Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:03/14/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  My question is, I purchased a product from a photo company sound originals, the original contact said there could be a new contact to sign to get the raw footage, but in that contact they are making me sign an NDA that I can not give a negative review on any of their other products, basically blackmailing me, if I want the raw footage I have to sign the document that I won't say anything negative about any of their products or services, but their other product have nothing to do with the raw footage, so why are they aloud to hold it hostage. They say the contact negotiable, but they refuse to negotiate, I'm fine with the *** for just pertaining to negative reviews of the raw footage. But to force me to not be aloud to give a honest complaint or review about their service and to withhold a product until I sign that seems absurd and I'm curious if it's legal for them to do that? I have attached the legal document, and I think it's a very un fair way to ensure they get only positive reviews. I got the raw footage for a promotion but like I said they won't deliver unless I sign to buy my silence.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/15/2025

  Dear BBB,

  Thank you for forwarding this message from the customer. This individual is requesting access to the unedited video footage captured at his wedding. This is a very unique kind of product, and there are conditions surrounding its release. For example, the footage may have glitches because its not edited. This is a totally optional product. If the customer does not want unedited footage, he does not need to obtain it, and he does not need to sign anything at all. Yes, this is completely legal. We have already sent the customer his edited photos and videos, and we have complied with our contract. There is absolutely nothing in the original contract preventing any kind of reviews. We thrive on feedback and would love to know our customers experience!

  Customer Answer

  Date: 03/16/2025

   
  Complaint: 23067580
  
  I am rejecting this response because: I stated im not upset with the fact that they want to sign a further document, i said i dont think the terms of only part of it are un fair asking me to buy my silence and not say anything negative about their other services. that's basically forcing me to only leave a good review. I totally am in support of the cant say anything bad about the raw footage i support that because that's what this document suppose to pertain to and they are handing a product that is gonna have issues which is normal and i agree no one should say anything bad about the raw footage. but as far as their other services that shouldn't be in the contract at all. which they never addressed that at all in their response. why does that need to be in their, thats not raw footage
  
  Sincerely,
  
  *********** ********

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/24/2024

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Date of transaction 2024-10-27 Amount of money paid: $1,749.30 was paid upon signing the contract and the business is requiring a further $874.65 to cancel the agreement.What they committed to provide: They committed to photographs at an engagement session and at our wedding on the 27th of October 2024 that are exactly the same quality as those that appear on their website. They committed to provide a trained photographer and that all their photographers are trained in the same way and the resulting photos cannot be told apart from one another including those on their website.Nature of the dispute: I do not want to pay the remainder of the contract as I believe they did not live up to their end of the contract. During our engagement session we discovered that the photographer assigned to us did not speak English proficiently and this resulted in a product that was less than what was expected/ sold to us over the phone. It further was clear that the photographer would not be able to perform on the day of the wedding to coordinate pictures among many groups given their language skills and disposition.Whether or not the business has tried to resolve the problem: They have not, they failed to live up to their word of changing the photographer and showed no interest in providing the service they were contracted for with the quality of service they led us to believe we could expect.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/25/2024

  Dear BBB:

  Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint. We take every concern very seriously. We serve thousands of customers a year, and the vast majority absolutely love their photographs. We are truly sorry that we did not meet this customers expectations. We respectfully believe the complaint leaves out some critical details. Even before the engagement photo session, the customer asked to reschedule at the last minute to wait for a sunny day. Our photographers rely on paid shoots to earn a living. Thats why our contract explains that photo shoots cant be rescheduled because its cloudy. After the shoot, the customer emailed us to say they enjoyed working with the photographer. The customer called the images fantastic. The customer asked why a few images were off-center, and we explained that we deliver as many images as possible, even the not perfect shots, because our customers tell us they love seeing everything. We loved the gallery! We even posted some images on our website portfolio. It wasnt until a week later when the customer seemed to have a change of heart. Suddenly, they told us they wanted a new photographer. Their major complaint was that their photographer spoke English with an accent and they worried about communication. We were saddened and surprised. The photographer is one of our long-time team members. Shes never received a complaint. In fact, shes received nothing but excellent feedback from dozens of other clients. Our contract explains that we provide the photographer, and unfortunately, we arent always able to accommodate change requests. (To the best of our memory, this customer is the only single customer this year who asked for a different photographer.) Our contract has a simple cancellation policy. We are eager to honor our contract. We hope the customer changes their mind, because we are absolutely willing to honor our commitment to photograph their wedding with extraordinary results.
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/01/2024

