Furious couple sue wedding photographer who took 96 pictures of bridesmaids - including revealing close-ups - but only 70 shots of the bride and 11 of the groom - and a third were out of focus (10 Pics)

A bride has described her horror after her wedding photographer took nearly 100 pictures of her bridesmaids on her big day - allegedly including 'bum and breast' shots.
Steph Unwin, who tied the knot in summer 2015, claims snapper David Kilcourse captured three photos of one of her bridesmaid's bottoms, insisting: "That's not an accident."
She and her groom Paul Unwin were shocked when they received their set of wedding snaps from Kilcourse, who has denied the allegations and claimed "they cropped the pictures down".
Steph, 29, allegedly discovered the photographer took 96 pictures of her bridesmaids - even more than the 70 of her and the 11 of Paul - with her in-laws not even featured in the shots.
It is also claimed more than a third were out of focus.
The bride has now spoken out after Kilcourse was sued over the wedding pictures. She and Paul took him to court in September 2016 and won £601 after he failed to turn up to the case.
Steph, who was refunded by the photographer following the case, said: “He caused so much heartache.
"We have so many moments missing from our big day.
“When we got some of the pictures, I said to him, 'Is this all of them because I’m really disappointed?'
“He turned around and said he took thousands of pictures. When we received them, he’d taken 1,636 images and 559 were out of focus. He called them ‘misfires’.
“There were none of the in-laws, one of my parents and almost 100 of the two bridesmaids."
She alleged: “He took pictures of one of my bridesmaid’s breasts, some of her bum. There were more pictures of just the bridesmaids than anything else. I’m sure he was doing that on purpose.
“I know that photography is interpreted differently by different people but when he takes three pictures of someone’s bum, that’s not an accident.”
Steph and Paul, 30, from Bollington, Cheshire, hired Kilcourse to work at their June 2015 wedding.
They purchased a package which included the full day and all its various stages, including the bride getting ready, the ceremony, the meal and the night time.
It also contained a photobook, two prints, edited images and a CD.
But Steph claimed Kilcourse didn't show up until after the groom arrived.
“He didn’t turn up until after the groom’s arrival, by which point we were all ready," she said.
“He didn’t get family pictures and missed my mum, dad and in laws. On pictures he took using the photo booth, you can see hanging equipment and the metal frame in the background.
“We received no photo album. He just sent the pictures via disk after I complained.
“He claimed the pictures he’d sent us were edited but they weren’t. My husband wore a grey suit but on the pictures, it looked blue.
“A lot of the pictures were angled so they wouldn’t look right in a photo frame.
“The pictures he showed us before we booked him were really nice, well done photos.
“Thankfully we had a videographer.”
The young woman said she had learned that other brides have complained about Kilcourse's work.

She also claimed he was still advertising his services on his website last week.
However, the photographer said the company had folded.
He denied the allegations against him, saying it was bad weather all day and that the couple's claim that he had taken inappropriate pictures was "disproved".
Kilcourse said: “The company has folded since then. As far as I’m concerned it’s all done and dusted.
“As a company we did over 1,000 weddings and we only had, probably in all that time, 10 complaints of that severity.

“It’s a matter of opinion that we didn’t fulfil the package.
"Steph said that we didn’t take any outside shots of the wedding, when it was pouring it down all day. According to my terms and conditions we say that we can’t control the weather.

“They claimed I had taken inappropriate images but they cropped the pictures down. They said I’d taken inappropriate pictures which was disproved.
“I got so much hassle through weddings that I just stopped doing it."
He added: “The reason I didn’t turn up to court was that it was in Nottingham, it would have cost me a fortune. The court ruled in her favour.”

Powered by Blogger.