Am I guilty of misselling?

[DJ Jules]

I'll keep this short. I've been using the image below on emails to potential clients to sell my services. Usually this is accompanied by a list of what will be provided which includes the phrase "Full professional sound and lighting rig" and another line that offers "Uplighting/Moodlighting" as an additional service.

17768

A couple I DJ'd for on Sat night got a bit confused with the above and thought that "Uplighting" meant the string light canopy in the photo (which is obviously not mine and is permanently installed in the venue).

My missus pointed out that if I haven't been stating that it's not included, then couples could assume that it is (think about the product demonstration photos you see in catalogues where they put "TV not included" against pics of PS4's and the like). I haven't been explicitly stating that the string light canopy is not included in my package - do you think I should? Should I also state that drapes, decorations, flowers and cake are not included? :D

Julian

[yourdj]

Yes i think most will think its included. I used to have a photo with an installed mirrorball, quite clearly screwed into the ceiling and clients used to think that was included. As they have never had anything to do with putting up any lighting equipment, their knowledge is often only limited to what they have seen online TV or in nightclubs, which is usually installed or takes a lot of time to set up. Just a case of a sentence at the bottom saying its not included as thats a lovely photo. :)

Even Ebay listings have (laptop not included) for DJ controllers. Its amazing how many people out there just don't read listings, or assume things that clearly are not included.

[Shakermaker Promotions]

Looking at the photo from a fellow suppliers perspective and also if you hadn't of told us anyway, I would have guessed that you'd not installed the additional lighting and other bits....

But, from a customers perspective, they may think that what they are getting for their money is what is in the photo. I think it's best to cover yourself just in case.

[yourdj]

Make sure you also include the speakers on the wall, the curtains, the cake and of course also the venue. :p

* venue not included

That would look quite funny LOL.

[funkymook]

Where is the uplighting (as we understand it) in that picture?
I think its reasonable that if someone were asked to point out the 'uplighting' they would take it literally that it's the lighting 'up' on the ceiling. We can't assume the public understands the technical or descriptive terms we take for granted.

So as the ceiling lights are the main feature in that photograph I do think it's a misrepresentation.

[CRAZY K]

I'll keep this short. I've been using the image below on emails to potential clients to sell my services. Usually this is accompanied by a list of what will be provided which includes the phrase "Full professional sound and lighting rig" and another line that offers "Uplighting/Moodlighting" as an additional service.

17768

A couple I DJ'd for on Sat night got a bit confused with the above and thought that "Uplighting" meant the string light canopy in the photo (which is obviously not mine and is permanently installed in the venue).

My missus pointed out that if I haven't been stating that it's not included, then couples could assume that it is (think about the product demonstration photos you see in catalogues where they put "TV not included" against pics of PS4's and the like). I haven't been explicitly stating that the string light canopy is not included in my package - do you think I should? Should I also state that drapes, decorations, flowers and cake are not included? :D

Julian

Interesting--I keep telling my son who runs the Rodeo Bull to be careful about showing pictures on his quotes which often include nice Red and Blue uplighting taken when we did a gig with Paul at Paul James Promotions a few years ago.

Yes I think you need to be very careful otherwise you will fall foul of some Advertising Standards legislation or similar I imagine--misrepresentation is the word that springs to mind--so yes get some disclaimers in the quote saying you will only get abcd and not xyz or use another photo.

I am having to be careful as well as my latest videos from Pinewood Studios feature a magnificent white starcloth installation which must be 30 feet by about 15 feet high and makes the whole setting look great---except it wont be with me next time--like your string lights it will still be at the venue.:rolleyes:

I think we have to work in laymans dummy language as not everyone knows what starcloths or uplights mean.

I often provide quotes saying--any flags or lighting shown on the website are not included---naturally an invitation for a bit of upselling:D

Although trying to dissect your brilliant picture into what and whats not included may prove difficult.

What about the stage and surround which looks impressive as well ?

Obviously you dont want a picture down the local Scout Hut :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

On a lighter note a contestant who won a car in a Golf Club raffle got one that only had 2 doors not 4 as shown in the publicity, however he lost his court case on that one( recent newspaper article))I think because he turned down the offer of cash instead. People DO NOTICE.

[DeckstarDeluxe]

I'd use a photo that shows all of the services you mention or a series of photos to cover all the various services. It's pretty damm clear it's fairy lights so not really buying mistaking that for uplighting myself (even from a Joe Public POV).

[Shakermaker Promotions]

It's pretty damm clear it's fairy lights so not really buying mistaking that for uplighting myself (even from a Joe Public POV).

I think you'd be surprised. Whilst I wouldn't want to accuse a small section of Joe Public of being....dare I say it.....s****d, it is amazing just how many of it need educating as to what Uplighting (for example) actually is. I have had to explain a number of times so it wouldn't surprise me if lots of the public thought the fairy lights were included.

It sounds outrageous but I am thinking about it from their point of view. We know the score, some of them don't so I wouldn't say it's "pretty damn clear" (to them).

[CRAZY K]

I think you'd be surprised. Whilst I wouldn't want to accuse a small section of Joe Public of being....dare I say it.....s****d, it is amazing just how many of it need educating as to what Uplighting (for example) actually is. I have had to explain a number of times so it wouldn't surprise me if lots of the public thought the fairy lights were included.

It sounds outrageous but I am thinking about it from their point of view. We know the score, some of them don't so I wouldn't say it's "pretty damn clear" (to them).

In todays no win no fee society I would err on the side of caution.

[yourdj]

dare I say it.....s****d, it is amazing just how many of it need educating as to what Uplighting (for example) actually is. .

I was going to say that but trod carefully as not to be labelled a snob as usual. ;)
The "general" public are a funny bunch, especially in the UK.

