We briefly mentioned a lawsuit in which a bride (who happens to be a lawyer) was suing her florist for $400,000 after she was disappointed with the wedding flowers she paid $30,000 for.
Now, the Wall Street Journal has tracked down the filing so we can bask in the litigiousness of it all.
According to the filing, the florist is accused of “materially failing to perform in accordance with” their agreement by ” substituting different and less expensive flowers than the ones required under the contract, and failing to provide specific items Plaintiffs paid for.” They’re also accusing the florist of “using wilted and/or browned flowers, leaving the event without filling half the centerpieces with water” and “using dusty or dirty vases.”
One interesting part of the complaint (from a consumer standpoint) is the bride’s assertion that she was falsely lead to believe that the florist didn’t accept credit card payments, and such deception is a common tactic of shady wedding vendors. From the complaint:
“It is a common scheme for wedding vendors to claim that they do not accept credit card payments and instead require money to be paid upfront and in a non-refundable form. Wedding services are unique in the sense that payment is usually required upfront prior to receiving services, not after. Often, dishonest vendors insist upon payment by cash or check so that in the event of a dispute, it will be harder for the bride to get back her money. “
Elana Glatt, Tobi Glatt, and David Glatt V. Posy Floral Design Studios, INC and Paula Arakas (PDF) [WSJ via WSJ Law Blog]
More From Consumerist
-
Washington State Sues Florist Who Refused To Provide Flowers For Same-Sex Wedding
-
Trolley Company Leaves Wedding Business Rather Than Let Gay Couples Take A Spin
-
Make Sure That Local Florist You Found On Google Really Is Local
-
This Year’s Mother’s Day Garden of Discontent Is Wonderfully Small
-
Florists Hate FTD And Teleflora Even More Than Disappointed Girlfriends Do
Luckily there should be tons of documentation… unless of course the photographer and videographer didn’t show
Call me an ass, but I just can’t seem to feel sympathy for a lawyer over anything.
Wait. This is the same lady that was filing a lawsuit against the vendor for using flowers that were a shade of pink instead of a dark red. At first glance, at least, it sounds to me like she’s changing the suit to something that’s easier to swing by the courts. And while I’ll agree that unscrupulous wedding vendors will often pull the “cash up-front scam” (plenty of stories about that on Etiquette Hell), I’d love to hear the vendor’s point of view on all this.
Having spent $30k on flowers, I find it particuarly easy to snark on this. However, having myself paid full price for some flowers and ending up getting crap, I say sick ‘em.
@Jaysyn:
OK, you’re an ass. She’s a lawyer. That doesn’t change the fact that she was defrauded. The florist specifically promised A, was paid in advance for A, and then provided B, which was a poor, and much cheaper substitute, for A.
BTW, the payment upfront is very typical. Otherwise, to look at it from the vendor’s point of view, you run into bridezillas who say “I saw one modestly wilted flower in the arrangement on table 23, I’m charging back the whole $30k!”
This woman needs a swift kick in the face, and by kick, I mean bullet, and by face, I mean face.
@Girtych: Either that, or she’s had the same complaints the whole time, and the press just reported the ones that sounded the most ridiculous because it made better headlines.
@Yourhero88: Yes, violence will surely solve this problem, the way it solves so many others.
400k in ‘damages’ for 30k in flowers is completly absurd. I hope she loses simply because she is greedy.
@Jaysyn:
I agree completely. Hopefully she won’t take her pants to the dry cleaners anytime soon…
Is there a law that merchants have to take credit cards?
Show me the law. SHOW ME THE LAW!
There is no law that merchants have to take credit cards. But there IS a law that prohibits undue enrichment and a law that requires someone to abide by the terms of a contract. $30,000 in flowers is a lot of money…you’d think she would have used something other than a check to pay.
The vendor is right that there are way too many insane people getting married. Or getting married turns sane people into monsters.
But if you spent some huge amount of money on flowers you expect to get what you paid for. I am assuming that they had some sort of big status event for their wedding if they paid 30g for flowers. At that level of trying to impress people having half dead dirty looking arrangements would not be acceptable.
But $30g for flowers WTF. There are people starving in Africa.
Have any photos of said flowers been published yet? No flowers, no matter how ugly, should cause you “extreme disappointment, distress and embarrassment” or leave you needing to “get our reputation back”. If they were wilted and the vases were dirty, I can see her getting some money back, but crappy flowers should not equal emotional distress.
Wow. Nothing like turning $270k profit on something that no one would have known about anyways!