   
  Complaint: 22035215
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Complaint: 22035215
  
  I am rejecting this response because: Sound Originals is not addressing the issue at hand. The complaint is over Sound Original's ability to fulfill the contract for the wedding shoot to the standard agreed upon and marketed on their website and over the phone. I want to negotiate a refund for services not rendered (the wedding shoot) and/or at the very least void the contract with no further payments. The fact of the matter is that they misrepresented their services when I hired them and as such did not live up to their verbal or written commitments as follows:

  
  1. They committed to provide a trained ************ that can perform to the level of quality seen on their website. They did not do this as evidenced by i) conversations with the ************ (****) where she told me she was new to the service and that she said and I quote "if you don't like [the] photos, just complain and they [will] give you another ************" as if it was no big deal and it happened all the time. ii) When I reiterated my complaint, Sound Originals made the commitment in writing to get back to me in a "couple of weeks" and they did not follow-up and months went by. iii) They failed to disclose that they worked with ************s that do not speak English to a level that they can understand client requests as was the issue during the engagement session and was communicated to them in writing.  
  

  2. A trained ************ for a wedding undoubtedly needs to speak English to a level that they can understand requests and coordinate groups of people for family shoots for example. This was not the case as evidenced by the engagement session where on several occasions there were awkward moments where the ************ would not understand what was being said and in one instance dismissed me completely by saying "I don't understand, I'm Russian" to simple questions and requests. With this experience I started to talk to more vendors and quickly realized that the services offered by Sound Originals was well below what they had committed to and that a key component of the wedding was now at risk. I showed the pictures to multiple vendors and they laughed at the slanted horizon lines and other aspects further putting in doubt Sound Originals' ability to cover the event to the standard agreed.      

  
  Sound Originals has also misrepresented the facts in their last response:
  1. I have found multiple public complaints on the BBB against Sound Originals and clients have even threatened to pursue legal action against them for the lack of quality and also have mentioned being treated with rudeness by their business manager. On the BBBs website alone it says there are two complaints in the last 12 months. Sound Originals often uses the excuse that they have good reviews to minimize the complaints of their clients in these publicly available documents. These complaints by other clients are from the following dates: first complaint dated 12/17/2023 and second complaint dated 11/17/2023
  
  2. I am not requesting a refund for the engagement session or the fast editing of the same. I am asking for a refund of services not rendered on the basis that they are unable to provide a ************ that meets the standards they themselves have set and led us to believe. It is unclear what the purpose of their statements around rescheduling the engagement shoot has to do with this mediation. Rescheduling an engagement shoot is a normal course of business when there is inclement weather and I was more than willing to pay for the rescheduling at the time. They decided to forgo that charge unilaterally, I assume because the ************ was unresponsive to my messages which I complained about in writing and over the phone with them (further evidence that they could not communicate effectively). I ask that Sound Originals be consistent with the sentiment of waiving the rescheduling fee and refund the charges for services not rendered which is a fair compromise for all parties. I gave Sound Originals more than adequate notice (April 14th 2024) that I did not think the ************ could do the job and further reiterated that I wanted a change on April 24th. They had over two months to provide a new ************ or understand that they could not live up to the contract and cancel it, but instead they asked for more money to cancel the contract. They have had plenty of time to book that date and still do. As they made no effort to find a replacement for me, I can only assume that their plan has always been to just send a ************ I explicitly do not think can do a good job to cover the event. That is simply disingenuous and bad business.
  