I don't really like groups of people at all, which is ironic as when i am in work mode I am the opposite. :)

[Nakatomi]

For the avoidance of doubt, disclaim/explain as much as you feel you need to, then a little more. We can't assume Joe Public knows what's meant by 'uplighting' or 'gobos'.

Objects may appear larger or smaller in real life ;)

[ukpartydj]

I'll keep this short. I've been using the image below on emails to potential clients to sell my services. Usually this is accompanied by a list of what will be provided which includes the phrase "Full professional sound and lighting rig" and another line that offers "Uplighting/Moodlighting" as an additional service.

A couple I DJ'd for on Sat night got a bit confused with the above and thought that "Uplighting" meant the string light canopy in the photo (which is obviously not mine and is permanently installed in the venue).

I had a similarly not very clever client ask if I could put the twinkly white lights on at a wedding last year, baffled at their request I asked more. It turns out they thought the white starlit floor was included! So I know it does happen!

Anyway you didn't missell anything! Did you provide a "Full professional sound and lighting rig"? It looks like you did! It's a common advertising technique to show the customer something which appears to be better than what they are actually buying. If you state certain things aren't included which I do then you are going the extra mile :)
Here's a good example:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql7J_AxjFHs

[CRAZY K]

I had a similarly not very clever client ask if I could put the twinkly white lights on at a wedding last year, baffled at their request I asked more. It turns out they thought the white starlit floor was included! So I know it does happen!

Anyway you didn't missell anything! Did you provide a "Full professional sound and lighting rig"? It looks like you did! It's a common advertising technique to show the customer something which appears to be better than what they are actually buying. If you state certain things aren't included which I do then you are going the extra mile :)
Here's a good example:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql7J_AxjFHs

I still think you need to be careful if you are using images to display your service that they dont produce pictures of the actual gig and compare it to whats offered on a website or picture.

You could be embarrasssed in a Small Claims Court.

[DazzyD]

...

17768

...

Julian

In advertising, a picture paints a thousand words and that picture is screaming about the sparkly lights up in the roof!! They are the very first feature of the picture that my eyes focused on and, no doubt, many potential customers would be the same. I think you can get away with many incidental features in your photos but I can see where that light fixture would cause some confusion. It would be very dangerous to assume that the client is aware that that fancy light isn't included in your service without you actually telling them so. So, for me, I would be including a disclaimer in that one. Always better to be safe than sorry!

[Shaun]

I don't really like groups of people at all, which is ironic as when i am in work mode I am the opposite. :)

I'm exactly the same. In fact, I'll go as far to say I don't like people in general. :d

[Shakermaker Promotions]

Ha! Ha!

I don't mind people until they :Censored:me off and then that's it.
A bit harsh maybe but people get one chance and that's it..... Anyway, back on topic...(sorry).

[ckpr2]

Its important to be exact when describing a service with words and pictures.
Some people will take advantage if its not.

I sold 2 amplifier boards on ebay. One had a different colour resistor to the other and the buyer said he wasn't happy.
I explained that I had run out of the first resistor and had to use the equivalent second resistor.
He said he still wasnt happy that the second one didn't match the picture and I was trying to rip him off.
So I suggested he send them both back for a refund.
He still wasn't happy but said he would send them back.
He sent back a lump of wood with nails in it !
He claimed a refund off ebay, kept the items and left me negative feedback.

My only option was to inform the police he had sent wood with nails in it designed to injure me.
Police went around to see him and he blamed his wife for sending the wood and so got away with it.

While this is an unusual occurrence it does show how quickly problems can escalate if you aren't careful and exact.

[CRAZY K]

Its important to be exact when describing a service with words and pictures.
Some people will take advantage if its not.

I sold 2 amplifier boards on ebay. One had a different colour resistor to the other and the buyer said he wasn't happy.
I explained that I had run out of the first resistor and had to use the equivalent second resistor.
He said he still wasnt happy that the second one didn't match the picture and I was trying to rip him off.
So I suggested he send them both back for a refund.
He still wasn't happy but said he would send them back.
He sent back a lump of wood with nails in it !
He claimed a refund off ebay, kept the items and left me negative feedback.

My only option was to inform the police he had sent wood with nails in it designed to injure me.
Police went around to see him and he blamed his wife for sending the wood and so got away with it.

While this is an unusual occurrence it does show how quickly problems can escalate if you aren't careful and exact.

How ridiculous.

Good job he didnt try that trick on us here.:daft::daft::daft:

- - - Updated - - -

[ianforest]

So where does it end?

Walls, bricks, plasterwork, venue fixture & fittings, ceiling mounted lights, flooring not included.

Ridiculous.

[funkymook]

So where does it end?

Walls, bricks, plasterwork, venue fixture & fittings, ceiling mounted lights, flooring not included.

Ridiculous.

It’s ridiculous to extrapolate it that far. The client had a valid point in this case.

[Excalibur]

It’s ridiculous to extrapolate it that far. The client had a valid point in this case.

I might question that. The story of the folk who bought some disposable barbeques with pictures of a sizzling repast on the front, put them in the freezer to preserve the contents, and were then disappointed to find there was no food inside any of them when opened makes me believe anything's possible.

It's documented on here that I've had clients ask me for my phone number when it's on every email they've had. :daft:

[funkymook]

I might question that. The story of the folk who bought some disposable barbeques with pictures of a sizzling repast on the front, put them in the freezer to preserve the contents, and were then disappointed to find there was no food inside any of them when opened makes me believe anything's possible.

It's documented on here that I've had clients ask me for my phone number when it's on every email they've had. :daft:

Oh, I understand now, the idiots probably also thought they were the new owners of the garden the bbq was pictured in as well.....