BY YOURHERO88 AT 01:22 PM
This woman needs a swift kick in the face, and by kick, I mean bullet, and by face, I mean face.
Suggesting that a woman should be shot in the face because she expects a vendor to live up to their contract is the kind of violent BS that should get you banned. There is enough violence in the world without you suggesting more of it for non-violent contract disputes.
That filing reads as though this woman wrote it herself. I understand that she did not get what she paid for, but that is one petulant-sounding filing.
Be smarter next time and do research on vendors, before dropping someone’s yearly salary on flowers.
@Yourhero88: dude, talk about taking it too far.
1) A merchant can take payment in any form it wants, but one of the hallmarks of an unscrupulous wedding vendor is the claim that they don’t take credit card payments.
2) A huge wedding might not be something you want to pay for, but if she wants one, she shouldn’t be thrown out of court for having one. Maybe she donated half her salary to the starving children in Africa… we just don’t know!
3) I’m pretty sure that bad flowers didn’t cause $400,000 in damages.
What is it about weddings, anyway? People have a beautiful time. They eat cake and dance. Everyone is smiling. Why does one wrong thing totally ruin it for the bride?
Me? I got married at the courthouse on less than five days’ notice. It was fine. The rest of the marriage has been amazing!
@erratapage: You would be surprised how much emotional distress and social embarassment and ruin pink-and-green hydrangeas can cause, especially when they don’t match your rust-colored theme. She’ll never be able to live it down, because now all her rich friends and relatives think she thinks that pink ‘n green matches rust. Her in-laws will probaby not-so-subtly suggest to her new husband that he could have perhaps done better. Awful.
Why does one wrong thing totally ruin it for the bride?
@erratapage: The idea (maybe even pressure) that it has to be perfect. Anything from nagging and interference from the family to having OCD. That and the people you’re giving money to are telling you that your wedding should be perfect and that’s why it’s worth spending the money.
@erratapage: Ive been to 200k weddings and weddings at the VFW with deli trays. I have more fun at the cheap ones. I dont get how she is claiming 400k in damages either, but if that was the final cost of the wedding I could understand it, if not support the claim.
@Skeptic:
Suggesting that a woman should be shot in the face because she expects a vendor to live up to their contract is the kind of violent BS that should get you banned.
I agree — YourHero88 will no longer be gracing us with his presence. I’m only leaving his comment in place because half the other comments on the thread refer to it.
Thanks to all who brought that violent BS to my attention.
$30,000 for flowers? I would’ve done it for $15,000.
I don’t know anybody with a credit limit at or above $30,000. How could somebody put something like that on a credit card?
But then again, who would pay $30,000 for flowers? My whole wedding cost less than half of what this woman paid for flowers!
so she paid a lot for flowers. she’s either loaded or debt happy. since she’s a lawyer, i’m guessing she’s loaded.
but don’t give her crap for having to deal with a broken contract. anyone that has experience the simple pain and annoyance of a vender or contractor that fails to deliver can empathize. it’s not fun.
p.s. in ie7, the huge title has spilled over into the article.
What I see a lot from watching those “court shows” is it always seems to be the bride that wants to sue for something that was not right at her wedding.
The groom usually could care less. The wedding is over with. The main reason you had the wedding is to join with a partner for the rest of your life.
Get on with that life and quit making a big deal about everything you didn’t like at the wedding.
If you spent $30,000 on flowers who were you trying to impress? What kind of wife is this going to make that she cares more about how the flowers were than concentrating on her new husband?
I see a divorce in the future.
@bohemian: Yes, for $30K she could have fed a lot of starving children in Africa… and Guatemala… and China… and have some left over to give me to buy a car.. or two!
What I don’t get is where she came up with the $400,000 she wants for the lawsuit. I would give her a lot more support if she just wanted the $30K back. Could droopy flowers and a dusty vase really completely destroy your wedding? I’d like to know what her husband thinks. “Well, honey, I’m glad you’ve totally overshadowed the symbolism of the day and the gathering of our families over some dead foliage. That’s my girl!”
@liquisoft: If you’re willing to pay $30,000 for flowers, you probably have a credit limit that large…
I, on the other hand, with my credit card limit only in the “new mid to subcompact car” range, could not afford this “moderately priced SUV” range of limit, so I don’t really know.
I’ve read that she asked the vendor for $4,000 to settle the whole thing (which is 1/10 of what she payed for the crappy flowers), and the vendor refused.
Honestly, most of the critical comments towards the Glatts seems to stem from a) hating rich people, b) hating lawyers, c) hating women, or d) a complete lack of reading comprehension.