  3. Sound Originals misrepresented the facts in their response: i) I have complained about the ************'s communication from the very beginning (March 26th, 2024). Sound Originals was aware of my concerns before the day of the engagement shoot and they chose to ignore them. I never mentioned the accent of the ************, as they claim, as the issue is that the ************ does not understand me, the client, not the other way around. I was very clear that the communication was a problem and the level of service and output was not adequate for the wedding shoot. I am not asking for a refund of the engagement shoot even though I am not satisfied with the overall result. My communication regarding complaints on the quality of service, including the ability of the ************ to perform on the day of the wedding has been timely and consistent. They cannot claim to be surprised as the issues started and were communicated in the first interactions with Sound Originals before our engagement shoot, and throughout my continued interactions with them. I also complained about the overall quality of the engagement photos and in my first communication after receiving the photos, which they misrepresented their response. In that first communication after the engagement photoshoot, I wrote the following:
  "Generally speaking there are many shots where we are off center or the entire photo is crooked, telling us that there is a communication barrier here and/or that there isnt enough attention paid to details like our relative position to the foreground and the farming of the foreground in the shot."
  

  4) In their previous response, Sound Originals claims I said the photos are fantastic.  That is factually incorrect and can be proven through screen shots of our communications through their online client portal. My direct response to them said the following, where its clear I thought some of the shots were fantastic but had problems with many of the others, AND reiterating the aforementioned prompt communication back to them on the communication barrier.

  This is my response:
  We received the engagement photos last week and there are some fantastic shots! We had a couple of questions as we look through these we're hoping you can answer:
  1.) Unfortunately I have a surgical scar on my arm that's covered by a bandage, can that be photoshopped out on a few of our favorite shots?
  2.) We are still concerned about the level of communication we have received. When we met **** we told her we were ok with feedback and lots of direction. She said she was Russian and didn't fully understand. We MUST have very clear communication with the ************s on the day and we're not confident right now that we have that. Can we choose who the second ************ is based on their portfolio and communication style, and given some of the language barriers we would like the pre-wedding meeting to include both of the ************s who will be there on the day. We are not comfortable having our wedding day shot by someone who cannot communicate well with us or our families.
  Generally speaking there are many shots where we are off center or the entire photo is crooked, telling us that there is a communication barrier here and/or that there isnt enough attention paid to details like our relative position to the foreground and the farming of the foreground in the shot. We expect ************s to provide direction and ask questions to achieve both centered shots with the background or intentionally off centered shots. We also did not get a chance to see the shots on the camera screen as we worked to adjust and reshoot as needed. This would have helped reshoot the action shots that did not meet our standard for example. Again we just want to reiterate we're fine with the engagement shoot but we are not ok to repeat that level of communication on our wedding day.
  
  5) They claim the ************ is a "long-time team member" and in their own communications with us could not verify for how long she had been working with them. The ************ told us directly and in person that she had been with Sound Originals for less than a year and she did not know even basic facts of how they worked.  One example of that was the ************ (****) did not know I was denied access to her portfolio when I requested Sound Originals to share it with me. The ************ was also surprised that I had not picked her, rather she was assigned to me directly. 
  

  All of these facts lead me to believe that Sound Originals is unable to perform their commitments and seems to be acting in bad faith, misinterpreting the facts and minimizing or omitting my complaints in their response. If Sound Originals does in fact "take every concern seriously" and are "truly sorry that we did not meet this customer's expectations'' then they should recognize that the best solution for all parties is to void the contract, forgo any further payments and refund the wedding deposit. They claim that they are "willing to honor their commitment to photograph their wedding with extraordinary results", but that is exactly what I am contesting as the basis of my complaint. This is evidenced by my repeated and documented disconformity since March 2024 with the level of service, communication and the pictures received as well as the ************'s inability to understand me, the client, and what I want. Other professional wedding ************s I have shown the pictures to since, as well as family and friends, have confirmed my concerns that Sound Originals is unable to produce acceptable results, let alone the extraordinary results they are committing to in this mediation.

