am Fri 14 Feb 14

we-shall-see says...

The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford"

I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point?

Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish.

I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o(
The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford" I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point? Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish. I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o( we-shall-see
  • Score: 8

9:37am Fri 14 Feb 14

rozmister says...

hamworthygirl wrote:
Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.
I thought the most important part of your wedding day was marrying the one you love...silly me!
[quote][p][bold]hamworthygirl[/bold] wrote: Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.[/p][/quote]I thought the most important part of your wedding day was marrying the one you love...silly me! rozmister
  • Score: 29

9:43am Fri 14 Feb 14

ian_the_bute says...

Special Occasions Bridal House & Photography
55 Commercial Road, Lower Parkstone,
Special Occasions Bridal House & Photography 55 Commercial Road, Lower Parkstone, ian_the_bute
  • Score: 11

9:44am Fri 14 Feb 14

ian_the_bute says...

Special Occasions Bridal House & Photography
55 Commercial Road, Lower Parkstone,

AVOID AVOID AVOID

Crook ,dodgy ,git
Special Occasions Bridal House & Photography 55 Commercial Road, Lower Parkstone, AVOID AVOID AVOID Crook ,dodgy ,git ian_the_bute
  • Score: 19

10:15am Fri 14 Feb 14

BournemouthMum says...

we-shall-see wrote:
The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford"

I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point?

Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish.

I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o(
As a web designer I have bult lots of websites for these charletons who claim to be photographers when they haven't a clue or have never taken courses on it. I can always tell by the photos they give me to put on their sites. They buy an expensive camera get a website and think they know it all and then when somethinig goes wrong they haven't a clue how to put ithings right.

Photographers should be licensed.
[quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford" I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point? Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish. I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o([/p][/quote]As a web designer I have bult lots of websites for these charletons who claim to be photographers when they haven't a clue or have never taken courses on it. I can always tell by the photos they give me to put on their sites. They buy an expensive camera get a website and think they know it all and then when somethinig goes wrong they haven't a clue how to put ithings right. Photographers should be licensed. BournemouthMum
  • Score: 16

10:58am Fri 14 Feb 14

ABCD1 says...

Bournemouth International Centre (BIC) do yourselves a favour an ban this individual and Special Occasions from your future wedding events. Otherwise people are going to start doubting the genuine exhibitors and before we know it it will be another event poorly supported and everyone will lose out.
What a god **** awful man, shame on you Special Occasions for even getting involved with such a rip off merchant. Clearly your lovely shop front is all you are, customer service is more important than a posh shop front! Get it right or give up now.
I really hope this couple get their album and hopefully have enough friends photos that they can put together a decent album of their own. I can thoroughly recommend the photo books that Tesco print, takes time to plan but very worthwhile.
Bournemouth International Centre (BIC) do yourselves a favour an ban this individual and Special Occasions from your future wedding events. Otherwise people are going to start doubting the genuine exhibitors and before we know it it will be another event poorly supported and everyone will lose out. What a god **** awful man, shame on you Special Occasions for even getting involved with such a rip off merchant. Clearly your lovely shop front is all you are, customer service is more important than a posh shop front! Get it right or give up now. I really hope this couple get their album and hopefully have enough friends photos that they can put together a decent album of their own. I can thoroughly recommend the photo books that Tesco print, takes time to plan but very worthwhile. ABCD1
  • Score: 13

11:08am Fri 14 Feb 14

hamworthygirl says...

rozmister wrote:
hamworthygirl wrote:
Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.
I thought the most important part of your wedding day was marrying the one you love...silly me!
Yes it is but also a record of you marrying that person is important, maybe i should have said one of the most important parts of the day. I still look at my wedding pics after 35 yrs and what if the person you marry is no longer with you surely pictures are a comfort?
[quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hamworthygirl[/bold] wrote: Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.[/p][/quote]I thought the most important part of your wedding day was marrying the one you love...silly me![/p][/quote]Yes it is but also a record of you marrying that person is important, maybe i should have said one of the most important parts of the day. I still look at my wedding pics after 35 yrs and what if the person you marry is no longer with you surely pictures are a comfort? hamworthygirl
  • Score: 13

11:16am Fri 14 Feb 14

Chrissy's says...

This is bad it is meant to be your special day with the photos as memories to pass onto your children when older. This man needs investigating by the inland revenue too he takes deposits for this it is a revenue . Please keep fighting this case I would want my pics and I'm getting married next year and feel who or were do I go I don't trust no one now.
This is bad it is meant to be your special day with the photos as memories to pass onto your children when older. This man needs investigating by the inland revenue too he takes deposits for this it is a revenue . Please keep fighting this case I would want my pics and I'm getting married next year and feel who or were do I go I don't trust no one now. Chrissy's
  • Score: 7

12:30pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

Talkingheadera wrote:
Maybe cos he's angry he lost the case!
Perhaps they should name his address
No I mean why did he not hand them over in the first place? Was there a dispute over payment, or a falling out over something? it doesn't say but would make a better story and paint a clearer picture. The sort of thing a decent journalist would bottom out. Oh - there's the problem!!!!
[quote][p][bold]Talkingheadera[/bold] wrote: Maybe cos he's angry he lost the case! Perhaps they should name his address[/p][/quote]No I mean why did he not hand them over in the first place? Was there a dispute over payment, or a falling out over something? it doesn't say but would make a better story and paint a clearer picture. The sort of thing a decent journalist would bottom out. Oh - there's the problem!!!! Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: 3

12:30pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Tig says...

we-shall-see wrote:
The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford"

I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point?

Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish.

I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o(
I don't know whether John Payne is properly qualified, but I agree about "every man and his dog" having a digital camera and then thinking they're a professional photographer.
.
I am a photographer, but still learning and am taking a BA in it; I've also taken many courses over the years. Even though I am now probably quite capable of taking decent wedding photos, I still wouldn't call myself a wedding photographer and wouldn't really want to do weddings as it's a HUGE responsibility.
.
I also get fed up with people who have, quite clearly, 'decided to be a photographer' and gone out and bought an expensive camera and then set up in business. There is more to it than just having the tools of the trade and Facebook is awash with such people. I look at their photos and know that I wouldn't give them £100 for their services, let alone thousands, but still many people do.
.
I've seen a local 'professional' photographer who just presses a button in PhotoShop to process all his wedding photos in one batch. The resulting photos were adequate, but that's all, and certainly nothing that special and not worthy of the ££££ I'm sure he charged. If you charge ££££ then people expect the best and that should involve a lot of work to give them those special memories.
.
Best for John Payne if he 'mans up' and offers an explanation, or the photos (if they now exist).
[quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford" I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point? Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish. I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o([/p][/quote]I don't know whether John Payne is properly qualified, but I agree about "every man and his dog" having a digital camera and then thinking they're a professional photographer. . I am a photographer, but still learning and am taking a BA in it; I've also taken many courses over the years. Even though I am now probably quite capable of taking decent wedding photos, I still wouldn't call myself a wedding photographer and wouldn't really want to do weddings as it's a HUGE responsibility. . I also get fed up with people who have, quite clearly, 'decided to be a photographer' and gone out and bought an expensive camera and then set up in business. There is more to it than just having the tools of the trade and Facebook is awash with such people. I look at their photos and know that I wouldn't give them £100 for their services, let alone thousands, but still many people do. . I've seen a local 'professional' photographer who just presses a button in PhotoShop to process all his wedding photos in one batch. The resulting photos were adequate, but that's all, and certainly nothing that special and not worthy of the ££££ I'm sure he charged. If you charge ££££ then people expect the best and that should involve a lot of work to give them those special memories. . Best for John Payne if he 'mans up' and offers an explanation, or the photos (if they now exist). Tig
  • Score: 12

12:33pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

BarrHumbug wrote:
I know it's no consolation for what he has done, as said it sounds to me like he's not got any pictures to give them for whatever reason and he's not man enough to admit that and just give them back their money, but I would ask friends and family for their photo's from the day and get my own album made from one of the online photo places, may not be as professional as the photographers but at least it's something?
Jumping to conclusions a bit there, my friend!!
[quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: I know it's no consolation for what he has done, as said it sounds to me like he's not got any pictures to give them for whatever reason and he's not man enough to admit that and just give them back their money, but I would ask friends and family for their photo's from the day and get my own album made from one of the online photo places, may not be as professional as the photographers but at least it's something?[/p][/quote]Jumping to conclusions a bit there, my friend!! Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: -5

12:34pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

snowdrop13 wrote:
I am friends of Chris & Bianca Hanley and was present at their wedding day. My Fiance and I are disgusted at what this crook of a man has done to our friends! Their wedding day was perfect for them and it was everything they ever dreamed of. John Payne is a nasty piece of work and he clearly has no conscience or simply doesn't care what he's done to them! Does he really have no heart?? By the sounds of it he doesn't!! This man is a LIAR and a CON and I hope everyone reads this article and I hope no bride EVER goes near him!! What kind of human being does something so awful to this couple and thinks he can get away with it? He's clearly noyt a very intelligent man to say the least! How on earth did he think this wouldn't go in the papers?? He's an idiot to himself! I hope brides cancel and I hope his business does start to fail because karma comes back around John and it will come back to bite you! John has never apologised to them for what he's put them through and even now not giving them their money and photos back who does this man think he is? I have seen how this has destroyed my friends and I'd never wish this on anyone. John Payne is a heartless, selfish liar of a crook and he should be well steared clear of FOREVER!!
Stand by for a letter from a lawyer!!
[quote][p][bold]snowdrop13[/bold] wrote: I am friends of Chris & Bianca Hanley and was present at their wedding day. My Fiance and I are disgusted at what this crook of a man has done to our friends! Their wedding day was perfect for them and it was everything they ever dreamed of. John Payne is a nasty piece of work and he clearly has no conscience or simply doesn't care what he's done to them! Does he really have no heart?? By the sounds of it he doesn't!! This man is a LIAR and a CON and I hope everyone reads this article and I hope no bride EVER goes near him!! What kind of human being does something so awful to this couple and thinks he can get away with it? He's clearly noyt a very intelligent man to say the least! How on earth did he think this wouldn't go in the papers?? He's an idiot to himself! I hope brides cancel and I hope his business does start to fail because karma comes back around John and it will come back to bite you! John has never apologised to them for what he's put them through and even now not giving them their money and photos back who does this man think he is? I have seen how this has destroyed my friends and I'd never wish this on anyone. John Payne is a heartless, selfish liar of a crook and he should be well steared clear of FOREVER!![/p][/quote]Stand by for a letter from a lawyer!! Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: -9

12:50pm Fri 14 Feb 14

snowdrop13 says...

Letcommonsenseprevai
l
wrote:
Talkingheadera wrote:
Maybe cos he's angry he lost the case!
Perhaps they should name his address
No I mean why did he not hand them over in the first place? Was there a dispute over payment, or a falling out over something? it doesn't say but would make a better story and paint a clearer picture. The sort of thing a decent journalist would bottom out. Oh - there's the problem!!!!
My friends paid John £2200 for his so called service! Which it states in the previous report. John failed to produce their wedding album and has kept ALL their money and their wedding disk so they STILL HAVE NOTHING! Theres no hidden report it is what it is! Johns a crook!
[quote][p][bold]Letcommonsenseprevai l[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Talkingheadera[/bold] wrote: Maybe cos he's angry he lost the case! Perhaps they should name his address[/p][/quote]No I mean why did he not hand them over in the first place? Was there a dispute over payment, or a falling out over something? it doesn't say but would make a better story and paint a clearer picture. The sort of thing a decent journalist would bottom out. Oh - there's the problem!!!![/p][/quote]My friends paid John £2200 for his so called service! Which it states in the previous report. John failed to produce their wedding album and has kept ALL their money and their wedding disk so they STILL HAVE NOTHING! Theres no hidden report it is what it is! Johns a crook! snowdrop13
  • Score: 16

1:15pm Fri 14 Feb 14

sarah040866 says...

The Echo spelt his name wrong it's John Paine

http://www.specialoc
casionsweddings.co.u
k/jp_about_john.htm
The Echo spelt his name wrong it's John Paine http://www.specialoc casionsweddings.co.u k/jp_about_john.htm sarah040866
  • Score: 7

1:44pm Fri 14 Feb 14

agp1337 says...

BournemouthMum wrote:
we-shall-see wrote:
The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford"

I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point?

Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish.

I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o(
As a web designer I have bult lots of websites for these charletons who claim to be photographers when they haven't a clue or have never taken courses on it. I can always tell by the photos they give me to put on their sites. They buy an expensive camera get a website and think they know it all and then when somethinig goes wrong they haven't a clue how to put ithings right.