[Shakermaker Promotions]

(Seriously 100% truth here)

I once had a very sozzled young lady stand by the side of me waiting whilst I finished talking on the microphone ask me "Do you have a microphone?"

I said "No" and she replied..."Ok" and then staggered off!

I thought everyone knew what I microphone is / was but obviously not. Maybe there is a bigger chunk of the public that have come straight out of the donut factory and therefore do not have a scooby?

[Excalibur]

OK, whimsy over ( and I must say that I too was thinking along the same lines as Toby!! )

I don't think it's fair to expect punters to know what's an installed light, and what's part of the DJs show.

Just to muddy the waters, what if the client has booked a third party to provide dancefloor, room dressing and lighting? You could have someone booking the same venue as shown, and finding it looks nothing like they expected, as they didn't use the third party supplier. Tricky. :confused:

[dicky]

I still think you need to be careful if you are using images to display your service that they dont produce pictures of the actual gig and compare it to whats offered on a website or picture.

You could be embarrasssed in a Small Claims Court.

Interesting.,... but why in this case do the pictures at McDonalds, KFC and similar food outlets not look anything like this food you actually get?

For example if I threatened to turn up in court wih a photo of the poster and a photo of what they actually served me, wouldn't I just get a free meal every day? (if I was so inclined to eat that sort of thing so regularly)

I realise you may say the picture is 'representative' of what you get but seeing as I have never in all the years been served one that actually looked like the 'representative' one I believe by the law of averages we can clearly prove this is not the case. :rolleyes: So the point being: there must be some other get-out here......

Rich#
PS I often thought of starting a Mc-WhatIgot website for people to upload their smartphone pics to :whome:

[ukpartydj]

I agree Rich, it happens everywhere. May not be the most transparent, it may not be the most honest but it's well known everywhere that advertisers show you the best possible example of what your getting.

[funkymook]

I often thought of starting a Mc-WhatIgot website for people to upload their smartphone pics to :whome:

My favourite of these is http://www.cakewrecks.com

[DJ Jules]

Thanks to everyone for their comments on here. I think the conclusion is (unfortunately) that I need to be more careful in my wording when replying. I've had to go back to my original email and go over it in detail and I've definitely made a few gaffs:

1. When I stated "Full professional sound and lighting rig" I added "as pictured above". Stupid...
2. I mentioned uplighting in the sentence introducing the photo. I actually stated "Our customers have also frequently opted for uplighting in their function room which has worked really well in similar settings", which implies that the uplighting package is shown, but doesn't outright confirm or deny. Could be better...
3. Also when I introduced the photo I stated that it showed "my Gold package in action", again open to interpretation. Duh.

Latest update - my client (the groom) has been in touch and apparently the mother in law is demanding to know why the lighting "didn't look like the photo" and threatening to "leave a bad review on needadisco and go to trading standards". He then asks if there is any possibility of a partial refund as compensation.

The thing which annoys me is that when the mother in law walked up to me on the night the first thing she said was "where are the string lights?" to which I replied "huh?" and she said "the things they've paid £x extra for". She didn't say "uplighting", she said "string lights". So even in her head, it's not called uplighting! Searching Google Images also clearly shows what "Uplighting" is (https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=uplighting&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-l-e4vtTLAhWCCCwKHWHOCO4Q_AUICCgC&biw=1280&bih=681).

It's doubly frustrating that the client wasn't able to find the time to meet with me in the last three months to run over the details for their day. Again, I'm sure that this would have been cleared up quickly if we'd actually met and talked.

Anyway, lesson learned, refund given. Can't wait for the needadisco review :(

Julian

[funkymook]

Thanks to everyone for their comments on here. I think the conclusion is (unfortunately) that I need to be more careful in my wording when replying. I've had to go back to my original email and go over it in detail and I've definitely made a few gaffs:

1. When I stated "Full professional sound and lighting rig" I added "as pictured above". Stupid...
2. I mentioned uplighting in the sentence introducing the photo. I actually stated "Our customers have also frequently opted for uplighting in their function room which has worked really well in similar settings", which implies that the uplighting package is shown, but doesn't outright confirm or deny. Could be better...
3. Also when I introduced the photo I stated that it showed "my Gold package in action", again open to interpretation. Duh.

Latest update - my client (the groom) has been in touch and apparently the mother in law is demanding to know why the lighting "didn't look like the photo" and threatening to "leave a bad review on needadisco and go to trading standards". He then asks if there is any possibility of a partial refund as compensation.

The thing which annoys me is that when the mother in law walked up to me on the night the first thing she said was "where are the string lights?" to which I replied "huh?" and she said "the things they've paid £x extra for". She didn't say "uplighting", she said "string lights". So even in her head, it's not called uplighting! Searching Google Images also clearly shows what "Uplighting" is (https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=uplighting&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-l-e4vtTLAhWCCCwKHWHOCO4Q_AUICCgC&biw=1280&bih=681).

It's doubly frustrating that the client wasn't able to find the time to meet with me in the last three months to run over the details for their day. Again, I'm sure that this would have been cleared up quickly if we'd actually met and talked.

Anyway, lesson learned, refund given. Can't wait for the needadisco review :(

Julian

I get the impression you're still partly blaming the client. I think, especially considering what you've just written, it's lies 100% with you.

[ukpartydj]

The thing which annoys me is that when the mother in law walked up to me on the night the first thing she said was "where are the string lights?" to which I replied "huh?" and she said "the things they've paid £x extra for". She didn't say "uplighting", she said "string lights". So even in her head, it's not called uplighting!