  
  It is in the best interest of Sound Originals to void the contract. It would also be good business practice for Sound Originals to negotiate a refund of the wedding deposit as no service has been provided. My complaints have been clear, consistent and communicated before the engagement shoot, right after the shoot and even after their lack of follow through to their own commitments to find a replacement ************ for the wedding. 
  Sound Originals' reputational risk in this case is far greater than trying to collect a small sum for services that have not been rendered.   
  

  Sincerely,
  *******************************
   

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/09/2024

  Hi ******,

  We are so sorry you are disappointed. Respectfully, many of the statements you are making are simply not true. We have a legally binding contract and we respectfully request that you honor your commitment and obligation, just as we will. Our contract contains a provision for you to cancel. We know we cant please everyone, but we certainly wish we could. We wish you all the best!

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/09/2024

   
  Complaint: 22035215
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  
  Sound Originals claims our statements are untrue but they fail to provide proof or any documentation that we are making untrue claims.

   

  1. They have not proven the photographer they provided could adequately speak English.

  2. They did not acknowledge we provided screen shots of our exact statements to them clarifying language used in our communications, especially around our initial expression of dissatisfaction with their service.

  3. They did not comment on the fact they said theyd look into providing another photographer and never did so (a documented conversation we included screenshots of).

  4. They did not prove that their photographer had been with the company for a long time as they claim, when she told us she had not been there less than a year.

   

  
  Sincerely,
  
  *******************************

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/20/2024

  Dear ******,

  Thank you for paying the additional charge explained in your contract. We now consider this matter resolved since you have complied with the contract we both signed. Thank you. We are very sorry that you did not feel your photographer **** was a great match for you. She has worked with many other clients and gotten excellent results. A photographers personality can be subjective, and we completely understand if you didnt feel a connection with her. You have the option to cancel your contract, and you have decided to do so. We are truly sorry we didnt have the opportunity to serve you on your wedding day. Thank you again for complying with your contract. We will always honor the terms that we agreed to.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:12/17/2023

  Type:Sales and Advertising Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Sound Originals engaged in deceptive pricing practices when interacting with me earlier this year, as I was shopping for a wedding videographer. Sound Originals falsely told me that their sale was expiring and that I would be ineligible for the sale price without signing a contract within the hour. They sent numerous highly pressuring emails stating that I had only minutes to sign a contract with them, or the sale would go away. I subsequently paid a deposit of $1,389.15 on February 5th, 2023. However, in the subsequent weeks and months, I observed that the "sale" was still ongoing. I believe Sound Originals violated FTC rules against inaccurate and misleading price comparisons, and advertised a "limited" sale that in fact, is not limited. Sound Originals does not routinely sell their product at the displayed regular price, and instead persistently advertises a "sale" in order to pressure consumers into signing a contract quickly. Their current website pricing page even now advertises a sale, suggesting that they advertise a "sale" year-round. I contacted the business to air my concerns and request a refund, as I no longer felt comfortable working with a company who practices in this way, however was denied. I previously submitted this complaint to the Washington state **************************** around April 2023, and received a long written response from Sound Originals. This response did not adequately explain their behavior, and also attempted to perpetuate the false idea that I had been looking at the wrong website. Actually, even today, they still use the website ************************************************** that I had been viewing their pricing packages on.There are two documents attached: Sound originals letter BBB.pdf Sound Originals documentation 12-16-23.pdf Please contact me if these do not transmit.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 12/17/2023

  Eight months ago, ********** submitted a similar complaint to the Attorney General of ****************. Sound Originals provided a detailed response. After reviewing ************** complaint and our response, the Attorney General closed the case. We have not heard from ********** since then. We believe this matter is closed. Here is a copy of our detailed response provided to the Attorney General back in April 2023.

