Defective changing bag, legal case - advices?

[Colle]

Hi colleagues!

I'm wrinting to here in a hope to get some advices, like how should I proceed with my case etc. ..so here are the details:

I bought a Tundra Security film chancing bag from the B&H NYC super store ( on Jan 2011), that turned out to be defective and non light tight, as it is presumably missing one layer of fabric or the defectiveness of fabric materials. This defective product caused me enormous damages as I used it during the commissioned assignment in Japan. I had changed several films in it before I got the first results out from the lab
that led me to investigate the cause for the damaged films. I have all the materials and documents to show the damages it caused and the defective product that can be examined and proofed to show that it lets the light in through the fabric. As well I have receipt from B&H and so on.

I have tried to contact the manufacturer Tundra Security, but I don't get any response. Also I have wrote to B&H but they direct me to contact the manufacturer.

I'v been shooting 4x5" some eight years and the reason why I bought a new changing bag was that it's materia was nylon like and I thought that might hold little less dust in it compared to my older cotton like changing bag.

I'm based in Finland and lacking information on legal procedures in US in cases like this,
so any advices would be appreciated!

Thanks in advance!

Colle

[Mark Stahlke]

You'll get better legal advice from lawyers than photographers.

Chances are the manufacturer's liability is limited to replacement of the defective product and possibly the film it damaged.

[Leigh]

Virtually all warranties exclude liability for "incidental and consequential damages", which is what you have.

If the product is defective, your only recovery would be replacement of the product or a refund of the purchase price, nothing more.

- Leigh

[Kimberly Anderson]

I tell my students to never use a new piece of equipment on a paying assignment. This is what happens when you do.

[jayabbas]

I tell my students to never use a new piece of equipment on a paying assignment. This is what happens when you do.

Exactly -- Test, Test, and Test again. New is always run through the meatgrinder before getting combat duty.

[Colle]

Virtually all warranties exclude liability for "incidental and consequential damages", which is what you have.

Thats quite exactly what I thought where my case lay.. anyway, Thanks for posts!

[Kirk Gittings]

I tell my students to never use a new piece of equipment on a paying assignment. This is what happens when you do.

Absolutely. I truly sympathize with your plight Colle. i really do-I've done some similar things (though less disastrous) in my time.........but relying on an untested critical piece of equipment for an assignment half way around the world? Dude! A brutally hard lesson in professionalism.

As per your case. Talk to a lawyer. I'm definitely not one, but have pursued some similar cases in my time against film labs destroying film for assignments and based on my experience I think you are going to spend a small fortune and not get much back. What I got from my experience was to never send all the film to a lab at one time-break it in two batches and make sure they are not run at the same time. IE cover and or minimise all posible problems.

FWIW. At this point in my career based on my experience, if this happened to me I would chalk it up to experience and not let it distract me from my work.

[Ed Richards]

With an incident in Japan, a bag bought in the US, and the plaintiff in Finland, you would need to have very large damages to justify any legal action. Unless you are out at least $10,000, just chalk it to experience. Given the low probability of winning, that $10K is probably low, say $20,000. More critically, are you prepared to spend thousands of dollars up front on only a small chance you might win your case? (And I am a lawyer.)

[Andrew O'Neill]

I tell my students to never use a new piece of equipment on a paying assignment.

That's spot on. One should NEVER use something without making sure it works. I hope you have learnt something from this.

[msk2193]

Under "normal" commercial terms and conditions, the manufacturer's warranty never exceeds the cost of the item's price paid by the retailer.
So, if you fought this in court, you might get back at most 67% of what you paid to B&H. Of course, I am only guessing at B&H's margins on this product.