I notice you have some par cans inside scrims and truss etc but I don't personally see any "uplighting" as I know it in the image (as pointed out earlier)?
Thinking about it, everybody knows roughly what an uplight is:

Wall uplights have been around for decades.
Downlights are all the rage in modern homes.
Uplight lampshade.

But I guess if the wording you used suggested there was uplighting in that image I can start to understand the thought process.
Either way it sounds like she's the type with a unhealthy sense of entitlement.

[funkymook]

What really annoys me about this is there’s not a hint that you care that a clients expectations haven’t been met, it’s all about you.

A light canopy like that is a major feature in every venue I’ve seen one in, as it clearly is in your picture. If you can’t understand why the MiL was disappointed then perhaps being in a customer service industry isn’t for you.

[musicology]

As he has, in fact, refunded some money I'm guessing his attitude towards the customer was somewhat more diplomatic than one would be on a discussion forum.

[CRAZY K]

I think in the circumstances Jules has done the right thing and hopefully that's the end of it and he will be a little careful inputting some disclaimers on quotes involving photos.

I have from today started doing this on some newly acquired videos featuring an impossibly impressive massive white star cloth in the venue --just to be safe.

I suppose there is always the picture down the Scout Hut to use if required:rolleyes:

[yourdj]

What really annoys me about this is there’s not a hint that you care that a clients expectations haven’t been met, it’s all about you.

A light canopy like that is a major feature in every venue I’ve seen one in, as it clearly is in your picture. If you can’t understand why the MiL was disappointed then perhaps being in a customer service industry isn’t for you.

I think posting it on here for discussion shows that he cares about what clients think, so thats good isn't it. :)
We all make mistakes along the way, but its how we deal with them that matters. :)

I don't think the fairy lights would really make much difference to the party, but she must have been disappointed not to have them. It may have been the one deciding factor that made her book the service. You can see her and here bridesmaids sitting around with a glass of wine and making the decision. :)


As he has, in fact, refunded some money I'm guessing his attitude towards the customer was somewhat more diplomatic than one would be on a discussion forum.

You can imagine it can't you. Not been on said FB group for years now, too much negatively.
"Wot mate, its f--ing obvious that its not included, they ain't gettin nufin refunded"

At the end of the day the lights take up half the photo, from this discussion alone, its now obvious that brides will assume its included. I would refund them a gestural amount and adopt better communications, clearer marketing. Its where face to face client consultations come into their own. :)

[CRAZY K]

Its where face to face client consultations come into their own. :)

Dont forget---It's doubly frustrating that the client wasn't able to find the time to meet with me in the last three months to run over the details for their day. Again, I'm sure that this would have been cleared up quickly if we'd actually met and talked.

[rth_discos]

I recently had something similar to this (luckily alleviated before the big day, but only just!).

I sent out an email last year to my booked brides with an offer for an LED starlit dancefloor. One replied saying they didn't feel the need for the LED starlit dancefloor, and they were happy with the wooden one as discussed.

As I don't supply a wooden dancefloor at all, and never have done, I replied stating that. She replied with a photo from my website showing a wooden dancefloor (venue provided).

I again reminded her that we'd never discussed dancefloors, and suggested she contact the venue, as it may have been them who discussed dancefloors.

She replied a few hours later saying the venue would be providing their wooden dancefloor. She didn't admit that it was the venue who had originally discussed it with her, but I think that is very likely to have been what had happened. But of course, that got me worried if anyone else had assumed the dancefloor came too?

I think I might specify what a "standard setup" is in my terms, and what constitutes additional (paid for) extras, eg uplighting/dancefloors etc, so that photos with those in aren't assumed to be a standard rig.

[Benny Smyth]

17768

I've nothing new to chime in with regards to the customer feedback and resolution, but I do have something to say about a much bigger issue that everybody seems to be glossing over: why are you not set up perfectly centre on the stage?

I mean, what the actual :Censored: Jules?












































:p

[Excalibur]

, but I do have something to say about a much bigger issue that everybody seems to be glossing over: why are you not set up perfectly centre on the stage?


Never mind that, why isn't he set up on the mezzanine? :confused: Rule 1) in the DJ handbook: " Take the high ground ". ;)

[funkymook]

I've nothing new to chime in with regards to the customer feedback and resolution, but I do have something to say about a much bigger issue that everybody seems to be glossing over: why are you not set up perfectly centre on the stage?

I mean, what the actual :Censored: Jules?


Obviously it was to be dead centre of the overhead uplighting canopy...

[rth_discos]

I've nothing new to chime in with regards to the customer feedback and resolution, but I do have something to say about a much bigger issue that everybody seems to be glossing over: why are you not set up perfectly centre on the stage?

I mean, what the actual :Censored: Jules?


On that note - speakers BEHIND the DJ? I value my hearing way too much to do that.

[ukpartydj]

It's quite sad that so many of you are taking the side of the client who threatened Julians reputation and was quite a rude in my opinion. Its clear Julian didn't breach any trading standards and he never intended to miss sell.

It was a breakdown on communication and the client made an incorrect assumption. He didn't help himself with some of the wording but that doesn't mean he's in the wrong.

A client with a good moral compass would accept they didn't pay for the fairy lights and would advise it's made clearer what is included.

Are we supposed to complain every time something doesn't work out how we expected? Who do I complain to about life? Surely I'm due some compensation by now!

[funkymook]

It's quite sad that so many of you are taking the side of the client who threatened Julians reputation and was quite a rude in my opinion. Its clear Julian didn't breach any trading standards and he never intended to miss sell. !

Trading Standards would rip him to pieces, it’s misrepresentation whether on purpose or not. What parts of the following do you think aren’t misleading?