  ---

  Sound Originals is a small wedding photography and videography business with 4 full-time employees. We have successfully served more than ***** clients since opening in 2017. We believe we have earned a reputation for integrity, professionalism and outstanding service. 
  We appreciate the opportunity to submit this voluntary response to Dr. **** complaint. We believe her allegations are false and materially mistaken. For example, contrary to her claims, we did not pressure her to sign a contract for our Evergreen package. As discussed below, we twice voluntarily extended her discount period to give her more time to review the contract, consider other options and make an informed decision. Each time, she let the discount periods run literally to the eleventh hour before contacting us. It seems the only pressure she may have faced was the time pressure she imposed on herself. Further, some of her key allegations are factually flawed. Her contract applied the discount price in effect in early February 2023, when she signed the contract. However, we routinely update our pricing packages, and had stopped using the specific website pricing page she had originally reviewed. ********** was apparently unaware of our updated pricing page, but mistakenly kept monitoring the outdated version. This mistake forms an essential part of her complaint. 
  It appears to us that ********** signed her contract, and then more than a month later, just changed her mind about using our services. We know this sometimes happens with some customers. But it does not relieve them of their contract obligations. 
  1. WE DID NOT PRESSURE **********. SHE CONSIDERED HIRING US FOR ALMOST A FULL MONTH BEFORE SIGNING THE CONTRACT. 
  ********** first submitted an inquiry to us on our website on January 10, 2023. We promptly sent her an email with a link to our then current webpage which summarized our regular and discount prices. We advised her the discounted price was available until January 25th, two weeks after she submitted her inquiry. ********** scheduled a phone call with us on January 23, during which we offered to extend her discount period because we had a special marketing interest in filming at her venue. Extensions like this were very rare. We also offered to pay on her behalf her venues fee for hiring an outside videographer, something we have never before offered to any customer. 
  We believe the email correspondence attached to Dr. **** complaint speaks for itself and shows that we did not pressure her. A day after our phone call, on January 24, we sent ********** an online contract (page 7 of the attachment to her complaint), which she reviewed, but did not sign. More than a week later, on February 3, ********** requested and accessed the contract again. We asked via email if she had any hesitations. ********** replied, as shown on page 11 of the attachment to her complaint: 
  No hesitations really just waiting to compare a few more quotes. 
  We extended her discount period a second time to allow ample opportunity to compare alternatives, review the contract and make an informed decision. We sent ********** a new link to the contract because the original version expired. On February 5, after asking and receiving
  answers to routine questions, ********** signed the contract and paid a non-refundable retainer. 
  ********** waited until nearly midnight on February 5 to sign the contract on her own accord, even though we had provided her with a copy more than a week earlier (on January 24) and again on February 3. Electronic records show she accessed the contract multiple times during that period. ********** never raised concerns with us, never indicated she felt pressured, and instead seemed enthusiastic. Ironically, our decision to offer her these extensions so she had extra time to review the contract is now a key feature for her allegations of feeling pressured. 
  The day after we received her signed contract, on February 6, we began fulfilling our contractual obligations to **********. We reserved her wedding date in our calendar and assigned a videographer to her event. Among other things, the videographer committed to this obligation, researched Dr. **** venue and began planning for location scouting. We set up Dr. **** online Client Portal, and provided her with an extensive planning guide and a detailed questionnaire to complete and return to us. We use the questionnaire to help us plan how best to work with our clients and to execute our services. We also invited her to schedule a planning session where she could meet her videographer, receive help with her timeline, and plan a video shot list, editing preferences and music selection. 
  ********** did not reply to our contacts or invitation. We had no further communication with her for 6 weeks, until March 21, when she asked to cancel her contract. On rare occasions, customers have second thoughts after committing to a videographer. Weddings are deeply personal affairs, and clients sometimes find another videographer they prefer or simply decide to allocate their budget elsewhere. However, our contract with ********** clearly explains that the reservation payment covers many pre-wedding services and is not refundable. 
  2. ************** ALLEGATIONS RELY ON AN WHAT HAD BECOME AN OUTDATED WEB PRICING PAGE THAT WE WERE NO LONGER USING 
  We offer a variety of wedding packages, which we routinely update in response to market conditions and other factors. Promptly after a customer submits an online inquiry form to us, we email them a link to a pricing page in effect at that time. The only way to access this pricing page is by clicking the email link or typing the exact address into a browser. It is not otherwise accessible to visitors of our website. 
  Multiple screenshots attached to Dr. **** complaint reveal her misunderstanding of how the pricing page is used. Weeks after signing her contract, she was still mistakenly monitoring a website pricing page that had become stale, outdated and which we no longer used or were circulating. She incorrectly believed our pricing had not changed since February 5, when she signed the contract, when it actually had changed soon afterwards. 
  On pages 3, 31 and 32 of the attachments to her complaint, ********** attached a screenshot of www.soundoriginals.com/packages. The annotations she made on page 31 of the attachment state that she was monitoring this webpage and capturing screenshots: 
