A wedding photographer booked to capture a couple’s big day personally sent his team instead, and they arrived 70 minutes late, missing key moments like the bride’s procession and the groom’s arrival, according to the bride’s complaint. A Karnataka Consumer Commission has directed ‘Karthik Singh Photography’ to pay Rs 25,000 in compensation and Rs 10,000 towards litigation expenses, holding that the failure to honour the commitment amounted to deficiency in service.The Hassan District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission president Chanchala C M and member Anupama R were a complaint filed by Dr Chinmayi M against photographer Karthik Singh and his wife Sharvari, an associate or representative of the business alleging deficiency in wedding photography and videography services and seeking a refund of Rs 1.4 lakh, Rs 1 lakh in compensation for mental agony, Rs 5,000 towards incidental expenses, Rs 3,000 in travel expenses, and a declaration that the photographer’s demand for Rs 32,000 was illegal.“Sending an assistant instead of the specifically booked photographer can amount to a deficiency in service. If the photographer was unable to attend due to an emergency, they were legally and ethically obligated to inform the client beforehand. Sending an unannounced substitute deprives the consumer of the chance to make alternative arrangements or negotiate a lower price,” the commission said on October 17.The complainant booked photography and videography services on November 28, 2024, for Rs 2.05 lakh, including candid and cinematic video services for the engagement. She paid Rs 1,99,200, including Rs 16,200 towards travel expenses. The photographer denied deficiency in service, saying his regular team performed the work and Rs 22,000 remained payable.Assistants arrived 70 minutes lateThe complainant alleged that the photographer had promised to personally cover key occasions, including the engagement, wedding and reception, but sent other photographers without her consent.She complained that the team missed moments including bridal home rituals, the bride’s procession with relatives and musicians, and the groom’s arrival in a car with relatives. She also alleged that the photographers later asked the family to recreate some events.The commission examined WhatsApp conversations submitted as evidence. According to the order, the bride had requested the team’s arrival at 2.30 pm, but the assistants reached the venue at 3.40 pm. The photographer acknowledged in the conversation that they were late by an hour and 10 minutes.The commission said Indian weddings involve numerous rituals and observed that the complainant was understandably disappointed. It held that sending an assistant without the customer’s knowledge, despite a specific commitment to personal coverage, could amount to deficiency in service.Story continues below this adHowever, the photographer disputed the allegation of subcontracting, maintaining that the photographers and videographers were members of his regular team and worked under his supervision. The commission nevertheless found that he had failed to honour the commitment regarding his personal attendance. It said he should have informed the customer beforehand if he could not attend, allowing her to make alternative arrangements or negotiate a lower price.Several other allegations rejectedThe commission did not accept every allegation. The bride complained that the engagement photographs and videos were substandard and that the pre-wedding video shown at the reception was poorly edited. However, she produced no expert opinion, technical report or other credible evidence establishing that the work fell below professional standards.The commission also rejected her allegation that the team failed to photograph the bridal makeup. The photographer said the makeup took longer than expected and the bride’s parents did not permit photographs after guests gathered. The commission found insufficient evidence to establish bride’s allegation.On the absence of drone footage, the photographer cited safety concerns arising from the hall’s low ceiling, structural beams, fans and lighting fixtures. The commission noted that the complainant had not established that the venue had sufficient ceiling height for drone operations. The order recorded that the bride had received the photographs, hard disk, album and videos.Story continues below this adThe commission partly allowed the complaint and directed the opposite parties to pay Rs 25,000 for deficiency in service, mental agony, negligence and delay, along with Rs 10,000 towards litigation expenses. Payment must be made within 45 days of receipt of the order. In case of non-compliance, the total amount will carry interest at 10 per cent per annum until realisation.TakeawayIf you hire a professional for a wedding or another once-in-a-lifetime event, get specific promises about who will provide the service recorded in writing. If the person you specifically booked is replaced without your knowledge, or the team arrives late and misses important moments, preserve the booking agreement, payment receipts, messages and other evidence.For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and Union territories (Karnataka: 1800-425-9339) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.Don’t miss out on these stories:Bengaluru society withholds 66-year-old woman’s FD for 6 years, she gets Rs 3.35 lakhStory continues below this adSleep apnoea surgery claim denied, private insurer told to pay Delhi man Rs 1.98 lakhCustomised sofa ‘10 inches wider’ than promised, Bengaluru man wins Rs 88,000