The vendor allegedly reneged on the contract. Now the vendor is trying to weasel out of refunding the money. It’s pretty simple.
@Consumerist Moderator – ACAMBRAS:
Wow, justice in action. Beautiful.
@DrGirlfriend:
First, there have to lawsuits out there in the world that aren’t filed by attorneys on their own behalf that don’t come off as obnoxious. Those, however, don’t get reported on and are likely rare, given that not every lawyer is a contract lawyer (or an ethics lawyer, in the case of Jack Thompson, or a sane person, in the case of that pants guy).
Second: your handle is awesome.
@liquisoft:
I’m 26 and my limit is 17k. My dad’s is unlimited. I’m sure she had enough credit, although I’m not sure they allow single purchases of that much. I’m also not sure of the wedge Visa would take out of that purchase.
Amen to you though for having a (relatively) cheap wedding. May mine be as sane someday.
@muddgirl: If she feels that 4k would settle it why is she sue for 400k? It seems to me that is why people are angry. Its like Mr. Pants, its tough to see why people would look to make a windfall off a simple vendor error. If she had sued for 4k, or even the 30k cost of the flowers this wouldnt be a story.
@muddgirl:
You got it. 400k probably covers the wedding + “emotional damages,” but she’ll probably settle for 10k or less though just to get it over with.
And we all get another field day to bash on crazy lawyers. Weehaw.
@krylonultraflat:
Thanks. Again, the fact that other commenters flagged the report made it possible for me to respond quickly. I’m glad there are so many people around who want to keep Consumerist high-quality.
I’m getting married in 6 months, and if I paid $30,000 for them I would want them fucking perfect! But $400,000 in damages? A little much.
@ArtDonovansLoveChild.: She sues for $400,000 so that a jury can award her maximum damages, if they see fit. If she only sues for $30k, then that’s the most the jury can award her, even if the jury decides she suffered punitive damages as well. It’s a very common strategy.
As a professional photographer, I have to take issue with this part of the complaint:
Often, dishonest vendors insist upon payment by cash or check so that in the event of a dispute, it will be harder for the bride to get back her money.
I’ve not met a single photographer who is willing to book a wedding without some sort of deposit. While the complaint does not explicitly state that only dishonest vendors require a cash deposit, there’s a strong implication to that end. No vendor is going to set aside a whole day for a wedding (and turn down other potential clients) without some guarantee that they’ll still get paid if the wedding doesn’t happen.
This suit reads like a public service announcement for contracts in the wedding industry.
Oh, I feel her pain. My wedding was over thirty years ago and I can still remember the shock and dismay I felt when the florist delivered flowers that were the completely wrong color. Once you’ve planned this very important day for months, coddling every detail, it’s damn infuriating to see some bozo make a mess. (Luckily, we had only paid a small downpayment, and we simply ignored the subsequent bill. The florist made one phone call for payment, got an earful, and dropped the matter entirely.) I don’t understand why all the harsh words here are for the unlucky bride, rather than the scummy vendor.
@ArtDonovansLoveChild.: While I agree that $400,000 seems a little out of bounds, presuming that the vendor is indeed at fault, the damages need to sting a little.
If the vendor were to pony up just the difference between the $30K she was paid and the actual value of what she delivered, what would be the fairness in that? There needs to be some sort of penalty for failing to perform on the contract. Otherwise, what incentive does the vendor have to deliver? The vendor can cheap out at the front end and leave it to the customer to somehow recoup the actual value of what they paid for.
It’s easy to deride the lawyer in this story because paying $30K for flower is absolfrickinlutely nuts to 99.9% of the people in this country. That said, what would you do if you paid for a loaded BMW 323 and the dealer handed you the keys to one that didn’t have heated seats, GPS, or a sport suspension package…and then told you to go suck it? It would still be a nice car, but it wouldn’t be what you paid for.
@muddgirl:
It’s not even $400K. She has five different counts:
Breach of contract: $43K
Unjust enrichment: $27K
Fraud: $200K compensatory damages + $90K punitive damages
Negligent misrepresentation: $50K
NY Gen. Bus. Law 349: TBD at trial
The $27K for the flowers is included in all of those counts, but it’s not like she’s going to get paid five times if she wins on all counts. She’ll also have to prove damages for each of those counts, and as muddgirl said, the numbers are large primarily so the jury has room to award what it thinks is fair.