  I started to notice that the sale price was still being advertised, even though I had been clearly told it had ended on February 4th and had been extended to February 5th for me out of a courtesy.
  ********** was mistaken. We had not been updating or using this webpage for weeks. We only sent this page to customers who had submitted an inquiry to us in January and early February. After that, customers were sent different pages, with different prices, and different package configuration options. Unless she had submitted a later inquiry, ********** would in all likelihood be unaware that our packages and prices had changed. For example, potential clients who submitted inquiries later in February and March 2023 were directed to the page, www.soundoriginals.com/packages-******. 
  The stale webpage ********** was mistakenly monitoring was not accessible to visitors on our main website. The specific page ********** referenced was accessible only to clients who inquired weeks earlier and received the link via email. It has not been our practice to delete outdated pricing pages. After signing a contract, a client has no material reason to continue accessing or monitoring the pricing page, since the relevant information was included in their signed contract. 
  At the time ********** submitted her complaint to the Attorney General on April 18, 2023, we had already changed our pricing from what we charged customers just a few weeks earlier. For example, the Evergreen package was now offered at a price of $1500 and also included additional services. (********** had contracted to pay what on February 5 was the then discounted price of $1900.) 
  3. CUSTOMERS RECEIVE A DISCOUNT IF THEY BOOK WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF INQUIRING 
  We occasionally offer incentives for potential customers to encourage them to book us within two weeks of submitting an inquiry. It is valuable to our business when customers make decisions on an informed basis and in an efficient manner, since it allows us to more efficiently and effectively plan our own staffing needs, manage our recruiting and training, allocate our marketing resources, respond to customer inquiries and provide completed products to our clients. Our videographers also can better plan their own schedules. The purpose of our discounts was never to mislead customers. We believe our pricing materials, email messages, phone conversations and contracts fully explain how our discounts work. 
  4. OUR REGULAR PRICES ARE REAL, AND WE HAVE TOLD MANY CUSTOMERS THEY NEED TO PAY THEM 
  Some pricing pages display regular and discount prices. The regular price is based on what real customers of Sound Originals have paid, over several years, consistent with FTC Title 16 Chapter I ***************** 233, as it is an actual, bona fide price at which the article was offered to the public on a regular basis for a reasonably substantial period of time. Like many companies with various products, our packages vary based on demand and other competitive factors. Exact comparisons are difficult. But we always display regular prices in good faith. 
  For example, Dr. **** pricing page showed the regular price of Redwood was $4800. Redwood includes 2 videographers, 8 hours, and a documentary film. In the past, we had a number of customers who booked a similar package for $4000, without a documentary film. The price for a documentary film is $800. Therefore, Redwoods regular price is shown as $4800. 
  5. WE HAVE ONLY VERY RARELY EXTENDED THE DISCOUNT PERIOD FOR A POTENTIAL CUSTOMER, EVEN IF A POTENTIAL CUSTOMER REQUESTED IT 
  We have received more than ***** inquiries from potential customers since January 2023. We
  automatically send an email response to each inquiry with a link to the then current pricing page. Most potential customers never respond to these emails. A small number ask for an extension to the discount period. We told almost all of them that they must pay the regular price if they book after the relevant discount period expires. Here are a few examples: 
  On February 11, 2023, a potential customer looking for a videographer asked to extend the discount period. We declined, and told them they would have to pay the regular price if they booked after the discount period expired. They did not respond. 
  On March 23, 2023, a potential customer asked when the discount period ended. We informed the customer their discount period had already ended. They did not reply and we did not follow up or offer an extension. 
  On March 26, 2023, a potential customer asked for an extension. We declined, and the customer proceeded to book us at the regular price. 
  On April 12, 2023, we told a potential customer their discount period expired, and did not offer to extend it. 
  Sound Originals offered ********** an extension for a unique business reason. We hoped to film a wedding at her venue for our marketing portfolio. There were several other customers this year who were offered an extension of the discount period for similar reasons. Some of them booked, while others did not. 
  6. IT APPEARS ********** ENCOURAGED A FAMILY MEMBER TO SUBMIT A DISINGENUOUS INQUIRY TO US 
  In her complaint, ********** says she solicited a family member, *********************************, to submit an inquiry to Sound Originals on March 29, 2023. We believe our responses illustrate that our interactions with customers provide transparent information about discount and regular pricing. 
  Upon receiving her inquiry, we automatically sent ******************** an email with a link to our then current pricing page, soundoriginals.com/packages-******. This page was different from the outdated pricing page that ********** was mistakenly monitoring. A screenshot on page 36 of the attachment to Dr. **** complaint plainly shows that ******************** almost immediately forwarded to ********** a copy of our email. We do not know why ********** asked ******************** to submit an inquiry. However, it suggests they were collaborating, perhaps with the intention to effect some kind of sting. 
  As we routinely do with other potential customers, our email to ******************** advised that the discount pricing expired 2 weeks after her inquiry. She did not respond, and we never contacted her to offer an extension. 
  7. SOUND ORIGINALS IS STILL WILLING TO HONOR ITS CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS 
  Sound Originals is still available to provide the contracted services for Dr. **** wedding, in accordance with the terms of our contract. 
  