Photographers should be licensed.
I agree about the licensing. But there would still be nothing to stop anyone else 'doing' a wedding for, say, £250 and letting them order pictures online. How could we enforce this? Obviously it's right for a doctor, who must be qualified and registered with the GMC. A bit of overkill for photographers, though. You pay your money and take your choice - professionals have skill and expensive insurance. They also have the experience not to be overwhelmed by the responsibility of taking that special day, no faffing around, they know what needs to be done. I've 'done' four weddings, only photographer there, no charge except material costs, in the days of film. The stress was awful. Fortunately everyone was happy. Never again, though.
[quote][p][bold]BournemouthMum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford" I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point? Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish. I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o([/p][/quote]As a web designer I have bult lots of websites for these charletons who claim to be photographers when they haven't a clue or have never taken courses on it. I can always tell by the photos they give me to put on their sites. They buy an expensive camera get a website and think they know it all and then when somethinig goes wrong they haven't a clue how to put ithings right. Photographers should be licensed.[/p][/quote]I agree about the licensing. But there would still be nothing to stop anyone else 'doing' a wedding for, say, £250 and letting them order pictures online. How could we enforce this? Obviously it's right for a doctor, who must be qualified and registered with the GMC. A bit of overkill for photographers, though. You pay your money and take your choice - professionals have skill and expensive insurance. They also have the experience not to be overwhelmed by the responsibility of taking that special day, no faffing around, they know what needs to be done. I've 'done' four weddings, only photographer there, no charge except material costs, in the days of film. The stress was awful. Fortunately everyone was happy. Never again, though. agp1337
  • Score: 10

2:04pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

snowdrop13 wrote:
Letcommonsenseprevai

l
wrote:
Talkingheadera wrote:
Maybe cos he's angry he lost the case!
Perhaps they should name his address
No I mean why did he not hand them over in the first place? Was there a dispute over payment, or a falling out over something? it doesn't say but would make a better story and paint a clearer picture. The sort of thing a decent journalist would bottom out. Oh - there's the problem!!!!
My friends paid John £2200 for his so called service! Which it states in the previous report. John failed to produce their wedding album and has kept ALL their money and their wedding disk so they STILL HAVE NOTHING! Theres no hidden report it is what it is! Johns a crook!
Why on earth did they hand over £2200 before the photo's were given to them?
[quote][p][bold]snowdrop13[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Letcommonsenseprevai l[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Talkingheadera[/bold] wrote: Maybe cos he's angry he lost the case! Perhaps they should name his address[/p][/quote]No I mean why did he not hand them over in the first place? Was there a dispute over payment, or a falling out over something? it doesn't say but would make a better story and paint a clearer picture. The sort of thing a decent journalist would bottom out. Oh - there's the problem!!!![/p][/quote]My friends paid John £2200 for his so called service! Which it states in the previous report. John failed to produce their wedding album and has kept ALL their money and their wedding disk so they STILL HAVE NOTHING! Theres no hidden report it is what it is! Johns a crook![/p][/quote]Why on earth did they hand over £2200 before the photo's were given to them? Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: 6

2:11pm Fri 14 Feb 14

vec350@gmail.com says...

sarah040866 wrote:
The Echo spelt his name wrong it's John Paine

http://www.specialoc

casionsweddings.co.u

k/jp_about_john.htm
The Echo has spelt his name wrong - John Paine. Should be changed as its quite an important story
[quote][p][bold]sarah040866[/bold] wrote: The Echo spelt his name wrong it's John Paine http://www.specialoc casionsweddings.co.u k/jp_about_john.htm[/p][/quote]The Echo has spelt his name wrong - John Paine. Should be changed as its quite an important story vec350@gmail.com
  • Score: 8

2:27pm Fri 14 Feb 14

rozmister says...

hamworthygirl wrote:
rozmister wrote:
hamworthygirl wrote: Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.
I thought the most important part of your wedding day was marrying the one you love...silly me!
Yes it is but also a record of you marrying that person is important, maybe i should have said one of the most important parts of the day. I still look at my wedding pics after 35 yrs and what if the person you marry is no longer with you surely pictures are a comfort?
I think the 35 years that come after a wedding day are important and while the pictures are nice and like you say would be of great comfort if the person you marry is no longer with you ultimately if your marriage is built to last you will have a lifetime of happy days and special memories and all the photos that come with that. They won't be your wedding day but a wedding day doesn't make a marriage anyway.
[quote][p][bold]hamworthygirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hamworthygirl[/bold] wrote: Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.[/p][/quote]I thought the most important part of your wedding day was marrying the one you love...silly me![/p][/quote]Yes it is but also a record of you marrying that person is important, maybe i should have said one of the most important parts of the day. I still look at my wedding pics after 35 yrs and what if the person you marry is no longer with you surely pictures are a comfort?[/p][/quote]I think the 35 years that come after a wedding day are important and while the pictures are nice and like you say would be of great comfort if the person you marry is no longer with you ultimately if your marriage is built to last you will have a lifetime of happy days and special memories and all the photos that come with that. They won't be your wedding day but a wedding day doesn't make a marriage anyway. rozmister
  • Score: 2

2:38pm Fri 14 Feb 14

l'anglais says...

Does the bride still fit into her wedding dress?
If so, get everyone together who there first time around.
Hire a "reputable David Bailey"
Sorted.
Even the nipper gets in on the act.
Just don't get divorced beforehand....
Does the bride still fit into her wedding dress? If so, get everyone together who there first time around. Hire a "reputable David Bailey" Sorted. Even the nipper gets in on the act. Just don't get divorced beforehand.... l'anglais
  • Score: -8

2:41pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Hessenford says...

BIGTONE wrote:
The sheriffs are coming.
See you on telly.
Quite right, get a high court writ and send in the sheriffs.
[quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: The sheriffs are coming. See you on telly.[/p][/quote]Quite right, get a high court writ and send in the sheriffs. Hessenford
  • Score: 4

2:42pm Fri 14 Feb 14

RM says...

Sounds like a photographer & company to avoid. Hope the young couple do eventually get their photographs.
Sounds like a photographer & company to avoid. Hope the young couple do eventually get their photographs. RM
  • Score: 5

2:43pm Fri 14 Feb 14

s-pb2 says...

BournemouthMum wrote:
we-shall-see wrote:
The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford"

I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point?

Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish.

I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o(
As a web designer I have bult lots of websites for these charletons who claim to be photographers when they haven't a clue or have never taken courses on it. I can always tell by the photos they give me to put on their sites. They buy an expensive camera get a website and think they know it all and then when somethinig goes wrong they haven't a clue how to put ithings right.

Photographers should be licensed.
No they shouldnt be licensed. Thats just a silly knee jerk reaction. What next a national cake maker register?

I feel sorry for the couple, because they have been caught out by a con man using a reputable wedding fair to give him credibility. The courts have said very clearly he is in the wrong and should pass the photos on and pay compensation, There is no back story. The man has been found guilty by the courts.
[quote][p][bold]BournemouthMum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford" I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point? Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish. I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o([/p][/quote]As a web designer I have bult lots of websites for these charletons who claim to be photographers when they haven't a clue or have never taken courses on it. I can always tell by the photos they give me to put on their sites. They buy an expensive camera get a website and think they know it all and then when somethinig goes wrong they haven't a clue how to put ithings right. Photographers should be licensed.[/p][/quote]No they shouldnt be licensed. Thats just a silly knee jerk reaction. What next a national cake maker register? I feel sorry for the couple, because they have been caught out by a con man using a reputable wedding fair to give him credibility. The courts have said very clearly he is in the wrong and should pass the photos on and pay compensation, There is no back story. The man has been found guilty by the courts. s-pb2
  • Score: 12

2:53pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Gym Master says...

What reason was given for the pictures or album not to be handed over to the newlyweds when asked ?
What reason was given for the pictures or album not to be handed over to the newlyweds when asked ? Gym Master
  • Score: 5

3:17pm Fri 14 Feb 14

60plus says...

Maybe the echo reporter should sit out side his door until he does comment better still print his address .
Maybe the echo reporter should sit out side his door until he does comment better still print his address . 60plus
  • Score: -1

3:22pm Fri 14 Feb 14

JackJohnson says...

As he's in breach of a court order it should be easy enough to get the court to send in their bailiff/sherriff to sieze the disc on behalf of the couple. Or does the disc not exist?
As he's in breach of a court order it should be easy enough to get the court to send in their bailiff/sherriff to sieze the disc on behalf of the couple. Or does the disc not exist? JackJohnson
  • Score: 1

4:29pm Fri 14 Feb 14

topofall says...

Very odd this as all the photos are on line in Albums so they are not lost and the Special Occassions Weddings website has the links to them! What seems to be missing is the physical albums in the couples hands. Why? Very odd!
Very odd this as all the photos are on line in Albums so they are not lost and the Special Occassions Weddings website has the links to them! What seems to be missing is the physical albums in the couples hands. Why? Very odd! topofall
  • Score: 2

4:33pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Katy_Ann says...

I have known Bianca for over 13 years and have grown up with her as my best friend, this couple are so genuine, together for all the right reasons and just want their wedding photos to show to family members and friends who were not at the big day and to have the photos for their own albums and to show Jasmine when she is older. I was at the couples wedding and can honestly say that John Payne was rude and snide to guests when taking his photos, even to me myself. How much the photos/wedding etc cost is nothing to do with the fact that they have paid for a product that John Payne could not deliver and now he will not refund their money or give them their photos. I advise to avoid this foul creature called John Payne and special occasions bridal house as he is just a con artist!
I have known Bianca for over 13 years and have grown up with her as my best friend, this couple are so genuine, together for all the right reasons and just want their wedding photos to show to family members and friends who were not at the big day and to have the photos for their own albums and to show Jasmine when she is older. I was at the couples wedding and can honestly say that John Payne was rude and snide to guests when taking his photos, even to me myself. How much the photos/wedding etc cost is nothing to do with the fact that they have paid for a product that John Payne could not deliver and now he will not refund their money or give them their photos. I advise to avoid this foul creature called John Payne and special occasions bridal house as he is just a con artist! Katy_Ann
  • Score: -1

5:19pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 22

5:19pm Fri 14 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

Funny that those who say they met the photographer,etc do not know his name.
Funny that those who say they met the photographer,etc do not know his name. pete woodley
  • Score: 3

5:22pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

rudolph_hucker wrote:
He's lost them or never had them. Probably left the lens cap on or something.
****
[quote][p][bold]rudolph_hucker[/bold] wrote: He's lost them or never had them. Probably left the lens cap on or something.[/p][/quote]**** fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: -5

5:23pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

BarrHumbug wrote:
I know it's no consolation for what he has done, as said it sounds to me like he's not got any pictures to give them for whatever reason and he's not man enough to admit that and just give them back their money, but I would ask friends and family for their photo's from the day and get my own album made from one of the online photo places, may not be as professional as the photographers but at least it's something?
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: I know it's no consolation for what he has done, as said it sounds to me like he's not got any pictures to give them for whatever reason and he's not man enough to admit that and just give them back their money, but I would ask friends and family for their photo's from the day and get my own album made from one of the online photo places, may not be as professional as the photographers but at least it's something?[/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 8

5:23pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

Townee wrote:
I'm sure that friends and family took picture of the wedding. So if the photograph has lost or deleted them, at least they will have something may not be professional but better than nothing.
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: I'm sure that friends and family took picture of the wedding. So if the photograph has lost or deleted them, at least they will have something may not be professional but better than nothing.[/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 9

5:24pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

jennyb292 wrote:
That's rediculous, why on earth is he refusing them their photos. It's good that they've gone to the echo as now noone else will have to go through this disappointment. It's a such a shame they don't get to have photos of their own wedding to look back on and share with family and show their daughter when she's older.
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]jennyb292[/bold] wrote: That's rediculous, why on earth is he refusing them their photos. It's good that they've gone to the echo as now noone else will have to go through this disappointment. It's a such a shame they don't get to have photos of their own wedding to look back on and share with family and show their daughter when she's older.[/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 7

5:24pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

snowdrop13 wrote:
I am friends of Chris & Bianca Hanley and was present at their wedding day. My Fiance and I are disgusted at what this crook of a man has done to our friends! Their wedding day was perfect for them and it was everything they ever dreamed of. John Payne is a nasty piece of work and he clearly has no conscience or simply doesn't care what he's done to them! Does he really have no heart?? By the sounds of it he doesn't!! This man is a LIAR and a CON and I hope everyone reads this article and I hope no bride EVER goes near him!! What kind of human being does something so awful to this couple and thinks he can get away with it? He's clearly noyt a very intelligent man to say the least! How on earth did he think this wouldn't go in the papers?? He's an idiot to himself! I hope brides cancel and I hope his business does start to fail because karma comes back around John and it will come back to bite you! John has never apologised to them for what he's put them through and even now not giving them their money and photos back who does this man think he is? I have seen how this has destroyed my friends and I'd never wish this on anyone. John Payne is a heartless, selfish liar of a crook and he should be well steared clear of FOREVER!!
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]snowdrop13[/bold] wrote: I am friends of Chris & Bianca Hanley and was present at their wedding day. My Fiance and I are disgusted at what this crook of a man has done to our friends! Their wedding day was perfect for them and it was everything they ever dreamed of. John Payne is a nasty piece of work and he clearly has no conscience or simply doesn't care what he's done to them! Does he really have no heart?? By the sounds of it he doesn't!! This man is a LIAR and a CON and I hope everyone reads this article and I hope no bride EVER goes near him!! What kind of human being does something so awful to this couple and thinks he can get away with it? He's clearly noyt a very intelligent man to say the least! How on earth did he think this wouldn't go in the papers?? He's an idiot to himself! I hope brides cancel and I hope his business does start to fail because karma comes back around John and it will come back to bite you! John has never apologised to them for what he's put them through and even now not giving them their money and photos back who does this man think he is? I have seen how this has destroyed my friends and I'd never wish this on anyone. John Payne is a heartless, selfish liar of a crook and he should be well steared clear of FOREVER!![/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 5

5:25pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

RRYFS55 wrote:
My daughter and son in law had the same problem, with a different photographer. He was contracted a year before the wedding, and I paid in regular instalments over that year. If I was late, he was on the phone instantly chasing the payment. After the wedding it took over 3 years to get the agreed albums, with regular e-mails, phone calls, and unfulfilled promises. Although the pictures were very good, the hassle was not. It appears that couples need to check testimonials before booking their photographer.
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]RRYFS55[/bold] wrote: My daughter and son in law had the same problem, with a different photographer. He was contracted a year before the wedding, and I paid in regular instalments over that year. If I was late, he was on the phone instantly chasing the payment. After the wedding it took over 3 years to get the agreed albums, with regular e-mails, phone calls, and unfulfilled promises. Although the pictures were very good, the hassle was not. It appears that couples need to check testimonials before booking their photographer.[/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 3

