|
2 issues.
Please see below for full correspondence and analysis. The tabbed sections have been split between these 2 sections, as there are 2 separate issues at play here. From: Claire Issue #1: Unsubstantiated client critiqueWe've compiled all of Zara's pre-event correspondence regarding the musical style prior to the event.
In all fairness, Zara has specified that there must be "singing as well as the music" and mentioned dancing on 3 separate occasions. Rory testifies in his post-event producer's report that the band did get clients up and dancing but were constantly interrupted because the music did not fit the brief of the event. Although the singing and dancing is mentioned, the musical style is not specified in any of the pre-event correspondence and the band performs jazz as prescribed by the act name "Rory & His Jazz Band". From: Zara Ever since, we include the following standard disclaimer on our Show Advance. Let's start by finding out some background information about the event. Please would you be able to give us a general description of the event so we can understand the context? How will the music play a part in the event, and what was the inspiration for the music in the first place? Does the event have a theme? It's always useful for us to know this as soon as possible so we can plan and prepare repertoire accordingly. Any other information about the event you feel might be relevant? This provides an opportunity for the client to stipulate the musical style and any requests before the event to avoid confusion or misunderstanding on the day. Despite such measures, the Show Advance is invariably not read or understood and problems do end up occurring on the day as a result of this. From: Claire Issue #2: Late paymentAlthough the artist invoice is sent on 22/05/2018 (2 weeks before event date), and includes all of the correct bank details and contact details, it isn't read or understood by the client.
Interestingly, MR mentions ‘terms and conditions’ and ‘legal action’ in his email to Zara, noting late payment fees beyond 14 days. Upon realising that the payment was made to the agent rather than the artist directly, MR appears to 'backtrack' in his subsequent email mentioning: 'the payment wont be made until towards the end of the month [July] when the client does the next payment run'. From: MR We've received this email from the same agency W Entertainment concerning a separate June 1st booking for which we're still awaiting payment (in this case, the client is also called ‘Zara' which confuses things somewhat! Just to clarify, this is a different Zara).
It mentions ‘terms and conditions’ and ‘legal action’. We're not sure if MR's words carry any weight behind them or if he’s 'winging it’, but it suggests that there is a legal basis behind the W contracts and perhaps they should be saying something similar to the other Zara regarding 6th May booking. We're not going to do anything on either without instruction from the MU — just thought it might be useful in case they're able to persuade AT to do something similar re: 6th May. From: Claire We've now received remittance and got them to confirm which bank account they’ve sent it to and at what date/time. They’ve sent it to the wrong account (possibly W's account). We've re-checked the invoice sent to them on 22nd May, 4th June and all of the reminder emails. They all have the correct details on them. So we’ve politely highlighted this to them, as it’s clearly an error in their accounts dept.
With regards to W's terms and conditions of booking, we've found: Where the outstanding balance has not been paid within 14 days, the amount may be sought via legal processes or referred to a debt recovery agency by the ‘artist’, which will incur additional fees. The ‘agent’ is not responsible for the collection of booking fees due to the ‘artist’. So, yes, in this case, we think MR is ‘fronting’ the artist but not acting on behalf of the artist.
Those terms were as we expected and are quite common with agencies. It is good that MR has used the wording he has in the email to the client, and shows some support at least. From: SM This approach throws up further legal issues. If we did say we won’t go then:
As we have seen from the [Zara D 1st June] case, we did invoice 3 weeks before but W didn’t notice that the client had paid them and not us directly, which falsifies SM's theory about invoicing in time. From: Claire Comments are closed.
|
BlogRed & Black Music was set up in 2012 to stop musicians cancelling. PurposeAt Red & Black Music, we believe in accountability = learning from experience. This blog serves as a record of challenges we’ve faced and how we’ve worked to resolve them. By sharing this, we aim to demonstrate our commitment to professionalism, problem-solving, and continuous improvement. Archives
May 2025
Categories
All
Pamela Molina 2022-23
Rory Duffy 2012-13, 2018-22
Claire Maillot 2016-18
Jo Mantini
2013-16
|
RSS Feed