  

  
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 12/23/2023

   
  Complaint: 21019244
  
  I am rejecting this response because: Sound Originals failed to recognize the validity of my complaint; failed to provide the refund; and simply forwarded the exact same aggressive, rude, and outdated response they did earlier this year. I encourage the BBB to closely review the documents I have provided which shows evidence of deceptive and unethical advertising. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  *****************

• Initial Complaint

  Date:11/17/2023

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Note: My Event Planner, ***************************** and I will be named co-defendants should this escalate legally.**** hired this company to shoot my son's birthday party on 10/31/2023, starting at 9:30 am. The pictures that were delivered were unacceptable. At first, I was willing to accept these bad images if the business would revise the colors and saturation. As the contract states, I cannot change the photos without their permission but I can request a revision. It was denied.I then reached out to the owner, asking for the price of owning the rights to the raw footage, but he would not give me a straight answer. He then began to fling bizarre accusations against me, saying that I was trying to extort him for free images. I have the entire exchange on text to verify that I never asked for free work. I was even willing to pay extra to salvage the poor work.I wrote a Yelp review detailing my horrible experience with them. The business owner called through a blocked number, threatening to delete the photos by 9 am today because of my review...which is retaliation and both illegal and unethical.This experience was so unsettling that, at my own expense, I hired a lawyer and field-area experts who were willing to look at the images to verify if I had a case. They assured me that the price doesn't reflect the low caliber of work provided, nor does it resemble any of their other work on the company's portfolio/social media. They determined this is a strong case of false advertising.At this point, we don't want anything from these people other than our money back. They can keep their images, and we are happy to sign a waiver stating that I agree not to use them. If we cannot compromise outside of court, we will have no choice but to litigate. Should we go to court, the experts will serve as witnesses. I will ask the Judge to have this company cover the cost of the expert consultation for photography and legal advice, which will be very costly.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 11/17/2023