5:26pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

tricky1007 wrote:
Letcommonsenseprevai

l
wrote:
More to this than meets the eye. Why would the guy not hand the photos over? The couple have left that important bit of info out of their story..........
what important bit? the court has said the photographer is in the wrong, has no grounds for appeal, dont think it gets any more clear cut than that!
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]tricky1007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Letcommonsenseprevai l[/bold] wrote: More to this than meets the eye. Why would the guy not hand the photos over? The couple have left that important bit of info out of their story..........[/p][/quote]what important bit? the court has said the photographer is in the wrong, has no grounds for appeal, dont think it gets any more clear cut than that![/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 5

5:27pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

Letcommonsenseprevai
l
wrote:
snowdrop13 wrote:
I am friends of Chris & Bianca Hanley and was present at their wedding day. My Fiance and I are disgusted at what this crook of a man has done to our friends! Their wedding day was perfect for them and it was everything they ever dreamed of. John Payne is a nasty piece of work and he clearly has no conscience or simply doesn't care what he's done to them! Does he really have no heart?? By the sounds of it he doesn't!! This man is a LIAR and a CON and I hope everyone reads this article and I hope no bride EVER goes near him!! What kind of human being does something so awful to this couple and thinks he can get away with it? He's clearly noyt a very intelligent man to say the least! How on earth did he think this wouldn't go in the papers?? He's an idiot to himself! I hope brides cancel and I hope his business does start to fail because karma comes back around John and it will come back to bite you! John has never apologised to them for what he's put them through and even now not giving them their money and photos back who does this man think he is? I have seen how this has destroyed my friends and I'd never wish this on anyone. John Payne is a heartless, selfish liar of a crook and he should be well steared clear of FOREVER!!
Stand by for a letter from a lawyer!!
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]Letcommonsenseprevai l[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]snowdrop13[/bold] wrote: I am friends of Chris & Bianca Hanley and was present at their wedding day. My Fiance and I are disgusted at what this crook of a man has done to our friends! Their wedding day was perfect for them and it was everything they ever dreamed of. John Payne is a nasty piece of work and he clearly has no conscience or simply doesn't care what he's done to them! Does he really have no heart?? By the sounds of it he doesn't!! This man is a LIAR and a CON and I hope everyone reads this article and I hope no bride EVER goes near him!! What kind of human being does something so awful to this couple and thinks he can get away with it? He's clearly noyt a very intelligent man to say the least! How on earth did he think this wouldn't go in the papers?? He's an idiot to himself! I hope brides cancel and I hope his business does start to fail because karma comes back around John and it will come back to bite you! John has never apologised to them for what he's put them through and even now not giving them their money and photos back who does this man think he is? I have seen how this has destroyed my friends and I'd never wish this on anyone. John Payne is a heartless, selfish liar of a crook and he should be well steared clear of FOREVER!![/p][/quote]Stand by for a letter from a lawyer!![/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 4

5:32pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

Tig wrote:
we-shall-see wrote:
The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford"

I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point?

Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish.

I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o(
I don't know whether John Payne is properly qualified, but I agree about "every man and his dog" having a digital camera and then thinking they're a professional photographer.
.
I am a photographer, but still learning and am taking a BA in it; I've also taken many courses over the years. Even though I am now probably quite capable of taking decent wedding photos, I still wouldn't call myself a wedding photographer and wouldn't really want to do weddings as it's a HUGE responsibility.
.
I also get fed up with people who have, quite clearly, 'decided to be a photographer' and gone out and bought an expensive camera and then set up in business. There is more to it than just having the tools of the trade and Facebook is awash with such people. I look at their photos and know that I wouldn't give them £100 for their services, let alone thousands, but still many people do.
.
I've seen a local 'professional' photographer who just presses a button in PhotoShop to process all his wedding photos in one batch. The resulting photos were adequate, but that's all, and certainly nothing that special and not worthy of the ££££ I'm sure he charged. If you charge ££££ then people expect the best and that should involve a lot of work to give them those special memories.
.
Best for John Payne if he 'mans up' and offers an explanation, or the photos (if they now exist).
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]Tig[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford" I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point? Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish. I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o([/p][/quote]I don't know whether John Payne is properly qualified, but I agree about "every man and his dog" having a digital camera and then thinking they're a professional photographer. . I am a photographer, but still learning and am taking a BA in it; I've also taken many courses over the years. Even though I am now probably quite capable of taking decent wedding photos, I still wouldn't call myself a wedding photographer and wouldn't really want to do weddings as it's a HUGE responsibility. . I also get fed up with people who have, quite clearly, 'decided to be a photographer' and gone out and bought an expensive camera and then set up in business. There is more to it than just having the tools of the trade and Facebook is awash with such people. I look at their photos and know that I wouldn't give them £100 for their services, let alone thousands, but still many people do. . I've seen a local 'professional' photographer who just presses a button in PhotoShop to process all his wedding photos in one batch. The resulting photos were adequate, but that's all, and certainly nothing that special and not worthy of the ££££ I'm sure he charged. If you charge ££££ then people expect the best and that should involve a lot of work to give them those special memories. . Best for John Payne if he 'mans up' and offers an explanation, or the photos (if they now exist).[/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 4

5:36pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Huey says...

John Paine in the backside more like.
John Paine in the backside more like. Huey
  • Score: -7

5:53pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

pete woodley wrote:
Funny that those who say they met the photographer,etc do not know his name.
JOHN PAINE HERE……………!
!!!!!!!!

Thank you for noticing that, every bride I have ever photographed over the last 20 years, every single bride will have known my name off by heart, but not the Hanley family. Every wedding photographer who now shows a new customer their work has to make it crystal clear that the display albums are examples of what to expect. THEY CANNOT BE REPLICATED. You don't have to be bright to understand that !!!!
I have to apologise to all my wedding photographer mates who know how passionate I am about my work that this stupid situation has bought disruption to the industry we all love so much, please accept my apologies, but how was I to know when I showed my albums to customers at the BIC wedding show that one bride out of hundreds I have photographed wanted her album to be inside layout design of another wedding. For gods sake, how stupid is that !!!

I honestly believe that if I told any new bride that her wedding book would be the same as all the other wedding books, she would think I was crazy.
[quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Funny that those who say they met the photographer,etc do not know his name.[/p][/quote]JOHN PAINE HERE……………! !!!!!!!! Thank you for noticing that, every bride I have ever photographed over the last 20 years, every single bride will have known my name off by heart, but not the Hanley family. Every wedding photographer who now shows a new customer their work has to make it crystal clear that the display albums are examples of what to expect. THEY CANNOT BE REPLICATED. You don't have to be bright to understand that !!!! I have to apologise to all my wedding photographer mates who know how passionate I am about my work that this stupid situation has bought disruption to the industry we all love so much, please accept my apologies, but how was I to know when I showed my albums to customers at the BIC wedding show that one bride out of hundreds I have photographed wanted her album to be inside layout design of another wedding. For gods sake, how stupid is that !!! I honestly believe that if I told any new bride that her wedding book would be the same as all the other wedding books, she would think I was crazy. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 7

6:03pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

BIGTONE wrote:
The sheriffs are coming.
See you on telly.
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: The sheriffs are coming. See you on telly.[/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 4

6:06pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

Katy_Ann wrote:
I have known Bianca for over 13 years and have grown up with her as my best friend, this couple are so genuine, together for all the right reasons and just want their wedding photos to show to family members and friends who were not at the big day and to have the photos for their own albums and to show Jasmine when she is older. I was at the couples wedding and can honestly say that John Payne was rude and snide to guests when taking his photos, even to me myself. How much the photos/wedding etc cost is nothing to do with the fact that they have paid for a product that John Payne could not deliver and now he will not refund their money or give them their photos. I advise to avoid this foul creature called John Payne and special occasions bridal house as he is just a con artist!
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]Katy_Ann[/bold] wrote: I have known Bianca for over 13 years and have grown up with her as my best friend, this couple are so genuine, together for all the right reasons and just want their wedding photos to show to family members and friends who were not at the big day and to have the photos for their own albums and to show Jasmine when she is older. I was at the couples wedding and can honestly say that John Payne was rude and snide to guests when taking his photos, even to me myself. How much the photos/wedding etc cost is nothing to do with the fact that they have paid for a product that John Payne could not deliver and now he will not refund their money or give them their photos. I advise to avoid this foul creature called John Payne and special occasions bridal house as he is just a con artist![/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 3

6:09pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

topofall wrote:
Very odd this as all the photos are on line in Albums so they are not lost and the Special Occassions Weddings website has the links to them! What seems to be missing is the physical albums in the couples hands. Why? Very odd!
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]topofall[/bold] wrote: Very odd this as all the photos are on line in Albums so they are not lost and the Special Occassions Weddings website has the links to them! What seems to be missing is the physical albums in the couples hands. Why? Very odd![/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 4

6:11pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 1

6:15pm Fri 14 Feb 14

ShuttleX says...

Hessenford wrote:
BIGTONE wrote:
The sheriffs are coming.
See you on telly.
Quite right, get a high court writ and send in the sheriffs.
That is only worth doing if they took him to Court, not his Company. He will shut the Company down in a heartbeat, leaving no assets to obtain. Won't stop him starting up in a new name though. To be honest, with all this negative publicity he is getting, I expect he has already done that.
[quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: The sheriffs are coming. See you on telly.[/p][/quote]Quite right, get a high court writ and send in the sheriffs.[/p][/quote]That is only worth doing if they took him to Court, not his Company. He will shut the Company down in a heartbeat, leaving no assets to obtain. Won't stop him starting up in a new name though. To be honest, with all this negative publicity he is getting, I expect he has already done that. ShuttleX
  • Score: 0

6:21pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

ShuttleX wrote:
Hessenford wrote:
BIGTONE wrote:
The sheriffs are coming.
See you on telly.
Quite right, get a high court writ and send in the sheriffs.
That is only worth doing if they took him to Court, not his Company. He will shut the Company down in a heartbeat, leaving no assets to obtain. Won't stop him starting up in a new name though. To be honest, with all this negative publicity he is getting, I expect he has already done that.
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We love every wedding book to be unique, and to flow with the days, the Hanley families wedding book was no different, only trouble was she wanted it the same as some-one else's wedding.....This is why the appeal date is booked for March, and have been told by the court not to part with ANY monies or images until then.


WHAT HAPPENED.
We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.....FACT.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all neither you or the bride can even spell my name correctly, even after 18 months of arguing.

JOHN PAINE.
[quote][p][bold]ShuttleX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: The sheriffs are coming. See you on telly.[/p][/quote]Quite right, get a high court writ and send in the sheriffs.[/p][/quote]That is only worth doing if they took him to Court, not his Company. He will shut the Company down in a heartbeat, leaving no assets to obtain. Won't stop him starting up in a new name though. To be honest, with all this negative publicity he is getting, I expect he has already done that.[/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We love every wedding book to be unique, and to flow with the days, the Hanley families wedding book was no different, only trouble was she wanted it the same as some-one else's wedding.....This is why the appeal date is booked for March, and have been told by the court not to part with ANY monies or images until then. WHAT HAPPENED. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.....FACT. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all neither you or the bride can even spell my name correctly, even after 18 months of arguing. JOHN PAINE. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 3

6:27pm Fri 14 Feb 14

LordLilliput says...

Well said John Paine for speaking out I say.

If the above's version of events is legally correct then The Echo has made a calamitous error by misreporting 'factual' information that may well have catastrophic effects upon this man's business and reputation.

If what you say is true John (and I have no reason to doubt you, considering this publications 'form' in delivering inaccurate and sensational reporting - mainly in the expectation of attracting the very kind of comments it has) then I would be speaking to a lawyer at your earliest opportunity.
Well said John Paine for speaking out I say. If the above's version of events is legally correct then The Echo has made a calamitous error by misreporting 'factual' information that may well have catastrophic effects upon this man's business and reputation. If what you say is true John (and I have no reason to doubt you, considering this publications 'form' in delivering inaccurate and sensational reporting - mainly in the expectation of attracting the very kind of comments it has) then I would be speaking to a lawyer at your earliest opportunity. LordLilliput
  • Score: 21

6:27pm Fri 14 Feb 14

O'Reilly says...

rudolph_hucker wrote:
He's lost them or never had them. Probably left the lens cap on or something.
I must compliment you 'Astings on your invaluable power of probability....
[quote][p][bold]rudolph_hucker[/bold] wrote: He's lost them or never had them. Probably left the lens cap on or something.[/p][/quote]I must compliment you 'Astings on your invaluable power of probability.... O'Reilly
  • Score: 0

6:34pm Fri 14 Feb 14

ShuttleX says...

Jesus that Paine blokes likes to make his point again and again and again. You were ordered to pay the Hanleys by the County Court and given 28 days to pay up. That Order does not get superseded by any appeal. The story states, which I notice you did not disagree with, that you had a letter on 5th Feb saying you had no grounds for appeal. FACTS are a funny thing. According to my granddaughter it's a FACT that One Direction are all Gods, doesn't mean everybody agrees. No matter what you rant and rave about, the simple FACT is, you have a County Court Judgement against you. Now pay up, give them the discs and stop moaning. You had your day in Court, you lost, it's that simple. I seriously hope that you do go out of business as you do not come across as a professional. Any decent business person would have explained what was possible and was not. An agreement would have been in writing and signed by both parties. It's called a contract in case you haven't got an idea what that is. Funny enough this story was being discussed in the office today. Not one person was on your side. One colleagues even told her sister, who is getting married soon, NOT to use you. So you have had one cancellation already. The more you dig your heels in, the more you make yourself look like a petulant teenager stamping their feet because they didn't get their own way. Now pay up and shut up.
Jesus that Paine blokes likes to make his point again and again and again. You were ordered to pay the Hanleys by the County Court and given 28 days to pay up. That Order does not get superseded by any appeal. The story states, which I notice you did not disagree with, that you had a letter on 5th Feb saying you had no grounds for appeal. FACTS are a funny thing. According to my granddaughter it's a FACT that One Direction are all Gods, doesn't mean everybody agrees. No matter what you rant and rave about, the simple FACT is, you have a County Court Judgement against you. Now pay up, give them the discs and stop moaning. You had your day in Court, you lost, it's that simple. I seriously hope that you do go out of business as you do not come across as a professional. Any decent business person would have explained what was possible and was not. An agreement would have been in writing and signed by both parties. It's called a contract in case you haven't got an idea what that is. Funny enough this story was being discussed in the office today. Not one person was on your side. One colleagues even told her sister, who is getting married soon, NOT to use you. So you have had one cancellation already. The more you dig your heels in, the more you make yourself look like a petulant teenager stamping their feet because they didn't get their own way. Now pay up and shut up. ShuttleX
  • Score: -9

7:11pm Fri 14 Feb 14

LordLilliput says...