I've had to go back to my original email and go over it in detail and I've definitely made a few gaffs:

1. When I stated "Full professional sound and lighting rig" I added "as pictured above". Stupid...
2. I mentioned uplighting in the sentence introducing the photo. I actually stated "Our customers have also frequently opted for uplighting in their function room which has worked really well in similar settings", which implies that the uplighting package is shown, but doesn't outright confirm or deny. Could be better...
3. Also when I introduced the photo I stated that it showed "my Gold package in action", again open to interpretation. Duh.



There’s no getting away from the fact that the overhead lighting as shown in the picture is a major feature. Why wouldn’t the client be upset if they thought that’s what they were getting (and paid extra for) and were then told it wasn’t part of the package?

What I think is 'quite sad' is that there’s an obviously unhappy client with good reason and some DJ’s don’t think that’s important.

[DJ Jules]

There’s no getting away from the fact that the overhead lighting as shown in the picture is a major feature. Why wouldn’t the client be upset if they thought that’s what they were getting (and paid extra for) and were then told it wasn’t part of the package?

What I think is 'quite sad' is that there’s an obviously unhappy client with good reason and some DJ’s don’t think that’s important.

Just to be clear - My initial reaction was horror because I've clearly delivered something less than the customer was expecting - I had no issue at all with giving them a partial refund because of this. Given the mother in law's pretty :Censored: attitude, I've got through that and now I'm just really disappointed with this whole situation.
My biggest issue with this whole situation is that the more I think about it, the more opportunities I identify where we should have been able to spot this error in communication and correct it before the big day, had they actually talked to me properly about their plans. For example, if I were booking someone with a very large structure that appears to be fixed to the venue, I would probably ask a bunch of questions about how it is fixed, how big is it, would it fit in my venue, how long does it take to put up, etc - they didn't ask a single question about it. Apparently they had fire pits lined up so that the guests could "sit under the pretty lights" (no idea how that would have worked given the lights are indoors) - but again, I had no knowledge. I've been told the venue had a ladder on standby for me to put up the lights, no mention of that and the caretaker didn't mention it either when I arrived. We discussed arrival times and, again, no mention of "is an hour going to be enough to put that up?" I also consistently referred to uplighting as "uplighting" and did they really not research what that was at all???

REALLY frustrating. I chatted to the groom a little more about this yesterday and apparently he's a Chef and believes in "you get what is in the picture". Using the same analogy though, this is like seeing a photo of some fish on a plate, ordering it and then expecting to get the plate as well as part of the package (and thinking that it's called chicken). The only thing stopping that from happening in a restaurant is domain knowledge and experience, something that they clearly had none of and they declined my offer to talk more to learn.

Anyway, mother in law is intent on going to Trading Standards with this regardless of the partial refund so if anyone has any experience of dealing with being on the receiving end of Trading Standards, I'd be keen to hear about it. I'm going to call them today and find out what their take on it is likely to be. I've refunded this customer, this wasn't intentional serial misselling and I can demonstrate that I've contacted any other customers who might be affected (none of them thought they were getting the string lights) so I'm not sure what else might happen?

Julian

[rth_discos]

Anyway, mother in law is intent on going to Trading Standards with this regardless of the partial refund so if anyone has any experience of dealing with being on the receiving end of Trading Standards, I'd be keen to hear about it. I'm going to call them today and find out what their take on it is likely to be. I've refunded this customer, this wasn't intentional serial misselling and I can demonstrate that I've contacted any other customers who might be affected (none of them thought they were getting the string lights) so I'm not sure what else might happen?

Julian

It's not something I deal with, but trading standards in many ways is "common sense". I think you've been very fair so far with the client. Yes, it was a miscommunication, and is clearly not something that a whole load of people have also been "mis-sold", so I think with Trading Standards they won't take any action.

The partial refund - was that something you offered to the client, and they accepted? If so, Trading Standards are likely to see that as a resolution anyway. The client shouldn't have accepted the partial refund if they weren't happy for that to be the conclusion of the matter.

[musicology]

I don't think they'll regard this as a serious matter either. If you get to meet them I'm sure it will be an interesting and helpful experience and I expect you'l get some excellent advice from them.

[Excalibur]

It's quite sad that so many of you are taking the side of the client who threatened Julians reputation and was quite a rude in my opinion. Its clear Julian didn't breach any trading standards and he never intended to miss sell.

I disagree. For whatever reason ( basically poor communication ) they didn't get what they expected. Their expectations weren't unreasonable, due to Julian's picture and prose. He's looking at that picture as a DJ, the customer isn't.

My quotes say " full PA and lights ", and customers still ask " Do you have lights "? On Saturday, I provided a monitor for showing pictures, but the customer insisted we borrowed the venue's TV as it was bigger. Did I mis-sell my service? There's a case to say I did. ( Mind you, since it was a free add on, I'm not too worried )

I'm sure Julian has learned a lot from the episode, and will do his best to satisfy this customer, and future ones. I think we'd all do well to look at our sites through the eyes of someone who knows nothing about a disco.

[rth_discos]

Did I mis-sell my service? There's a case to say I did. ( Mind you, since it was a free add on, I'm not too worried )


Very dangerous to assume that because something was a "free add on" that it holds no value.

It can easily be argued that the reason they booked with you was because of the add on, even if it was offered free.

So it's worth being as careful with free add ons as with the paid ones (hence why I rarely give free add ons).