  We have reviewed the complaint from **************. Sound Originals is a photography studio that proudly serves approximately ***** clients a year. The vast majority of our clients are extremely happy with our services. ****************** event planner, *****************************, entered into a contract with us to provide photography services for ****************** party. ************** is a repeat client of ours and has hired and worked with us before. We believe we honored the terms of the contract for this event. We delivered hundreds of images edited with the exact same style and "preset" that we showcase on our website. In fact, ************** selected the editing style that she preferred, known as the "Rustic Collection," which is a dark and ***** editing style. We are confused why ************** is so unhappy with the images. Photography can be highly subjective. We have also been in contact with ****************** event planner, **************. She told us by telephone that she is very satisfied with the images. She has asked for our permission to post them on her own website to showcase her work as an event planner. We invited ************** to have a phone discussion with us. She refused. Instead, she demanded a refund and access to the unedited RAW images, or she threatened to begin leaving negative reviews on social media. The contract explains that clients can purchase the unedited RAW photos. ************** has refused to purchase them. We stand by the images that we delivered to **************. We believe they are consistent with our portfolio. We continue to invite ************** to have a discussion with us and to purchase the unedited RAW photos. For reference, here is a link to the gallery of edited images. (*******************************************************************************************)

  Customer Answer

  Date: 11/27/2023

  On the evening of Thursday, Nov 16, 2023, minutes after I had written a bad review on Yelp, the owner, ***, immediately called my event planner on a private number and threatened to delete the raw footage the next day by 9 am, presumably if I did not take down my bad review. 
  
  When I confronted ************* text, he did not deny doing this, saying, "We are in the process of deleting photos and other files in our cloud storage." How interesting that he just happened to delete my photos when they were not even in his cloud system for 14 days, as required in the contract.
  
  This business is predatory, and I urge BBB to step in and stop them from taking advantage of others. They charged me $1,150 (way above market price in my area) and delivered photos that did not resemble the level of the work they advertised. They refused to make revisions nor authorize anyone else to edit them. Instead, they want me to spend an additional $800 to purchase the raw footage and spend even more to have someone more competent edit them. As if that's not enough, they created drama, accusing me of extorting them for free work, which I can prove is false since all my communications with them are written. Also, I don't want their work at all, because as I said before, it's very bad.
  
  At this point, the only resolution is for the business to is*** a full refund and for my Event Planner and I to agree to refrain from using the pictures. This solution is them getting off easy. If not, I will *** them and my event planner as co-defendants.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 11/29/2023

  The response window was closed in my complaint against Sound Originals. It said I could email my response if I would like. Here is my response: On the evening of Thursday, Nov 16, 2023, minutes after I had written a bad review on Yelp, the owner, ***, immediately called my event planner on a private number and threatened to delete the raw footage the next day by 9 am, presumably if I did not take down my bad review. When I confronted ************* text, he did not deny doing this, saying, "We are in the process of deleting photos and other files in our cloud storage." How interesting that he just happened to delete my photos when they were not even in his cloud system for 14 days, as required in the contract. This business is predatory, and I urge BBB to step in and stop them from taking advantage of others. They charged me $1,150 (way above market price in my area) and delivered photos that did not resemble the level of the work they advertised. They refused to make revisions nor authorize anyone else to edit them. Instead, they want me to spend an additional $800 to purchase the raw footage and spend even more to have someone more competent edit them. As if that's not enough, they created drama, accusing me of extorting them for free work, which I can prove is false since all my communications with them are written. Also, I don't want their work at all, because as I said before, it's very bad. At this point, the only resolution is for the business to is*** a full refund and for my Event Planner and I to agree to refrain from using the pictures. This solution is them getting off easy. If not, I will *** them and my event planner as co-defendants.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 12/07/2023

  We are sorry this customer is so unhappy. We believe the photos meet our quality standards and are very consistent with our portfolio. We have not received any communication from this customer, and she did not reply to our multiple offers to schedule a meeting or phone call to discuss her concerns. We wish her all the very best.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 12/08/2023

   
  Complaint: 20885991
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  This company is lying. They claim to be an Emmy ***** winning studio, but the caliber of work they did for me looks worse than amateur.

  I have requested that they reach out to me in writing many times in order to resolve this. However they have refused opting instead to only take phone calls. It is highly suspicious that they do not want a record of our communication.

  They are scammers and consumers need to be protected from these people.

  Sincerely,
  
  *******************