ShuttleX wrote:
Jesus that Paine blokes likes to make his point again and again and again. You were ordered to pay the Hanleys by the County Court and given 28 days to pay up. That Order does not get superseded by any appeal. The story states, which I notice you did not disagree with, that you had a letter on 5th Feb saying you had no grounds for appeal. FACTS are a funny thing. According to my granddaughter it's a FACT that One Direction are all Gods, doesn't mean everybody agrees. No matter what you rant and rave about, the simple FACT is, you have a County Court Judgement against you. Now pay up, give them the discs and stop moaning. You had your day in Court, you lost, it's that simple. I seriously hope that you do go out of business as you do not come across as a professional. Any decent business person would have explained what was possible and was not. An agreement would have been in writing and signed by both parties. It's called a contract in case you haven't got an idea what that is. Funny enough this story was being discussed in the office today. Not one person was on your side. One colleagues even told her sister, who is getting married soon, NOT to use you. So you have had one cancellation already. The more you dig your heels in, the more you make yourself look like a petulant teenager stamping their feet because they didn't get their own way. Now pay up and shut up.
I'm not taking sides because I do not know the facts but you seem to be basing your comment and opinion upon the story put forward by the Echo reporter. If, as Mr Paine says, an appeal date HAS indeed been granted then you are yourself making incorrect statements. At this moment in time the 'truth' seems to be unclear and it appears it's every man and his dog throwing all they've got at one individual.

Considering his response and quite possibly inaccurate reporting I think it's unreasonable to subject this man to such general abuse.

I won't comment further suffice to say it's easy to be led by an emotive story especially when a reporter may have an agenda. The 'facts' need to be established before people are demonised.
[quote][p][bold]ShuttleX[/bold] wrote: Jesus that Paine blokes likes to make his point again and again and again. You were ordered to pay the Hanleys by the County Court and given 28 days to pay up. That Order does not get superseded by any appeal. The story states, which I notice you did not disagree with, that you had a letter on 5th Feb saying you had no grounds for appeal. FACTS are a funny thing. According to my granddaughter it's a FACT that One Direction are all Gods, doesn't mean everybody agrees. No matter what you rant and rave about, the simple FACT is, you have a County Court Judgement against you. Now pay up, give them the discs and stop moaning. You had your day in Court, you lost, it's that simple. I seriously hope that you do go out of business as you do not come across as a professional. Any decent business person would have explained what was possible and was not. An agreement would have been in writing and signed by both parties. It's called a contract in case you haven't got an idea what that is. Funny enough this story was being discussed in the office today. Not one person was on your side. One colleagues even told her sister, who is getting married soon, NOT to use you. So you have had one cancellation already. The more you dig your heels in, the more you make yourself look like a petulant teenager stamping their feet because they didn't get their own way. Now pay up and shut up.[/p][/quote]I'm not taking sides because I do not know the facts but you seem to be basing your comment and opinion upon the story put forward by the Echo reporter. If, as Mr Paine says, an appeal date HAS indeed been granted then you are yourself making incorrect statements. At this moment in time the 'truth' seems to be unclear and it appears it's every man and his dog throwing all they've got at one individual. Considering his response and quite possibly inaccurate reporting I think it's unreasonable to subject this man to such general abuse. I won't comment further suffice to say it's easy to be led by an emotive story especially when a reporter may have an agenda. The 'facts' need to be established before people are demonised. LordLilliput
  • Score: 15

7:12pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

Well done John Paine for your level headed posting. I would now hold your silence and not jeopardise your appeal. Trust me on this one....
Well done John Paine for your level headed posting. I would now hold your silence and not jeopardise your appeal. Trust me on this one.... Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: 6

7:20pm Fri 14 Feb 14

biancabmth says...

This is Bianca Hanley victim of John Paine’s Ordeal!!

Firstly I’d like to say that I find it VERY interesting that John has only just found his voice after refusing to comment to the Daily Echo on this story.

If you want to hear the REAL TRUTH as WE WON THE CASE then please read on.

John photographed our wedding day on 8th June 2012. When we returned from our Honeymoon we picked our photo selection which infact John lost for well over a month, pretty careless to say the least. We liked all of our wedding photos that John had taken, it was the wedding design album which was NOTHING like the wedding album we were sold out package on at the BIC Wedding Show where we first met John. John seems to think we wanted an EXACT copy of someone else’s album this is infact ridiculous and was something we NEVER said we wanted. My Husband and I liked the style and format of a particular album we in no way wanted a replica who would?
The long and short of it is that John could NOT produce what we wanted, he put together a cobbled album which was completely un acceptable for the £2200 we paid John to do this. May I make it clear that the money John has to pay us back is NOT compensation at all its OUR money which we paid in good faith for something John was completely incapable of doing. John was paid a £200 deposit straight away and when we viewed our photographs he was paid the FULL £2000!!
When my Husband and I took John to court we only claimed for £1750 and let John keep the £500 it cost him to photograph our wedding day! That’s how reasonable my Husband and I are, we are good honest people unlike John.
John attempted to try and re design our album to look something like the style and format we wanted but he failed to do this AGAIN. This is why my Husband and I took John Paine to court as he refused to give us our money back for something he quoted "IMPOSSIBLE TO DO." We had no other option than to pursue our court hearing.
It was made very clear that John had breached his contract and that it was down to John to design and produce our wedding album not him trying to get us to design it ourselves. My Husband Chris and I WON THE CASE against John Paine and he was ordered to deliver our disk of photos back to us within 14 days which he failed to do. He was also ordered by the courts to pay us back our money within 28 days which again he FAILED TO DO SO.
John's statement about him not having to pay us is complete rubbish! Johns appeal got rejected by the courts and he still didn’t pay up or give us our disk even when he's been ordered to do so by the Judge! Despite him appealing and being rejected he STILL had to deliver our goods which he didn’t.
John has put us through so much grief and stress and even now he’s still making our lives a living hell. If the courts were so called wrong then the DAILY ECHO would NEVER of printed our story!!!!

My Husband and I would like to state that the court awarded John £250 to simply COPY a disk of our wedding photos. We would like to hope that John will pay us our money back and give us our disk back so we can finally move on with our lives with have been on hold for so long. The amount that we were awarded wasn’t even the full amount back we paid him so we will STILL be out of pocket!!
The fact of the matter still stays the same John has EVERYTHING and we STILL have nothing to show for our wedding day.

Thank you to everyone for your encouraging words and supports through all this ordeal, we like to hope that there is light at the end of the tunnel for us.
May this be a warning for all future brides to take heed.

Thank You

Bianca Hanley
This is Bianca Hanley victim of John Paine’s Ordeal!! Firstly I’d like to say that I find it VERY interesting that John has only just found his voice after refusing to comment to the Daily Echo on this story. If you want to hear the REAL TRUTH as WE WON THE CASE then please read on. John photographed our wedding day on 8th June 2012. When we returned from our Honeymoon we picked our photo selection which infact John lost for well over a month, pretty careless to say the least. We liked all of our wedding photos that John had taken, it was the wedding design album which was NOTHING like the wedding album we were sold out package on at the BIC Wedding Show where we first met John. John seems to think we wanted an EXACT copy of someone else’s album this is infact ridiculous and was something we NEVER said we wanted. My Husband and I liked the style and format of a particular album we in no way wanted a replica who would? The long and short of it is that John could NOT produce what we wanted, he put together a cobbled album which was completely un acceptable for the £2200 we paid John to do this. May I make it clear that the money John has to pay us back is NOT compensation at all its OUR money which we paid in good faith for something John was completely incapable of doing. John was paid a £200 deposit straight away and when we viewed our photographs he was paid the FULL £2000!! When my Husband and I took John to court we only claimed for £1750 and let John keep the £500 it cost him to photograph our wedding day! That’s how reasonable my Husband and I are, we are good honest people unlike John. John attempted to try and re design our album to look something like the style and format we wanted but he failed to do this AGAIN. This is why my Husband and I took John Paine to court as he refused to give us our money back for something he quoted "IMPOSSIBLE TO DO." We had no other option than to pursue our court hearing. It was made very clear that John had breached his contract and that it was down to John to design and produce our wedding album not him trying to get us to design it ourselves. My Husband Chris and I WON THE CASE against John Paine and he was ordered to deliver our disk of photos back to us within 14 days which he failed to do. He was also ordered by the courts to pay us back our money within 28 days which again he FAILED TO DO SO. John's statement about him not having to pay us is complete rubbish! Johns appeal got rejected by the courts and he still didn’t pay up or give us our disk even when he's been ordered to do so by the Judge! Despite him appealing and being rejected he STILL had to deliver our goods which he didn’t. John has put us through so much grief and stress and even now he’s still making our lives a living hell. If the courts were so called wrong then the DAILY ECHO would NEVER of printed our story!!!! My Husband and I would like to state that the court awarded John £250 to simply COPY a disk of our wedding photos. We would like to hope that John will pay us our money back and give us our disk back so we can finally move on with our lives with have been on hold for so long. The amount that we were awarded wasn’t even the full amount back we paid him so we will STILL be out of pocket!! The fact of the matter still stays the same John has EVERYTHING and we STILL have nothing to show for our wedding day. Thank you to everyone for your encouraging words and supports through all this ordeal, we like to hope that there is light at the end of the tunnel for us. May this be a warning for all future brides to take heed. Thank You Bianca Hanley biancabmth
  • Score: 13

7:42pm Fri 14 Feb 14

PooleHallRichard says...

Weve now heard both sides of the story and to be honest it sounds like John Paine has ripped this couple off big time.
He took their money which they handed over in good faith then could not produce the wedding album Mr & Mrs Hanley had requested,therefore he has breached the contract and should reimburse them in full.
The fact that the couple have paid him his expenses for the day shows they are a fine upstanding couple who both seem very genuine.
Do the right thing Paine and pay this young couple their money back and give them their photographic disk.
Weve now heard both sides of the story and to be honest it sounds like John Paine has ripped this couple off big time. He took their money which they handed over in good faith then could not produce the wedding album Mr & Mrs Hanley had requested,therefore he has breached the contract and should reimburse them in full. The fact that the couple have paid him his expenses for the day shows they are a fine upstanding couple who both seem very genuine. Do the right thing Paine and pay this young couple their money back and give them their photographic disk. PooleHallRichard
  • Score: 7

7:52pm Fri 14 Feb 14

stevobath says...

Seems they'll get a FREE set of professionally taken photos plus most of their cash back.

I see only one loser here, at least money wise...
Seems they'll get a FREE set of professionally taken photos plus most of their cash back. I see only one loser here, at least money wise... stevobath
  • Score: -14

8:02pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Vortigern says...

snowdrop13 wrote:
Letcommonsenseprevai

l
wrote:
Talkingheadera wrote:
Maybe cos he's angry he lost the case!
Perhaps they should name his address
No I mean why did he not hand them over in the first place? Was there a dispute over payment, or a falling out over something? it doesn't say but would make a better story and paint a clearer picture. The sort of thing a decent journalist would bottom out. Oh - there's the problem!!!!
My friends paid John £2200 for his so called service! Which it states in the previous report. John failed to produce their wedding album and has kept ALL their money and their wedding disk so they STILL HAVE NOTHING! Theres no hidden report it is what it is! Johns a crook!
Who the hell pays £2200 for wedding pictures? My God, what a narcissistic couple.

And please, stop pretending those pictures have any value to them other than for the people paying for them. No one but the bride and mother ever want to see wedding pictures after the fact, and no one will care about them in the future.

If the guy didn't deliver as promised, then yes, he needs to give the money back. But let's stop pretending not having some pictures is a tragedy on the scale of people dying in floods all over the country.

Having a friend do the pictures and paying them £200 pounds for expenses will always provide better memories than a professional. It's a frickin' wedding, not a Paris fashion show. Get over yourselves.
[quote][p][bold]snowdrop13[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Letcommonsenseprevai l[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Talkingheadera[/bold] wrote: Maybe cos he's angry he lost the case! Perhaps they should name his address[/p][/quote]No I mean why did he not hand them over in the first place? Was there a dispute over payment, or a falling out over something? it doesn't say but would make a better story and paint a clearer picture. The sort of thing a decent journalist would bottom out. Oh - there's the problem!!!![/p][/quote]My friends paid John £2200 for his so called service! Which it states in the previous report. John failed to produce their wedding album and has kept ALL their money and their wedding disk so they STILL HAVE NOTHING! Theres no hidden report it is what it is! Johns a crook![/p][/quote]Who the hell pays £2200 for wedding pictures? My God, what a narcissistic couple. And please, stop pretending those pictures have any value to them other than for the people paying for them. No one but the bride and mother ever want to see wedding pictures after the fact, and no one will care about them in the future. If the guy didn't deliver as promised, then yes, he needs to give the money back. But let's stop pretending not having some pictures is a tragedy on the scale of people dying in floods all over the country. Having a friend do the pictures and paying them £200 pounds for expenses will always provide better memories than a professional. It's a frickin' wedding, not a Paris fashion show. Get over yourselves. Vortigern
  • Score: -2

8:18pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

stevobath wrote:
Seems they'll get a FREE set of professionally taken photos plus most of their cash back.