[yourdj]

Just to be clear - My initial reaction was horror because I've clearly delivered something less than the customer was expecting - I had no issue at all with giving them a partial refund because of this. Given the mother in law's pretty :Censored: attitude, I've got through that and now I'm just really disappointed with this whole situation.
My biggest issue with this whole situation is that the more I think about it, the more opportunities I identify where we should have been able to spot this error in communication and correct it before the big day, had they actually talked to me properly about their plans. For example, if I were booking someone with a very large structure that appears to be fixed to the venue, I would probably ask a bunch of questions about how it is fixed, how big is it, would it fit in my venue, how long does it take to put up, etc - they didn't ask a single question about it. Apparently they had fire pits lined up so that the guests could "sit under the pretty lights" (no idea how that would have worked given the lights are indoors) - but again, I had no knowledge. I've been told the venue had a ladder on standby for me to put up the lights, no mention of that and the caretaker didn't mention it either when I arrived. We discussed arrival times and, again, no mention of "is an hour going to be enough to put that up?" I also consistently referred to uplighting as "uplighting" and did they really not research what that was at all???

REALLY frustrating. I chatted to the groom a little more about this yesterday and apparently he's a Chef and believes in "you get what is in the picture". Using the same analogy though, this is like seeing a photo of some fish on a plate, ordering it and then expecting to get the plate as well as part of the package (and thinking that it's called chicken). The only thing stopping that from happening in a restaurant is domain knowledge and experience, something that they clearly had none of and they declined my offer to talk more to learn.

Anyway, mother in law is intent on going to Trading Standards with this regardless of the partial refund so if anyone has any experience of dealing with being on the receiving end of Trading Standards, I'd be keen to hear about it. I'm going to call them today and find out what their take on it is likely to be. I've refunded this customer, this wasn't intentional serial misselling and I can demonstrate that I've contacted any other customers who might be affected (none of them thought they were getting the string lights) so I'm not sure what else might happen?

Julian

I don't think they have a leg to stand on. You have offered them an out of court settlement and they have agreed and accepted the payment.

Maybe they are unhappy with something else on the night and using that as an excuse as its an easy thing to use. My one and only client who complained, picked every little thing that I did wrong, despite the fact that I went to their house for a consultation (it was a package venue event), provided LED uplighting and did an excellent job on the night (I had my assistant with me). She was just not happy that I tried to advise her on the first dance time. I had also fallen out with my sister the day before so I think i was carrying bad energy. I had several photos of her with her hands in the air, so the venue were satisfied, that it was probably a clash of personality.

Would be worth looking at the night and any way that they are not happy?

I was at a venue the other day and was listening to a groom "complaining" about something. i could honestly not work out what they were complaining about and got the impressions they were just not happy with there service and were picking at things that they could justify. There is also the possibility that they just wanted a discount, which could be the case with you? I was also under the impression that the groom was under orders from the bride. Why you would want that negativity after the wedding day who knows. I think couples big it up so much that on the day their plans do not meet (and will never meet) their expectations. There is a dump of energy the day after, which is not helped by hangovers, so there is the possibility that they are running on false emotions??? I would contact the venue and see what they have said to them!!

If this was me I would close communication on the basis of legal grounds as they have threatened you AFTER accepting the payment of goodwill. If you have any photos and especially videos of the event then I think you have a good case. Written testimony from venue staff and managers before they forget would also be very useful. Also contact any other suppliers on the night and see if they have had any issues. If there was a Photo Booth, photographer etc on site during the entertainment get their written testimony and also any photos of them.

The fact they did not want to meet you for a planning meeting or ask any questions is also strong evidence.

* I am no legal expert so this is just speculation.

[Shakermaker Promotions]

Not sure if it is the same kind of thing but a few years ago when I was the recommended supplier at another hotel just down the road from me, I had a similar thing (like I said, not sure if it can be likened to this example)... It had nothing to do with photos but me instead.

I'd done a Christmas party at the venue and following on from that, someone enquired with the hotel about my services for a party in the new year. As I understand it, the hotel told them that it was my business that supplied the venue. I can't remember exactly what happened but at a guess I'd say that the customer enquired about me personally because they'd been at the Christmas party and enjoyed themselves and wanted "that DJ" which happened to be me.

Again, I can't remember exactly what happened but had I been available personally then I would have done it but I didn't. I guess the customer thought they were getting me and were both surprised and pretty narked that someone else turned up in my place (working on behalf of my business). It didn't matter to them that they'd had a great time (D'oh!), I think they were 'trying it on' and they bought up the issue with the hotel. This resulted in the venue passing the buck as such and it felt like they were interegating me when they were asking why I'd got someone else in. They refunded some of the money to the customer and I ended up being out of pocket as I'd paid the DJ for the job she'd done but didn't get full payment from the venue. I was also told that if I couldn't cover a booking myself then they would look elsewhere.

I decided there and then that I wasn't interested in working for them anymore (plus the fact they kept trying to bring the price down all the time)....

Now, is that mis-selling too or is it / was it just mis-communication because it is something that has always had me thinking if I was in the wrong. The venue KNEW that it was my business that was the supplier so myself and anyone I used to cover me were operating under the business name. Had I of been able to talk to the customer myself (this venue wanted to do everything themselves back then), then maybe I could have explained fully but I wasn't able to.

I still think that this whole thing with the fairy lights etc is really down to common sense isn't it?
Someone is booking a Disco at the end of the day and most people know what a bloody Disco looks like. I said it before but as DJ's we'd all look at that photo and know that 99.99% of the time those lights belong to the venue and NOT the DJ and are probably a permanent fixture. Yes, there may be some people out there who need it explaining to them that they are separate from the Disco but a simple thing like "batteries not included" would do the job wouldn't it?
At least it's sorted now so in the nicest possible way.....take it on the chin and move on. Things pop up every now and then that test us....this looks like it's one of them.

[DJ Jules]

Thanks for all the advice. Trading standards have a view that the matter is closed if they've requested a partial refund and I've obliged and been reasonable throughout. They also believe that if she did decide to go to small claims for a larger refund or compensation, they'll take the same view.