For example, let’s assume the wedding cost $200K and the bad flowers ruined it completely. If the florist made an honest screw up, he should still have to provide a refund for his breach of contract, but he’s not necessarily responsible for the other damages to the event, even if they were caused by the bad flowers. If he intentionally provided substandard flowers and knew what that would do to the wedding as a whole, however, then that’s fraud and he’s responsible for a lot more of that bill, and possibly all of it. (This is drastically oversimplified, but you get the idea).
I think it was incredibly wasteful to spend that much on flowers, but that just makes her guilty of being rich and having bad taste. The florist, if the complaint is true, looks to be guilty of a bait and switch fraud, and should not be allowed to get away with it just because his victim is unsympathetic.
Just curious, I understood that most merchant agreements with VISA etc state that in order to accept credit cards as all they must accept them for all purchases, with no minimums or maximums. Of course this isn’t a law thing, its a contract thing so how much could be done by a 3rd party other than making VISA aware of it, I dont know.
@liquisoft:
Amex Black has no credit limit.
FYI.
My girlfriend, who is not rich by any stretch, has a $25000 limit.
@JustAGuy2: Do we know that she was defrauded? Most agreements for flowers have language that basically says we’re not responsible for color variations and reserve the right to substitute if a particular request is unavailable.
I see a bridezilla, and it isn’t pretty.
The moral of the story? Get married at the courthouse, hop a plane to a nice vacation destination and mail out announcements when you get back.
Well, if you want to avoid the pain and anguish.
The funny part is how reactionary people are without understanding the actual suit.
This woman spent money for a specific flower/color/arrangement.
It does not matter how much she spent.
Instead of supplying the woman with the correct flower/correct color/correct arrangement, the florist attempted to enrich the deal for his personal gain by substituting a different flower/color/arrangement.
This is a direct violation of the contract that he is part of.
As a result, this woman’s wedding was ruined. She wasn’t happy. Being as the modern wedding has become one of the most significant parts of the brides life, it is not beyond reason that she is upset over a broken contract that, in her mind, ruined the event.
The fact that she is a lawyer is also of no consequence.
The reality of the situation is that she likely invited more than just family to this event – there were likely clients, partners in her firm, and other parties that may be able to affect her future income. Laugh all you want, but in many cases appearences are important. If just one of the partners decide that her color scheme being off is indicitive of her attention to detail, or a client decides that the flowers were skimpy – so what else will she skimp on – she could lose financially.
The reality is that she was ripped off. A contract was broken.
She is well within her rights to file a lawsuit.
It doesn’t matter one bit that she spent what appears to be too much on flowers. Nor does it matter that she may be wealthy.
What matters here is the integrity of our legal systems integrity in terms of contractual obligations.
Remember, we are all equal under the law (or at least we are supposed to be). That means that her wealth, her profession, and her disposition are not at issue – what is at issue is a long standing set of legal precedents that protect both parties in a contract.
All my merchant agreements, ie contracts with credit card companies, specifically state that if a merchant accepts cards, they must accept a card for any transaction. AMEX is the most aggressive about their cardholders privileges and states that refusal to take a valid card is potentially a $50,000 fee. The entire agreement is about 100 pages.
What kind of wife is this going to make that she cares more about how the flowers were than concentrating on her new husband?
I see a divorce in the future.
@BigNutty: I’m sorry, but that’s just dumb. It’s supposed to be OK for people she’s buying items and/or services from to screw up because it’s a wedding?
It is also funny that no one here is braying about ‘blaming the victim’ when so many clearly are.
I guess ‘rich lawyers’ don’t deserve the same treatment as poor people?
I don’t believe this woman is entitled to $400,000 in damages.
My daughter was married 4 years ago. The flower bill was a comparatively modest $7,000. The roses were an orangey-red, the wedding had a wine theme. Do you have a visual? I was not happy, but my florist did do the work and delivered on time. Knowing this … I walked into the shop andn quietly talked to the owner. BTW,he has a great reputation in our town. He explained the flowers shipped in were not what he had ordered, but had to go with them… No time to reorder. I would have been happier if he would have called me, but he didn’t. Anyway, we had also rented some pew bows, etc. All I asked from him was to take the rental fee off the bill and I would “forget” the mistake. He agreed. I got a great discount, he protected his reputation AND was still able to pay for materials and his staff. We all went away happy. Now we laugh about it.
You see, it’s all in how you look at it. America needs to lighten up a bit!
If it happens as she says, she deserves to win the suit. However I still have little sympathy for the type of person who would spend $30 thousand on FLOWERS for their wedding.