I see only one loser here, at least money wise...
If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.
[quote][p][bold]stevobath[/bold] wrote: Seems they'll get a FREE set of professionally taken photos plus most of their cash back. I see only one loser here, at least money wise...[/p][/quote]If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 7

8:22pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
stevobath wrote:
Seems they'll get a FREE set of professionally taken photos plus most of their cash back.

I see only one loser here, at least money wise...
If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.
Sorry Stevobath, forgot to thank you for your comment, the album designs are on the front page of my website, I would appreciate any feed back, I still think they look great, just like the others on my website.......John Paine.
[quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevobath[/bold] wrote: Seems they'll get a FREE set of professionally taken photos plus most of their cash back. I see only one loser here, at least money wise...[/p][/quote]If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.[/p][/quote]Sorry Stevobath, forgot to thank you for your comment, the album designs are on the front page of my website, I would appreciate any feed back, I still think they look great, just like the others on my website.......John Paine. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: -1

8:24pm Fri 14 Feb 14

kalebmoledirt says...

fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
topofall wrote:
Very odd this as all the photos are on line in Albums so they are not lost and the Special Occassions Weddings website has the links to them! What seems to be missing is the physical albums in the couples hands. Why? Very odd!
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
John Paine,I was one of your critics .I,m sorry .shame you took so long to publish you side of the story.Would have saved a lot of embarrassment.If the Echo had not chosen to use you as news worthy villain.Once again I apologise
[quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]topofall[/bold] wrote: Very odd this as all the photos are on line in Albums so they are not lost and the Special Occassions Weddings website has the links to them! What seems to be missing is the physical albums in the couples hands. Why? Very odd![/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE.[/p][/quote]John Paine,I was one of your critics .I,m sorry .shame you took so long to publish you side of the story.Would have saved a lot of embarrassment.If the Echo had not chosen to use you as news worthy villain.Once again I apologise kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 2

8:42pm Fri 14 Feb 14

BournemouthMum says...

I believe John Paine. This couple seem very vindictive and spiteful and seem to be hellbent on ruining this poor guy's business. Also the Echo should print an apology, although that wouldn't negate the fact that a lot of damage would already have been done to his repuation and busness.
I believe John Paine. This couple seem very vindictive and spiteful and seem to be hellbent on ruining this poor guy's business. Also the Echo should print an apology, although that wouldn't negate the fact that a lot of damage would already have been done to his repuation and busness. BournemouthMum
  • Score: 7

9:28pm Fri 14 Feb 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Would be a decent gesture if the Echo paid the fine and costs in lieu of biased repoting
Would be a decent gesture if the Echo paid the fine and costs in lieu of biased repoting kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 2

9:53pm Fri 14 Feb 14

StaceyWR says...

I used John Paine for my wedding 2 years ago and would just like to say that our pictures and album are amazing and everyone who has seen it comments on how fantastic it is. Our album was designed and provided to us for approval promptly and completely met all our expectations and more.

Not only that John was lovely to everyone on the day and even did a speech before he left to say how much he had enjoyed being a part of our day. It saddens me to see him being made out to be a villain in this article and agree there must be more to this story and people shouldn't comment when they don't know the full details. I hope this clearly one sided article doesn't affect Johns longstanding and reputable business.
I used John Paine for my wedding 2 years ago and would just like to say that our pictures and album are amazing and everyone who has seen it comments on how fantastic it is. Our album was designed and provided to us for approval promptly and completely met all our expectations and more. Not only that John was lovely to everyone on the day and even did a speech before he left to say how much he had enjoyed being a part of our day. It saddens me to see him being made out to be a villain in this article and agree there must be more to this story and people shouldn't comment when they don't know the full details. I hope this clearly one sided article doesn't affect Johns longstanding and reputable business. StaceyWR
  • Score: 15

10:15pm Fri 14 Feb 14

HRH of Boscombe says...

fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong?
.
If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos!
.
Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words.
.
You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard!
[quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE.[/p][/quote]John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong? . If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos! . Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words. . You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard! HRH of Boscombe
  • Score: -26

10:20pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Louloued77 says...

John photographed my wedding 4 years ago and I cannot speak more highly of him, he took the most amazing photos of my day and designed the most beautiful wedding album for us. I am really sad to see this couple and their friends write such vile and horrible things about a truly nice man and an amazing photographer, shame on you!
John photographed my wedding 4 years ago and I cannot speak more highly of him, he took the most amazing photos of my day and designed the most beautiful wedding album for us. I am really sad to see this couple and their friends write such vile and horrible things about a truly nice man and an amazing photographer, shame on you! Louloued77
  • Score: 10

11:23pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

HRH of Boscombe wrote:
fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong?
.
If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos!
.
Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words.
.
You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard!
If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.
[quote][p][bold]HRH of Boscombe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE.[/p][/quote]John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong? . If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos! . Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words. . You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard![/p][/quote]If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 3

11:26pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
HRH of Boscombe wrote:
fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong?
.
If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos!
.
Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words.
.
You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard!
If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.
Hi hrh. I do know how to spell our family name.It is PAINE. It would be nice if the echo and the hanley family knew how to spell it too. Thanks for being so attentive Twerp. Yours Mrs PAINE !
[quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HRH of Boscombe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE.[/p][/quote]John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong? . If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos! . Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words. . You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard![/p][/quote]If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.[/p][/quote]Hi hrh. I do know how to spell our family name.It is PAINE. It would be nice if the echo and the hanley family knew how to spell it too. Thanks for being so attentive Twerp. Yours Mrs PAINE ! fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 6

11:29pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
HRH of Boscombe wrote:
fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong?
.
If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos!
.
Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words.
.
You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard!
If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.
Hi hrh. I do know how to spell our family name.It is PAINE. It would be nice if the echo and the hanley family knew how to spell it too. Thanks for being so attentive Twerp. Yours Mrs PAINE !
PS our own website spells the family name correctly too. ........Sorry !... Oh thats ok ......I forgive you for making this mistake.....
[quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HRH of Boscombe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE.[/p][/quote]John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong? . If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos! . Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words. . You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard![/p][/quote]If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.[/p][/quote]Hi hrh. I do know how to spell our family name.It is PAINE. It would be nice if the echo and the hanley family knew how to spell it too. Thanks for being so attentive Twerp. Yours Mrs PAINE ![/p][/quote]PS our own website spells the family name correctly too. ........Sorry !... Oh thats ok ......I forgive you for making this mistake..... fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 3

11:32pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

StaceyWR wrote:
I used John Paine for my wedding 2 years ago and would just like to say that our pictures and album are amazing and everyone who has seen it comments on how fantastic it is. Our album was designed and provided to us for approval promptly and completely met all our expectations and more.

Not only that John was lovely to everyone on the day and even did a speech before he left to say how much he had enjoyed being a part of our day. It saddens me to see him being made out to be a villain in this article and agree there must be more to this story and people shouldn't comment when they don't know the full details. I hope this clearly one sided article doesn't affect Johns longstanding and reputable business.
Hi Stacey. Thanks for your kind message. I can't tell you the details on here but it's nice to know our genuine couples are happy with what we do. Love to you both , J and L... xxx
[quote][p][bold]StaceyWR[/bold] wrote: I used John Paine for my wedding 2 years ago and would just like to say that our pictures and album are amazing and everyone who has seen it comments on how fantastic it is. Our album was designed and provided to us for approval promptly and completely met all our expectations and more. Not only that John was lovely to everyone on the day and even did a speech before he left to say how much he had enjoyed being a part of our day. It saddens me to see him being made out to be a villain in this article and agree there must be more to this story and people shouldn't comment when they don't know the full details. I hope this clearly one sided article doesn't affect Johns longstanding and reputable business.[/p][/quote]Hi Stacey. Thanks for your kind message. I can't tell you the details on here but it's nice to know our genuine couples are happy with what we do. Love to you both , J and L... xxx fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 3

11:39pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

Louloued77 wrote:
John photographed my wedding 4 years ago and I cannot speak more highly of him, he took the most amazing photos of my day and designed the most beautiful wedding album for us. I am really sad to see this couple and their friends write such vile and horrible things about a truly nice man and an amazing photographer, shame on you!
Hi Lou, thanks for your lovely comments, as I said to Stacey, it's nice to hear from our clients and we really appreciate your support. You know how much John loves what he does but got caught with real trouble here with a couple who are trying to line their pockets and cause as much trouble as they can. John and I know we did everything as promised for them, as we always do., Love to you all, L...xxx
[quote][p][bold]Louloued77[/bold] wrote: John photographed my wedding 4 years ago and I cannot speak more highly of him, he took the most amazing photos of my day and designed the most beautiful wedding album for us. I am really sad to see this couple and their friends write such vile and horrible things about a truly nice man and an amazing photographer, shame on you![/p][/quote]Hi Lou, thanks for your lovely comments, as I said to Stacey, it's nice to hear from our clients and we really appreciate your support. You know how much John loves what he does but got caught with real trouble here with a couple who are trying to line their pockets and cause as much trouble as they can. John and I know we did everything as promised for them, as we always do., Love to you all, L...xxx fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 2

11:47pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

BournemouthMum wrote:
I believe John Paine. This couple seem very vindictive and spiteful and seem to be hellbent on ruining this poor guy's business. Also the Echo should print an apology, although that wouldn't negate the fact that a lot of damage would already have been done to his repuation and busness.
Thank you Bournemouth Mum. Not sure who you are but its nice to know not all are hellbent as you say in spiteful comments. John has an appeal hearing in March and this should show that he has done everything by the book but in the meantime will have to weather the storm. Have you seen their album designs on the website at special occasions homepage? Look forward to some feedback. Thanks again .. Mrs P
[quote][p][bold]BournemouthMum[/bold] wrote: I believe John Paine. This couple seem very vindictive and spiteful and seem to be hellbent on ruining this poor guy's business. Also the Echo should print an apology, although that wouldn't negate the fact that a lot of damage would already have been done to his repuation and busness.[/p][/quote]Thank you Bournemouth Mum. Not sure who you are but its nice to know not all are hellbent as you say in spiteful comments. John has an appeal hearing in March and this should show that he has done everything by the book but in the meantime will have to weather the storm. Have you seen their album designs on the website at special occasions homepage? Look forward to some feedback. Thanks again .. Mrs P fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 3

11:55pm Fri 14 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

kalebmoledirt wrote:
fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
topofall wrote:
Very odd this as all the photos are on line in Albums so they are not lost and the Special Occassions Weddings website has the links to them! What seems to be missing is the physical albums in the couples hands. Why? Very odd!
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
John Paine,I was one of your critics .I,m sorry .shame you took so long to publish you side of the story.Would have saved a lot of embarrassment.If the Echo had not chosen to use you as news worthy villain.Once again I apologise
Hi kalebmoledirt, Thanks for your apology... It is very much accepted of course. It is really difficult when you only hear one side of a story and of course the echo get in on the act !!!!!!!! and still get the facts wrong. John did not refuse to comment, in fact he told the reporter that as this is an on going court case he was unable to go in to detail and as the appeal was set for March , they would have to wait until then . Not quite what was said in the echo !!! what a surprise. Thanks again and take a look at the couple's album designs on special occasions homepage, would love to hear your feedback compared to other happy clients album designs , also available to see on website. Thanks again Mrs P
[quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]topofall[/bold] wrote: Very odd this as all the photos are on line in Albums so they are not lost and the Special Occassions Weddings website has the links to them! What seems to be missing is the physical albums in the couples hands. Why? Very odd![/p][/quote]OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE.[/p][/quote]John Paine,I was one of your critics .I,m sorry .shame you took so long to publish you side of the story.Would have saved a lot of embarrassment.If the Echo had not chosen to use you as news worthy villain.Once again I apologise[/p][/quote]Hi kalebmoledirt, Thanks for your apology... It is very much accepted of course. It is really difficult when you only hear one side of a story and of course the echo get in on the act !!!!!!!! and still get the facts wrong. John did not refuse to comment, in fact he told the reporter that as this is an on going court case he was unable to go in to detail and as the appeal was set for March , they would have to wait until then . Not quite what was said in the echo !!! what a surprise. Thanks again and take a look at the couple's album designs on special occasions homepage, would love to hear your feedback compared to other happy clients album designs , also available to see on website. Thanks again Mrs P fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 4

11:57pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Yankee1 says...

So go back to the Court and have him arrested for Contempt of a Court Order. He will be in jail until he pays up.
So go back to the Court and have him arrested for Contempt of a Court Order. He will be in jail until he pays up. Yankee1
  • Score: 0

12:00am Sat 15 Feb 14

Yankee1 says...

BournemouthMum wrote:
we-shall-see wrote:
The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford"

I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point?

Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish.

I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o(
As a web designer I have bult lots of websites for these charletons who claim to be photographers when they haven't a clue or have never taken courses on it. I can always tell by the photos they give me to put on their sites. They buy an expensive camera get a website and think they know it all and then when somethinig goes wrong they haven't a clue how to put ithings right.

Photographers should be licensed.
If they photograph children, they should be CRB'd.
[quote][p][bold]BournemouthMum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford" I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point? Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish. I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o([/p][/quote]As a web designer I have bult lots of websites for these charletons who claim to be photographers when they haven't a clue or have never taken courses on it. I can always tell by the photos they give me to put on their sites. They buy an expensive camera get a website and think they know it all and then when somethinig goes wrong they haven't a clue how to put ithings right. Photographers should be licensed.[/p][/quote]If they photograph children, they should be CRB'd. Yankee1
  • Score: -4

12:04am Sat 15 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

Yankee1 wrote:
BournemouthMum wrote:
we-shall-see wrote:
The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford"

I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point?

Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish.

I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o(
As a web designer I have bult lots of websites for these charletons who claim to be photographers when they haven't a clue or have never taken courses on it. I can always tell by the photos they give me to put on their sites. They buy an expensive camera get a website and think they know it all and then when somethinig goes wrong they haven't a clue how to put ithings right.

Photographers should be licensed.
If they photograph children, they should be CRB'd.
Not relevant. Silly Boy
[quote][p][bold]Yankee1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BournemouthMum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: The problem here is if you look around on social media there are "professional" photographers everywhere. It seems every man and his dog who has a digital camera is offering wedding or child portrait photography "at a price you can afford" I wonder if this is a similar case in which some bloke with a camera goes around getting bookings and then either the pics turn out badly or he's simply lost or deleted them at some point? Certainly the man is a crook by the sound of it, but to withhold the photos (assuming he still has them and I personally doubt it) after being ordered by the courts to hand them over, is just plain selfish. I feel sorry for the couple, but if they have gone to some fly-by-night photographer, I doubt they could expect anything else really. You get what you pay for in the end :o([/p][/quote]As a web designer I have bult lots of websites for these charletons who claim to be photographers when they haven't a clue or have never taken courses on it. I can always tell by the photos they give me to put on their sites. They buy an expensive camera get a website and think they know it all and then when somethinig goes wrong they haven't a clue how to put ithings right. Photographers should be licensed.[/p][/quote]If they photograph children, they should be CRB'd.[/p][/quote]Not relevant. Silly Boy fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 1

12:41am Sat 15 Feb 14

scrumpyjack says...

hamworthygirl wrote:
Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.
I'd have gone for memories as being the most important part of the day. But maybe that's just me.
[quote][p][bold]hamworthygirl[/bold] wrote: Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.[/p][/quote]I'd have gone for memories as being the most important part of the day. But maybe that's just me. scrumpyjack
  • Score: 0

7:38am Sat 15 Feb 14

Oakdale12 says...

fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
Well said !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE.[/p][/quote]Well said !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!! Oakdale12
  • Score: 3

7:47am Sat 15 Feb 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

PooleHallRichard wrote:
Weve now heard both sides of the story and to be honest it sounds like John Paine has ripped this couple off big time.
He took their money which they handed over in good faith then could not produce the wedding album Mr & Mrs Hanley had requested,therefore he has breached the contract and should reimburse them in full.
The fact that the couple have paid him his expenses for the day shows they are a fine upstanding couple who both seem very genuine.
Do the right thing Paine and pay this young couple their money back and give them their photographic disk.
You have made yourself look extremely foolish by not reading all the relevant posts and by jumping to a conclusion.
[quote][p][bold]PooleHallRichard[/bold] wrote: Weve now heard both sides of the story and to be honest it sounds like John Paine has ripped this couple off big time. He took their money which they handed over in good faith then could not produce the wedding album Mr & Mrs Hanley had requested,therefore he has breached the contract and should reimburse them in full. The fact that the couple have paid him his expenses for the day shows they are a fine upstanding couple who both seem very genuine. Do the right thing Paine and pay this young couple their money back and give them their photographic disk.[/p][/quote]You have made yourself look extremely foolish by not reading all the relevant posts and by jumping to a conclusion. Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: 0

8:20am Sat 15 Feb 14

nosuchluck54 says...

Letcommonsenseprevai
l
wrote:
PooleHallRichard wrote:
Weve now heard both sides of the story and to be honest it sounds like John Paine has ripped this couple off big time.
He took their money which they handed over in good faith then could not produce the wedding album Mr & Mrs Hanley had requested,therefore he has breached the contract and should reimburse them in full.
The fact that the couple have paid him his expenses for the day shows they are a fine upstanding couple who both seem very genuine.
Do the right thing Paine and pay this young couple their money back and give them their photographic disk.
You have made yourself look extremely foolish by not reading all the relevant posts and by jumping to a conclusion.
Even more worrying is that there are so many people who continue to believe every word that's printed in newspapers,are they really that naïve? surely not
[quote][p][bold]Letcommonsenseprevai l[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PooleHallRichard[/bold] wrote: Weve now heard both sides of the story and to be honest it sounds like John Paine has ripped this couple off big time. He took their money which they handed over in good faith then could not produce the wedding album Mr & Mrs Hanley had requested,therefore he has breached the contract and should reimburse them in full. The fact that the couple have paid him his expenses for the day shows they are a fine upstanding couple who both seem very genuine. Do the right thing Paine and pay this young couple their money back and give them their photographic disk.[/p][/quote]You have made yourself look extremely foolish by not reading all the relevant posts and by jumping to a conclusion.[/p][/quote]Even more worrying is that there are so many people who continue to believe every word that's printed in newspapers,are they really that naïve? surely not nosuchluck54
  • Score: 7

8:56am Sat 15 Feb 14

bournemouthbride says...

I've had bad bad dealings with special occasions and hear their name come up on a number of occasions by people who have gone to look at wedding dresses at how rude their staff our and how unprofessional. I certainly wouldn't use them for my wedding for a dress or for photography.
They are in a perfect lucrative location but their reputation is not a great one. They need to start thinking of who is paying their wages....the customer,so start treating people with some respect.
I've had bad bad dealings with special occasions and hear their name come up on a number of occasions by people who have gone to look at wedding dresses at how rude their staff our and how unprofessional. I certainly wouldn't use them for my wedding for a dress or for photography. They are in a perfect lucrative location but their reputation is not a great one. They need to start thinking of who is paying their wages....the customer,so start treating people with some respect. bournemouthbride
  • Score: -8

10:27am Sat 15 Feb 14

ragj195 says...

Basically anyone who believes anything this websites publishes is an idiot. The only occupation that you should have to register for is journalism because it's pretty clear that any numpty can write stories for this website.

Both sides should quit airing their laundry in public, do the decent thing and put a sock in it.
Basically anyone who believes anything this websites publishes is an idiot. The only occupation that you should have to register for is journalism because it's pretty clear that any numpty can write stories for this website. Both sides should quit airing their laundry in public, do the decent thing and put a sock in it. ragj195
  • Score: 12

1:27pm Sat 15 Feb 14

myopinion1 says...

UUUmmm, I was also a guest at this wedding, the photographer as far as I am concerned did an amazing job, he had us all in fits of laughter most of the day, he seemed very pleasant to me and heard no-one complain about him in any way at all, in fact everyone I spoke to seemed very complimentary of his approach to the whole day, don't think he finished until midnight, it is strange how two faced people can get. The photos he took are really good so not sure what they mean he left the lens cap on the front of his camera was all about !! I've seen every image, and they looked good to me.
To go a step further I thought the wedding album he put together really showed off the day as it happened, can't see why the couple didn't like it. So before anyone comments about him loosing the images maybe you should look on his home page where there is a link which will take you to both the albums he put together with all the images they presumably wanted, I would have thought the couple were spoilt for choice. Not sure what has gone wrong here at all. I cannot say any more than that, I thought he was great on the day. It will be interesting to see what he has to appeal about, he must have something, why don't you tell us.
UUUmmm, I was also a guest at this wedding, the photographer as far as I am concerned did an amazing job, he had us all in fits of laughter most of the day, he seemed very pleasant to me and heard no-one complain about him in any way at all, in fact everyone I spoke to seemed very complimentary of his approach to the whole day, don't think he finished until midnight, it is strange how two faced people can get. The photos he took are really good so not sure what they mean he left the lens cap on the front of his camera was all about !! I've seen every image, and they looked good to me. To go a step further I thought the wedding album he put together really showed off the day as it happened, can't see why the couple didn't like it. So before anyone comments about him loosing the images maybe you should look on his home page where there is a link which will take you to both the albums he put together with all the images they presumably wanted, I would have thought the couple were spoilt for choice. Not sure what has gone wrong here at all. I cannot say any more than that, I thought he was great on the day. It will be interesting to see what he has to appeal about, he must have something, why don't you tell us. myopinion1
  • Score: 15

1:29pm Sat 15 Feb 14

alasdair1967 says...

Seems both party's need to grow up and sit down and sort this issue out once and for all
Seems both party's need to grow up and sit down and sort this issue out once and for all alasdair1967
  • Score: 2

1:33pm Sat 15 Feb 14

retry69 says...

alasdair1967 wrote:
Seems both party's need to grow up and sit down and sort this issue out once and for all
It's good to see friends of both parties suddenly rally round when needed lol
[quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: Seems both party's need to grow up and sit down and sort this issue out once and for all[/p][/quote]It's good to see friends of both parties suddenly rally round when needed lol retry69
  • Score: 2

8:58pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Claireyk says...

I was one of the bridesmaid's and my daughter was their flower girl at Mr and Mrs Hanley's wedding, its sad to see the couple still after this times have no wedding photos professionally taken for them to enjoy and remember their day. Its also sad to not have many of my daughter that was taken for their special day as the bride is her godmother and was very proud of her. Its sad to think you put your trust in a person to take memorable photos of your big day, one thing you plan for and one less thing to worry about for the big day and then this happens! Its disgusting after all this time. I would be fuming too if this was my big day and paid a lot of money and still have nothing for it 18 months later and JOHN has ALL the photos that were taken and the happy couple have received NONE. I also would like to point out clearly MYOPINION1 clearly WASNT a guest!!
I was one of the bridesmaid's and my daughter was their flower girl at Mr and Mrs Hanley's wedding, its sad to see the couple still after this times have no wedding photos professionally taken for them to enjoy and remember their day. Its also sad to not have many of my daughter that was taken for their special day as the bride is her godmother and was very proud of her. Its sad to think you put your trust in a person to take memorable photos of your big day, one thing you plan for and one less thing to worry about for the big day and then this happens! Its disgusting after all this time. I would be fuming too if this was my big day and paid a lot of money and still have nothing for it 18 months later and JOHN has ALL the photos that were taken and the happy couple have received NONE. I also would like to point out clearly MYOPINION1 clearly WASNT a guest!! Claireyk
  • Score: -2

9:03pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Claireyk says...

nosuchluck54 wrote:
Letcommonsenseprevai

l
wrote:
PooleHallRichard wrote:
Weve now heard both sides of the story and to be honest it sounds like John Paine has ripped this couple off big time.
He took their money which they handed over in good faith then could not produce the wedding album Mr & Mrs Hanley had requested,therefore he has breached the contract and should reimburse them in full.
The fact that the couple have paid him his expenses for the day shows they are a fine upstanding couple who both seem very genuine.
Do the right thing Paine and pay this young couple their money back and give them their photographic disk.
You have made yourself look extremely foolish by not reading all the relevant posts and by jumping to a conclusion.
Even more worrying is that there are so many people who continue to believe every word that's printed in newspapers,are they really that naïve? surely not
If you knew the truth, you would find this offensive to the couple who have had this done to them!
[quote][p][bold]nosuchluck54[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Letcommonsenseprevai l[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PooleHallRichard[/bold] wrote: Weve now heard both sides of the story and to be honest it sounds like John Paine has ripped this couple off big time. He took their money which they handed over in good faith then could not produce the wedding album Mr & Mrs Hanley had requested,therefore he has breached the contract and should reimburse them in full. The fact that the couple have paid him his expenses for the day shows they are a fine upstanding couple who both seem very genuine. Do the right thing Paine and pay this young couple their money back and give them their photographic disk.[/p][/quote]You have made yourself look extremely foolish by not reading all the relevant posts and by jumping to a conclusion.[/p][/quote]Even more worrying is that there are so many people who continue to believe every word that's printed in newspapers,are they really that naïve? surely not[/p][/quote]If you knew the truth, you would find this offensive to the couple who have had this done to them! Claireyk
  • Score: -3

9:37pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Eddie2 says...

As a Pro freelance photographer, I would be happy to help, free of charge for one full day of photography of their choice. I'm based in Poole and this will include all edited images on disc within a week. I'm more than happy to discuss this proposition as I know how important it is to deliver images from your special day. Wedding references are available. Paul Yates Photography 07712578880.
As a Pro freelance photographer, I would be happy to help, free of charge for one full day of photography of their choice. I'm based in Poole and this will include all edited images on disc within a week. I'm more than happy to discuss this proposition as I know how important it is to deliver images from your special day. Wedding references are available. Paul Yates Photography 07712578880. Eddie2
  • Score: -4

8:04am Sun 16 Feb 14

retry69 says...

scrumpyjack wrote:
hamworthygirl wrote:
Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.
I'd have gone for memories as being the most important part of the day. But maybe that's just me.
A beautiful sunny Sunday morning and so heartwarming to read that out of all the insults flying around a comment showing the softer side to one of our most hardened commenters,it makes one feel glad to be alive,I feel a tear coming on :)
[quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hamworthygirl[/bold] wrote: Very upsetting for the couple photos are the most important part of the day. The law needs to be upheld and he should be made to do what the courts said. I understand why they have gone to the echo so people wont be taken in by this crook.[/p][/quote]I'd have gone for memories as being the most important part of the day. But maybe that's just me.[/p][/quote]A beautiful sunny Sunday morning and so heartwarming to read that out of all the insults flying around a comment showing the softer side to one of our most hardened commenters,it makes one feel glad to be alive,I feel a tear coming on :) retry69
  • Score: 7

9:35am Sun 16 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

Claireyk wrote:
I was one of the bridesmaid's and my daughter was their flower girl at Mr and Mrs Hanley's wedding, its sad to see the couple still after this times have no wedding photos professionally taken for them to enjoy and remember their day. Its also sad to not have many of my daughter that was taken for their special day as the bride is her godmother and was very proud of her. Its sad to think you put your trust in a person to take memorable photos of your big day, one thing you plan for and one less thing to worry about for the big day and then this happens! Its disgusting after all this time. I would be fuming too if this was my big day and paid a lot of money and still have nothing for it 18 months later and JOHN has ALL the photos that were taken and the happy couple have received NONE. I also would like to point out clearly MYOPINION1 clearly WASNT a guest!!
I just thought I would take a quick look at some of the latest comments, I don't want to be branded an internet troll but I just thought I would mention to you that I have all the photos, if you would like to have any printed all you have to do is get in touch with me and I'll gladly print them for you, you may find it hard to believe but thats what photographers do, they photograph, then sell prints, but you have to ask for them, oh on less of course you wanted them for free.
Any images I have of you or your daughter as a flower girl I will be happy to send to you, then you can print bad copies of them on your own printer, if that is what you want just let me know and I'll send them to you absolutely free.