They did mention a couple of things which are interesting though. Generally most matters between consumer and business are considered civil matters, except misrepresentation which is a criminal matter. However, the outcome will probably be that I get a phone call from the local Consumer advice service to ensure that I'm not intentionally misleading people and as long as I can re-assure them that I'm taking reasonable steps to make sure that this doesn't happen again, they'll be fine.

So... lesson learned. I'm going to spend my next free evening going back over my website to make sure that there is no possible room for ambiguity (and I'll probably get a couple of people with no DJ experience to do the same).

Julian

[funkymook]

REALLY frustrating. I chatted to the groom a little more about this yesterday and apparently he's a Chef and believes in "you get what is in the picture". Using the same analogy though, this is like seeing a photo of some fish on a plate, ordering it and then expecting to get the plate as well as part of the package

Well I’d be surprised if I ordered it in a restaurant and it didn’t arrive on a plate.


I suspect the main reason you got that booking was because of those lights, so I really get why the clients thought they didn’t get what they ordered.

[CRAZY K]

Well I’d be surprised if I ordered it in a restaurant and it didn’t arrive on a plate.


I suspect the main reason you got that booking was because of those lights, so I really get why the clients thought they didn’t get what they ordered.

Cant disagree that it looks very enticing with those strings of lights.

Disclaimers look like the way forward, I have started.:rolleyes:

Maybe ought to disclaim liability for people not dancing as well :D:D:D

[ukpartydj]

Trading Standards would rip him to pieces, it’s misrepresentation whether on purpose or not. What parts of the following do you think aren’t misleading?




There’s no getting away from the fact that the overhead lighting as shown in the picture is a major feature. Why wouldn’t the client be upset if they thought that’s what they were getting (and paid extra for) and were then told it wasn’t part of the package?

What I think is 'quite sad' is that there’s an obviously unhappy client with good reason and some DJ’s don’t think that’s important.

Whichever way you look at it and whoever influenced the bottom line is the client made a mistake. The client is now looking to extort Julian for allowing her to make that mistake with his unclear (not not misleading) advertising. Client happiness is important but, when you've not done anything wrong (nor right, but not wrong) and you're client is claiming otherwise it's hard to sympathise.


Not sure if it is the same kind of thing but a few years ago when I was the recommended supplier at another hotel just down the road from me, I had a similar thing (like I said, not sure if it can be likened to this example)... It had nothing to do with photos but me instead.

I'd done a Christmas party at the venue and following on from that, someone enquired with the hotel about my services for a party in the new year. As I understand it, the hotel told them that it was my business that supplied the venue. I can't remember exactly what happened but at a guess I'd say that the customer enquired about me personally because they'd been at the Christmas party and enjoyed themselves and wanted "that DJ" which happened to be me.

Again, I can't remember exactly what happened but had I been available personally then I would have done it but I didn't. I guess the customer thought they were getting me and were both surprised and pretty narked that someone else turned up in my place (working on behalf of my business). It didn't matter to them that they'd had a great time (D'oh!), I think they were 'trying it on' and they bought up the issue with the hotel. This resulted in the venue passing the buck as such and it felt like they were interegating me when they were asking why I'd got someone else in. They refunded some of the money to the customer and I ended up being out of pocket as I'd paid the DJ for the job she'd done but didn't get full payment from the venue. I was also told that if I couldn't cover a booking myself then they would look elsewhere.

I decided there and then that I wasn't interested in working for them anymore (plus the fact they kept trying to bring the price down all the time)....

Now, is that mis-selling too or is it / was it just mis-communication because it is something that has always had me thinking if I was in the wrong. The venue KNEW that it was my business that was the supplier so myself and anyone I used to cover me were operating under the business name. Had I of been able to talk to the customer myself (this venue wanted to do everything themselves back then), then maybe I could have explained fully but I wasn't able to.

I still think that this whole thing with the fairy lights etc is really down to common sense isn't it?
Someone is booking a Disco at the end of the day and most people know what a bloody Disco looks like. I said it before but as DJ's we'd all look at that photo and know that 99.99% of the time those lights belong to the venue and NOT the DJ and are probably a permanent fixture. Yes, there may be some people out there who need it explaining to them that they are separate from the Disco but a simple thing like "batteries not included" would do the job wouldn't it?
At least it's sorted now so in the nicest possible way.....take it on the chin and move on. Things pop up every now and then that test us....this looks like it's one of them.

I had a very similar issue with an agency last year. I put a DJ in for this agency (which I'd been bending over backwards to please) and the DJ had a rough night - lots of demanding rude guests, staff were rude, Nobody was dancing to the B&G's requests and it was clear their music wasn't working, only given 2 days notice, asked to setup early for free and was a very low priced job. Agent comes back to me, I've had to refund the full amount, I'll pay you half (no question, just that's how it is). 4 months later and small claims court and I've got my money plus interest & compensation. Considering I lost £70 of my money sorting a DJ out for them the week before due to their error to keep them happy / keep the Christmas contact I had with them I felt it extremely disrespectful.

If nothing else this thread has proven that my long lost friend has passed away:

17771

[Pe7e]

so if anyone has any experience of dealing with being on the receiving end of Trading Standards, I'd be keen to hear about it.
Julian

I've dealt with them on several occasions in a retail environment and found them very reasonable and even-handed, so much so, I directed customers directly to them if they thought they had a claim which I disagreed with, not once did they find in their favour.


I still think that this whole thing with the fairy lights etc is really down to common sense isn't it?


I've never found common sense to actually be very common at all, there's a lot of doughnuts out there :)

[funkymook]

Whichever way you look at it and whoever influenced the bottom line is the client made a mistake.

Complete and utter rubbish!

[ukpartydj]

I've dealt with them on several occasions in a retail environment and found them very reasonable and even-handed, so much so, I directed customers directly to them if they thought they had a claim which I disagreed with, not once did they find in their favour.

I used to hear the trading standards line a lot with my old job. Mainly in regard to signs which state the bulk price in big bold letters then the individual price 1/4 the size next under it - that in my opinion is more of an issue than fairy-lightgate here but yet it still goes on!

[musicology]

Thanks for all the advice. Trading standards have a view that the matter is closed if they've requested a partial refund and I've obliged and been reasonable throughout. They also believe that if she did decide to go to small claims for a larger refund or compensation, they'll take the same view.

They did mention a couple of things which are interesting though. Generally most matters between consumer and business are considered civil matters, except misrepresentation which is a criminal matter. However, the outcome will probably be that I get a phone call from the local Consumer advice service to ensure that I'm not intentionally misleading people and as long as I can re-assure them that I'm taking reasonable steps to make sure that this doesn't happen again, they'll be fine.


Julian

Pretty much as I thought. :):thumbs_up:

[Excalibur]

Very dangerous to assume that because something was a "free add on" that it holds no value.

It can easily be argued that the reason they booked with you was because of the add on, even if it was offered free.

So it's worth being as careful with free add ons as with the paid ones (hence why I rarely give free add ons).

I said "add on" not "upsell " . Customer added it on after the contract had been signed, and deposit paid. She also added on microphones for live act ( which necessitated extra kit ). All provided free without being in the contract. I reckon I'm fireproof.

[musicology]

Whichever way you look at it and whoever influenced the bottom line is the client made a mistake.

I agree. Albeit through ignorance of the difference between uplighting and fairy lights. So an understandable mistake.

[CRAZY K]

I said "add on" not "upsell " . Customer added it on after the contract had been signed, and deposit paid. She also added on microphones for live act ( which necessitated extra kit ). All provided free without being in the contract. I reckon I'm fireproof.

However Peter, if one of your "free add ons" had electrocuted someone --I cant help feeling Health and Safety wouldnt be too interested in your Contract.

Or the no win no fee Solicitors hounding you.

Knowing the way things are stacked these days.:rolleyes:

[musicology]

However Peter, if one of your "free add ons" had electrocuted someone --I cant help feeling Health and Safety wouldnt be too interested in your Contract.

Or the no win no fee Solicitors hounding you.

Knowing the way things are stacked these days.:rolleyes:

An entirely different issue altogether.

[CRAZY K]

An entirely different issue altogether.

Its just another problem associated with the subject matter---ie free add on, freebie or whatever you want to call it.

There are plenty more but its not worth going there.:D:D:D

My point is whats in a Contract only covers part of the overall situation.

[DJ Jules]

Well I’d be surprised if I ordered it in a restaurant and it didn’t arrive on a plate.

Just to be clear, my analogy was that you thought you got to KEEP the plate - and in fact, thought it was called something else, and that you could eat it too. That's how distant the customers understanding of what "uplighting" was from the reality (uplighting vs string lights, fixed vs mobile, venue owned vs provided by DJ).


I suspect the main reason you got that booking was because of those lights, so I really get why the clients thought they didn’t get what they ordered.

Actually the "uplighting" wasn't mentioned in the initial response to my email when they asked to book, it was only requested on the third exchange as we got into contracts which makes this all the more interesting... When they did ask for it though, it was literally "we would also like to book uplighting" - no questions, no requests for clarification on size, position, coverage, etc and not mentioned at all in any of the emails prior to this one or after.

Julian

[funkymook]

Actually the "uplighting" wasn't mentioned in the initial response to my email when they asked to book, it was only requested on the third exchange as we got into contracts which makes this all the more interesting... When they did ask for it though, it was literally "we would also like to book uplighting" - no questions, no requests for clarification on size, position, coverage, etc and not mentioned at all in any of the emails prior to this one or after.



Surely when someone says they’d like to book uplighting you ask/advise how many units, what colours etc? How did they respond to those questions?

[DJ Jules]

Surely when someone says they’d like to book uplighting you ask/advise how many units, what colours etc? How did they respond to those questions?

I don't ask those questions now - I sell as a "package" suitable for the room which could be 4 units or 24. I did used to charge by the unit, but I found people were generally tight and tried to get away with as few as they could so I switched to one package, one price. Colours are all wirelessly controlled so I can change them at will so I don't need to ask the colour question until I get there and then I generally work in with whatever is there. I find that if people have a specific theme in mind, they'll be forthcoming about it before the night (or in the consultation - remember - that thing that they didn't want :D ).

Julian

[funkymook]

I don't ask those questions now - I sell as a "package" suitable for the room which could be 4 units or 24. I did used to charge by the unit, but I found people were generally tight and tried to get away with as few as they could so I switched to one package, one price. Colours are all wirelessly controlled so I can change them at will so I don't need to ask the colour question until I get there and then I generally work in with whatever is there. I find that if people have a specific theme in mind, they'll be forthcoming about it before the night (or in the consultation - remember - that thing that they didn't want :D ).

Julian

Really, you charge £60 regardless of the number of units?

[DJ Jules]

Really, you charge £60 regardless of the number of units?

Nope - I usually charge a lot more. In this case it was a January offer to secure a well paid wedding.

Julian

[funkymook]

Actually the "uplighting" wasn't mentioned in the initial response to my email when they asked to book, it was only requested on the third exchange as we got into contracts......
Julian


In this case it was a January offer to secure a well paid wedding.
Julian

I was under the impression the booking was going ahead before they asked about the lighting?

But if it was to secure the booking that actually makes it worse, the lighting was their deciding factor and they didn't get the one thing they booked you for.

I'm confused, no wonder your clients were too!