The photos in question can be seen on my website, simply go to my homepage, just click on the hanley link which shows both the completed albums, let me know which photos you would like me to send you in jpeg form, although I doubt very much if you will do it.

John Paine
[quote][p][bold]Claireyk[/bold] wrote: I was one of the bridesmaid's and my daughter was their flower girl at Mr and Mrs Hanley's wedding, its sad to see the couple still after this times have no wedding photos professionally taken for them to enjoy and remember their day. Its also sad to not have many of my daughter that was taken for their special day as the bride is her godmother and was very proud of her. Its sad to think you put your trust in a person to take memorable photos of your big day, one thing you plan for and one less thing to worry about for the big day and then this happens! Its disgusting after all this time. I would be fuming too if this was my big day and paid a lot of money and still have nothing for it 18 months later and JOHN has ALL the photos that were taken and the happy couple have received NONE. I also would like to point out clearly MYOPINION1 clearly WASNT a guest!![/p][/quote]I just thought I would take a quick look at some of the latest comments, I don't want to be branded an internet troll but I just thought I would mention to you that I have all the photos, if you would like to have any printed all you have to do is get in touch with me and I'll gladly print them for you, you may find it hard to believe but thats what photographers do, they photograph, then sell prints, but you have to ask for them, oh on less of course you wanted them for free. Any images I have of you or your daughter as a flower girl I will be happy to send to you, then you can print bad copies of them on your own printer, if that is what you want just let me know and I'll send them to you absolutely free. The photos in question can be seen on my website, simply go to my homepage, just click on the hanley link which shows both the completed albums, let me know which photos you would like me to send you in jpeg form, although I doubt very much if you will do it. John Paine fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 7

12:03pm Sun 16 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

Thanks LordLilliput,i am always wary of those offering to help,by giving themselves FREE publicity,and going against one of their own profession.The detailed attack on me,seems to confirm my suspicions.
Thanks LordLilliput,i am always wary of those offering to help,by giving themselves FREE publicity,and going against one of their own profession.The detailed attack on me,seems to confirm my suspicions. pete woodley
  • Score: 0

12:05pm Sun 16 Feb 14

Glashen says...

Interesting, first before anyone else comments I would suggest you look at John Paine's website http://www.specialoc
casionsweddings.co.u
k/home.htm and look at the two albums he produced for the couple they certainly disprove comments like "he probably left the lens cap on" , having spent most of my life dealing with the public I would have to say to John Paine if things get to this stage you've got it wrong, not that I think Bianca and Chris have been proven to be in the right, unless you think the Echo and a small claims court are infallible.

There is a reason Gordon Selfridge said the customer is always right, though I'm sure he didn't believe it. Sometimes you just have to except customers appear impossible to satisfy and hope to never come across similar ones again.

Also as you no doubt now realise by replying " no comment" to the Echo you made your self open season for the "informed" commenters on here.
Interesting, first before anyone else comments I would suggest you look at John Paine's website http://www.specialoc casionsweddings.co.u k/home.htm and look at the two albums he produced for the couple they certainly disprove comments like "he probably left the lens cap on" , having spent most of my life dealing with the public I would have to say to John Paine if things get to this stage you've got it wrong, not that I think Bianca and Chris have been proven to be in the right, unless you think the Echo and a small claims court are infallible. There is a reason Gordon Selfridge said the customer is always right, though I'm sure he didn't believe it. Sometimes you just have to except customers appear impossible to satisfy and hope to never come across similar ones again. Also as you no doubt now realise by replying " no comment" to the Echo you made your self open season for the "informed" commenters on here. Glashen
  • Score: 7

12:18pm Sun 16 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

Glashen wrote:
Interesting, first before anyone else comments I would suggest you look at John Paine's website http://www.specialoc

casionsweddings.co.u

k/home.htm and look at the two albums he produced for the couple they certainly disprove comments like "he probably left the lens cap on" , having spent most of my life dealing with the public I would have to say to John Paine if things get to this stage you've got it wrong, not that I think Bianca and Chris have been proven to be in the right, unless you think the Echo and a small claims court are infallible.

There is a reason Gordon Selfridge said the customer is always right, though I'm sure he didn't believe it. Sometimes you just have to except customers appear impossible to satisfy and hope to never come across similar ones again.

Also as you no doubt now realise by replying " no comment" to the Echo you made your self open season for the "informed" commenters on here.
Thanks for your comments Glashen, interesting thoughts, trouble was that I did comment to the echo, but guest what, they didn't print it !!

I am going to sign off now and not come back to the comments page again, the only reason I decided to make any comment was because I got so many calls from people that I should explain myself, which I have done.
I would like to wish to all the trolls, happy trolling but I'm out of here now for good.

John
[quote][p][bold]Glashen[/bold] wrote: Interesting, first before anyone else comments I would suggest you look at John Paine's website http://www.specialoc casionsweddings.co.u k/home.htm and look at the two albums he produced for the couple they certainly disprove comments like "he probably left the lens cap on" , having spent most of my life dealing with the public I would have to say to John Paine if things get to this stage you've got it wrong, not that I think Bianca and Chris have been proven to be in the right, unless you think the Echo and a small claims court are infallible. There is a reason Gordon Selfridge said the customer is always right, though I'm sure he didn't believe it. Sometimes you just have to except customers appear impossible to satisfy and hope to never come across similar ones again. Also as you no doubt now realise by replying " no comment" to the Echo you made your self open season for the "informed" commenters on here.[/p][/quote]Thanks for your comments Glashen, interesting thoughts, trouble was that I did comment to the echo, but guest what, they didn't print it !! I am going to sign off now and not come back to the comments page again, the only reason I decided to make any comment was because I got so many calls from people that I should explain myself, which I have done. I would like to wish to all the trolls, happy trolling but I'm out of here now for good. John fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 12

12:28pm Sun 16 Feb 14

Glashen says...

fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
Glashen wrote:
Interesting, first before anyone else comments I would suggest you look at John Paine's website http://www.specialoc


casionsweddings.co.u


k/home.htm and look at the two albums he produced for the couple they certainly disprove comments like "he probably left the lens cap on" , having spent most of my life dealing with the public I would have to say to John Paine if things get to this stage you've got it wrong, not that I think Bianca and Chris have been proven to be in the right, unless you think the Echo and a small claims court are infallible.

There is a reason Gordon Selfridge said the customer is always right, though I'm sure he didn't believe it. Sometimes you just have to except customers appear impossible to satisfy and hope to never come across similar ones again.

Also as you no doubt now realise by replying " no comment" to the Echo you made your self open season for the "informed" commenters on here.
Thanks for your comments Glashen, interesting thoughts, trouble was that I did comment to the echo, but guest what, they didn't print it !!

I am going to sign off now and not come back to the comments page again, the only reason I decided to make any comment was because I got so many calls from people that I should explain myself, which I have done.
I would like to wish to all the trolls, happy trolling but I'm out of here now for good.

John
In that case I think you have every right to insist that the Echo print a correction.

My point which I'm sure John has got is that Gordon Selfridge's statement that the customers is always right was because he knew the value of good reputation and that was when he only had word of mouth to contend with the power of social media it is 50 times worse.
[quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Glashen[/bold] wrote: Interesting, first before anyone else comments I would suggest you look at John Paine's website http://www.specialoc casionsweddings.co.u k/home.htm and look at the two albums he produced for the couple they certainly disprove comments like "he probably left the lens cap on" , having spent most of my life dealing with the public I would have to say to John Paine if things get to this stage you've got it wrong, not that I think Bianca and Chris have been proven to be in the right, unless you think the Echo and a small claims court are infallible. There is a reason Gordon Selfridge said the customer is always right, though I'm sure he didn't believe it. Sometimes you just have to except customers appear impossible to satisfy and hope to never come across similar ones again. Also as you no doubt now realise by replying " no comment" to the Echo you made your self open season for the "informed" commenters on here.[/p][/quote]Thanks for your comments Glashen, interesting thoughts, trouble was that I did comment to the echo, but guest what, they didn't print it !! I am going to sign off now and not come back to the comments page again, the only reason I decided to make any comment was because I got so many calls from people that I should explain myself, which I have done. I would like to wish to all the trolls, happy trolling but I'm out of here now for good. John[/p][/quote]In that case I think you have every right to insist that the Echo print a correction. My point which I'm sure John has got is that Gordon Selfridge's statement that the customers is always right was because he knew the value of good reputation and that was when he only had word of mouth to contend with the power of social media it is 50 times worse. Glashen
  • Score: 11

3:33pm Sun 16 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

What an evil man.who would employ him.
What an evil man.who would employ him. pete woodley
  • Score: -14

6:07pm Sun 16 Feb 14

HRH of Boscombe says...

fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
HRH of Boscombe wrote:
fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong?
.
If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos!
.
Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words.
.
You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard!
If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.
Hi hrh. I do know how to spell our family name.It is PAINE. It would be nice if the echo and the hanley family knew how to spell it too. Thanks for being so attentive Twerp. Yours Mrs PAINE !
Looks like your husband can only copy and paste from steveobath's comment lol. No wonder he has more than angry customers.
.
BTW if he gave your husband money for a drink on the wedding day then that was before he knew he was a monster.
.
Just pay up and stop being such a PAINE in the ****
[quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HRH of Boscombe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE.[/p][/quote]John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong? . If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos! . Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words. . You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard![/p][/quote]If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.[/p][/quote]Hi hrh. I do know how to spell our family name.It is PAINE. It would be nice if the echo and the hanley family knew how to spell it too. Thanks for being so attentive Twerp. Yours Mrs PAINE ![/p][/quote]Looks like your husband can only copy and paste from steveobath's comment lol. No wonder he has more than angry customers. . BTW if he gave your husband money for a drink on the wedding day then that was before he knew he was a monster. . Just pay up and stop being such a PAINE in the **** HRH of Boscombe
  • Score: -26

6:34pm Sun 16 Feb 14

BournemouthMum says...

HRH of Boscombe wrote:
fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
HRH of Boscombe wrote:
fromthehorsesmouth wrote:
OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine.

We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different.
Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March.

FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT.

SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing….

A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly.

JOHN PAINE.
John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong?
.
If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos!
.
Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words.
.
You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard!
If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.
Hi hrh. I do know how to spell our family name.It is PAINE. It would be nice if the echo and the hanley family knew how to spell it too. Thanks for being so attentive Twerp. Yours Mrs PAINE !
Looks like your husband can only copy and paste from steveobath's comment lol. No wonder he has more than angry customers.
.
BTW if he gave your husband money for a drink on the wedding day then that was before he knew he was a monster.
.
Just pay up and stop being such a PAINE in the ****
Do you know the people in question? Or are you basing your opinion purely on what the Echo has reported?

From what I've seen (the photos on the website look A1) and read, it seems like the couple obviously aren't satisfied with what they got and are out to ruin this poor guy. I get people like that all the time, they ask for something on their website then when I do it they complain it wasn't what they wanted. I just give them a refund and tell them to go elsewhere as I can't be a"sed with people like that.

Unfortunately in this case, the Echo has stepped in and helped them achieve what their goal - damaging his reputation. That's how it seems to me anyway.
[quote][p][bold]HRH of Boscombe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HRH of Boscombe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fromthehorsesmouth[/bold] wrote: OK THIS IS FROM THR HORSES MOUTH….Yes it's John Paine. We photographed a great wedding for the Hanley family, the photos were ready for them to see when they returned from honeymoon, they were happy with the results, I got paid. They order an extra 40 photographs to be put in their GraphiStudio wedding book. I designed the album layout to follow the flow of their wedding day. The layout or design of the wedding book was sent to the Hanley family. The design can be seen from our website, it looked great. Only problem was that the Bride wanted her design to be the same as someone else's wedding, which is obviously impossible to do because every wedding is different. Because the Hanley family did not understand the format in the way these wedding books are, we went to court because they were asking the impossible, unfortunately even the courts got confused. I APPEALED, and now even the Echo has got it wrong because the appeal date is set for March. FOR THE RECORD…The court has ordered that any monies or digital files need NOT to be handed over to the couple until the appeal has been heard in March….FACT. SO…..Before anyone who knows nothing about the job wedding photographers do and knows nothing about this one sided case, just think before you write comments about something you know nothing about, after-all surely it is unreasonable for any bride to even think that her wedding book could be made the same as another wedding and who would want that anyway. It's a shame that people have nothing better to do but to write crap without saying it to my face…..It's also a shame that the Echo can't even get their facts right before printing…. A MESSAGE TO THE ECHO…..Get your facts right before you print one-sided stories or at least look at both sides of the coin…..THE APPEAL IS IN MARCH, get your facts right after all you can't even spell my name correctly. JOHN PAINE.[/p][/quote]John PAINE? The article and website says John Payne! Are you one of these twerps who thinks it's somehow cool to spell your name wrong? . If you can't even get your own name right then no wonder you couldn't even take a few photos! . Pay these good people back what you owe them and the do something more simple for a living than pictures and 5 letter words. . You're a disgrace and I hope karma comes back to bite you hard![/p][/quote]If I was such a monster, how come the bride's father gave me £20 and said "treat yourself to a good bottle of wine, you made my daughters day" just as we were about to leave the wedding. If I was such a monster how come on the day they collected their dvd of images to choose their selection from, which they still have, we were invited for a drink with all the family at the local pub and had a great time. Seems to me that there's an agenda here. If you all think I am going to risk a fantastic 20 year reputation for a few £s, I don't think so. But I will risk a reputation for something I know I haven't done, which is why I have an appeal date booked in March. There's more to this story than you know.......I am now going to take my wife out for a slap up meal and tomorrow get on with my life as a qualified professional photographer would do. Unfortunately I do have better things to do than explain myself to people who have not got a clue about the truth regarding this story.[/p][/quote]Hi hrh. I do know how to spell our family name.It is PAINE. It would be nice if the echo and the hanley family knew how to spell it too. Thanks for being so attentive Twerp. Yours Mrs PAINE ![/p][/quote]Looks like your husband can only copy and paste from steveobath's comment lol. No wonder he has more than angry customers. . BTW if he gave your husband money for a drink on the wedding day then that was before he knew he was a monster. . Just pay up and stop being such a PAINE in the ****[/p][/quote]Do you know the people in question? Or are you basing your opinion purely on what the Echo has reported? From what I've seen (the photos on the website look A1) and read, it seems like the couple obviously aren't satisfied with what they got and are out to ruin this poor guy. I get people like that all the time, they ask for something on their website then when I do it they complain it wasn't what they wanted. I just give them a refund and tell them to go elsewhere as I can't be a"sed with people like that. Unfortunately in this case, the Echo has stepped in and helped them achieve what their goal - damaging his reputation. That's how it seems to me anyway. BournemouthMum
  • Score: 25

12:32am Mon 17 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

Bournemouth mum.Have you noticed how now we have "photographers" jumping on the bandwagon,offering free services,and one makes a point that he thinks i am anti gay,i wonder if thats because he was on the royal yacht for years.What that,and his other comments,which were nothing to do with wedding photos,was all about shows i must have hit a sore point.If anyone cares to google him,then they will see why he is trying to get his name known.Its free advertising again with a dig at john paine.
Bournemouth mum.Have you noticed how now we have "photographers" jumping on the bandwagon,offering free services,and one makes a point that he thinks i am anti gay,i wonder if thats because he was on the royal yacht for years.What that,and his other comments,which were nothing to do with wedding photos,was all about shows i must have hit a sore point.If anyone cares to google him,then they will see why he is trying to get his name known.Its free advertising again with a dig at john paine. pete woodley
  • Score: 0

1:27am Mon 17 Feb 14

MrPitiful says...

Wow - it's all going off on here ain't it?

A pity that this can't be sorted between the 2 parties involved in a more amicable and progressive way.

Something along the lines of :

1 - Both parties call a truce - life is too short.
2 - Both parties meet up for a coffee somewhere nice by the beach.
3 - Both parties agree at meeting a mutually acceptable solution such as a "re-do" of the wedding book or whatever. Any cash disputes are also resolved in a similarly adult manner.
4 - Mr photographer produces said wedding book asap and hands it over to Mr & Mrs Not-so-newly-wed who are hopefully happy with it.
5 - They all shake hands, retract all previous accusations about each other and depart to go home and live happily ever after.
6 - Any lawyers, other photographers, echo journalists licking their lips at prospect of another cheap story et al. all huff and puff 'cos it just ain't happening no more.

Or is that all a bit too much to hope for?
Wow - it's all going off on here ain't it? A pity that this can't be sorted between the 2 parties involved in a more amicable and progressive way. Something along the lines of : 1 - Both parties call a truce - life is too short. 2 - Both parties meet up for a coffee somewhere nice by the beach. 3 - Both parties agree at meeting a mutually acceptable solution such as a "re-do" of the wedding book or whatever. Any cash disputes are also resolved in a similarly adult manner. 4 - Mr photographer produces said wedding book asap and hands it over to Mr & Mrs Not-so-newly-wed who are hopefully happy with it. 5 - They all shake hands, retract all previous accusations about each other and depart to go home and live happily ever after. 6 - Any lawyers, other photographers, echo journalists licking their lips at prospect of another cheap story et al. all huff and puff 'cos it just ain't happening no more. Or is that all a bit too much to hope for? MrPitiful
  • Score: 4

8:28am Mon 17 Feb 14

fromthehorsesmouth says...

MrPitiful wrote:
Wow - it's all going off on here ain't it?

A pity that this can't be sorted between the 2 parties involved in a more amicable and progressive way.

Something along the lines of :

1 - Both parties call a truce - life is too short.
2 - Both parties meet up for a coffee somewhere nice by the beach.
3 - Both parties agree at meeting a mutually acceptable solution such as a "re-do" of the wedding book or whatever. Any cash disputes are also resolved in a similarly adult manner.
4 - Mr photographer produces said wedding book asap and hands it over to Mr & Mrs Not-so-newly-wed who are hopefully happy with it.
5 - They all shake hands, retract all previous accusations about each other and depart to go home and live happily ever after.
6 - Any lawyers, other photographers, echo journalists licking their lips at prospect of another cheap story et al. all huff and puff 'cos it just ain't happening no more.

Or is that all a bit too much to hope for?
MrPitfall, Before I go to work today I just had to congratulate you on your comment, it is probably the most sensible one so far and couldn't agree with you more. For the record the whole family met in my office a few days after the design was finished, I just couldn't understand why my client didn't like it, we went through every page but my bride could not tell any of us what exactly she didn't like about it. I invited the bride back to my office so we could go though it together as she claimed she was a very artistic person, something I now doubt as she never kept the appointment, I spent the wasted appointment time to try and come up with a second design which I sent to her, both designs can be seen on my website. The bride admitted in court she never even looked at the second design. What many people don't know is that these albums are made in Italy bu GraphiStudio the best in the world today and cost several hundred pounds to get printed. Therefore it is important that they are proofed first by the customer before they are sent off. If you don't even look at it, a stalemate occurs as it has done in this case. Believe me when I say that I I bent over backwards for my bride as I always have done for them all but for some reason found myself on a loosing battle. I was threatened by the bride literally within hours of sending her the 1st finished design who demanded her money back and all the digital files before going to court and the echo. You could have knocked me over with a feather.

At that point what would anyone else have done if they genuinely knew they had done everything correctly, photographed a great wedding of 500 plus photos, created a fab looking wedding book with 140 images (40 extra she paid for) then get threatened because she didn't like the 1st design, failed to make an appointment to run through the design together to try and establish exactly what she didn't like then and refused to look at the second design.

Would you simply hand everything over and admit guilt and end up in the echo as she threatened or would you fight your corner as I did. Maybe now anyone reading this can see the reason why I have to appeal in March.

I ask anyone to ask themselves that question before writing their comments about what has gone on, and anyone who retaliates after reading this will just be angry family members who just want to stick the knife in as far as possible, just because I am fighting not to simply give away hundreds of photographs so as they can print their own cheap album.

So yes MrPitfall, I did try and sort it out amicable, who wouldn't ? The wedding book was re-done and would loved to have shaken hands and ended with a happy customers. I did my level best and thats why I am fighting.

John Paine.
[quote][p][bold]MrPitiful[/bold] wrote: Wow - it's all going off on here ain't it? A pity that this can't be sorted between the 2 parties involved in a more amicable and progressive way. Something along the lines of : 1 - Both parties call a truce - life is too short. 2 - Both parties meet up for a coffee somewhere nice by the beach. 3 - Both parties agree at meeting a mutually acceptable solution such as a "re-do" of the wedding book or whatever. Any cash disputes are also resolved in a similarly adult manner. 4 - Mr photographer produces said wedding book asap and hands it over to Mr & Mrs Not-so-newly-wed who are hopefully happy with it. 5 - They all shake hands, retract all previous accusations about each other and depart to go home and live happily ever after. 6 - Any lawyers, other photographers, echo journalists licking their lips at prospect of another cheap story et al. all huff and puff 'cos it just ain't happening no more. Or is that all a bit too much to hope for?[/p][/quote]MrPitfall, Before I go to work today I just had to congratulate you on your comment, it is probably the most sensible one so far and couldn't agree with you more. For the record the whole family met in my office a few days after the design was finished, I just couldn't understand why my client didn't like it, we went through every page but my bride could not tell any of us what exactly she didn't like about it. I invited the bride back to my office so we could go though it together as she claimed she was a very artistic person, something I now doubt as she never kept the appointment, I spent the wasted appointment time to try and come up with a second design which I sent to her, both designs can be seen on my website. The bride admitted in court she never even looked at the second design. What many people don't know is that these albums are made in Italy bu GraphiStudio the best in the world today and cost several hundred pounds to get printed. Therefore it is important that they are proofed first by the customer before they are sent off. If you don't even look at it, a stalemate occurs as it has done in this case. Believe me when I say that I I bent over backwards for my bride as I always have done for them all but for some reason found myself on a loosing battle. I was threatened by the bride literally within hours of sending her the 1st finished design who demanded her money back and all the digital files before going to court and the echo. You could have knocked me over with a feather. At that point what would anyone else have done if they genuinely knew they had done everything correctly, photographed a great wedding of 500 plus photos, created a fab looking wedding book with 140 images (40 extra she paid for) then get threatened because she didn't like the 1st design, failed to make an appointment to run through the design together to try and establish exactly what she didn't like then and refused to look at the second design. Would you simply hand everything over and admit guilt and end up in the echo as she threatened or would you fight your corner as I did. Maybe now anyone reading this can see the reason why I have to appeal in March. I ask anyone to ask themselves that question before writing their comments about what has gone on, and anyone who retaliates after reading this will just be angry family members who just want to stick the knife in as far as possible, just because I am fighting not to simply give away hundreds of photographs so as they can print their own cheap album. So yes MrPitfall, I did try and sort it out amicable, who wouldn't ? The wedding book was re-done and would loved to have shaken hands and ended with a happy customers. I did my level best and thats why I am fighting. John Paine. fromthehorsesmouth
  • Score: 17

9:02am Mon 17 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

Good luck to you Mr Paine,i think most of us believe you have done your best,and they wanted money back and the prints.
Good luck to you Mr Paine,i think most of us believe you have done your best,and they wanted money back and the prints. pete woodley
  • Score: 16

3:32pm Tue 18 Feb 14

Arrrrrgh says...

Quite frankly based on my experience you have to take everything the Echo write with a grain of salt.

Pointless attempting to argue for / against either side unless you have no agenda and were there / in the court. Assuming an appeal is coming up, good luck to whichever party is in the right.
Quite frankly based on my experience you have to take everything the Echo write with a grain of salt. Pointless attempting to argue for / against either side unless you have no agenda and were there / in the court. Assuming an appeal is coming up, good luck to whichever party is in the right. Arrrrrgh
  • Score: 5

11:31pm Tue 18 Feb 14

wimbornemum says...

I feel compelled to write in defence of John Paine. He was the wedding photographer at the wedding of my son and daughter in-law last summer.
He was a total professional on the day. The photographs he took were superb. Interestingly the wedding book he put together wasn't what my daughter-in law had in mind (she is very artistic and has very definite opinions of what she likes). I know John had spent hours working on their album but on her request, he completely changed the format of the album. This was a huge amount of extra work for him which he did without complaint. I think it is outrageous that people can make such horrible comments on this site without knowing both sides of the story.
To John Paine. I hope that you win the court appeal in March and if you do the Echo will be honest enough to report it. Somehow I doubt it.
I feel compelled to write in defence of John Paine. He was the wedding photographer at the wedding of my son and daughter in-law last summer. He was a total professional on the day. The photographs he took were superb. Interestingly the wedding book he put together wasn't what my daughter-in law had in mind (she is very artistic and has very definite opinions of what she likes). I know John had spent hours working on their album but on her request, he completely changed the format of the album. This was a huge amount of extra work for him which he did without complaint. I think it is outrageous that people can make such horrible comments on this site without knowing both sides of the story. To John Paine. I hope that you win the court appeal in March and if you do the Echo will be honest enough to report it. Somehow I doubt it. wimbornemum
  • Score: 8

4:17pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Katy_Ann says...

wimbornemum wrote:
I feel compelled to write in defence of John Paine. He was the wedding photographer at the wedding of my son and daughter in-law last summer.
He was a total professional on the day. The photographs he took were superb. Interestingly the wedding book he put together wasn't what my daughter-in law had in mind (she is very artistic and has very definite opinions of what she likes). I know John had spent hours working on their album but on her request, he completely changed the format of the album. This was a huge amount of extra work for him which he did without complaint. I think it is outrageous that people can make such horrible comments on this site without knowing both sides of the story.
To John Paine. I hope that you win the court appeal in March and if you do the Echo will be honest enough to report it. Somehow I doubt it.
I some how doubt he will win when he hasn't got a leg to stand on!
[quote][p][bold]wimbornemum[/bold] wrote: I feel compelled to write in defence of John Paine. He was the wedding photographer at the wedding of my son and daughter in-law last summer. He was a total professional on the day. The photographs he took were superb. Interestingly the wedding book he put together wasn't what my daughter-in law had in mind (she is very artistic and has very definite opinions of what she likes). I know John had spent hours working on their album but on her request, he completely changed the format of the album. This was a huge amount of extra work for him which he did without complaint. I think it is outrageous that people can make such horrible comments on this site without knowing both sides of the story. To John Paine. I hope that you win the court appeal in March and if you do the Echo will be honest enough to report it. Somehow I doubt it.[/p][/quote]I some how doubt he will win when he hasn't got a leg to stand on! Katy_Ann
  • Score: -3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree