quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
You are not wrong.

+1

Which basically tells you the only person legally on the hook will be a US booking agent if there is one.

This is why holland and holland got out of the safari travel business - a very high end wedding in Kenya/Tanzania went pear shaped - only Holland and Holland as agent was liable.

Your booking agent on high end hunts is a lot of things and well worth his/her commission.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I think it would be valuable (perhaps in another thread) to discuss what can go wrong with a hunt from the viewpoints of the PH and the client and work up a sample contract that protects both parties. With the feedback from so many knowledgeable AR members, this may be a valuable venture.

Many here remember my thread of June and July about hunt contracts. A contract that is so one sided to the agent or PH would never work. Neither would a contract that is slanted toward the hunter. As my attorney told me regarding the contract the agent sent me, "If all goes well you won't remember the contract. If the hunt goes to shit, you will have signed away all of your rights." There must be common ground.

And, what to do about enforcement? Should the contract spell out what is to be done should one side default? I mean, it is probably worth legal time for a 90K$ hunt, but not so for most hunts.

What do you think? Is there a better course all of us can follow? Just wonderin'.
Cal

Just an observation. When you think about areas where there is a strong practice of using industry standard contracts, e.g., gas industry (NAESB), power (EEI), financial power and gas (ISDA), real estate sales (groups like TAR in Texas), construction (AIA), etc., the common element is an industry association that decided that standardizing contracts would help facilitate transactions, make entering into transactions more efficient and timely and result in more uniformity in terms. It takes a lot of work and drafting committees spend lots of time coming up with the agreements and ensuring that they remain up to date. So SCI or DSC is going to do this? Should this be a priority for either group given everything else that is going on? It would be like herding cats.

Mike & Mike:
Thank you for your comments. They come from gents far more educated on the subject than I.
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I think it would be valuable (perhaps in another thread) to discuss what can go wrong with a hunt from the viewpoints of the PH and the client and work up a sample contract that protects both parties. With the feedback from so many knowledgeable AR members, this may be a valuable venture.

Many here remember my thread of June and July about hunt contracts. A contract that is so one sided to the agent or PH would never work. Neither would a contract that is slanted toward the hunter. As my attorney told me regarding the contract the agent sent me, "If all goes well you won't remember the contract. If the hunt goes to shit, you will have signed away all of your rights." There must be common ground.

And, what to do about enforcement? Should the contract spell out what is to be done should one side default? I mean, it is probably worth legal time for a 90K$ hunt, but not so for most hunts.

What do you think? Is there a better course all of us can follow? Just wonderin'.
Cal

I think a good start would to not pay these exorbitant deposits. If you're paying 90k for a hunt upfront, contract or no contract you have no power. But if you pay 20k of a 90k upfront, outfitters are going to be under pressure to deliver what was promised in the contract in order to get paid.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I think it would be valuable (perhaps in another thread) to discuss what can go wrong with a hunt from the viewpoints of the PH and the client and work up a sample contract that protects both parties. With the feedback from so many knowledgeable AR members, this may be a valuable venture.

Many here remember my thread of June and July about hunt contracts. A contract that is so one sided to the agent or PH would never work. Neither would a contract that is slanted toward the hunter. As my attorney told me regarding the contract the agent sent me, "If all goes well you won't remember the contract. If the hunt goes to shit, you will have signed away all of your rights." There must be common ground.

And, what to do about enforcement? Should the contract spell out what is to be done should one side default? I mean, it is probably worth legal time for a 90K$ hunt, but not so for most hunts.

What do you think? Is there a better course all of us can follow? Just wonderin'.
Cal

Just an observation. When you think about areas where there is a strong practice of using industry standard contracts, e.g., gas industry (NAESB), power (EEI), financial power and gas (ISDA), real estate sales (groups like TAR in Texas), construction (AIA), etc., the common element is an industry association that decided that standardizing contracts would help facilitate transactions, make entering into transactions more efficient and timely and result in more uniformity in terms. It takes a lot of work and drafting committees spend lots of time coming up with the agreements and ensuring that they remain up to date. So SCI or DSC is going to do this? Should this be a priority for either group given everything else that is going on? It would be like herding cats.

Herein lies the problem. When both sides of a sport or pastime, which used to be full of Gentlemen, (both sides)relies on an ironclad contract, I rapidly lose interest.

I can just see a contract executed between Shootaway and an outfitter, pic your poison.

Every second of every day in the bush, both the service provider and the client would be making mental notes as not to violate the terms of said contract. Or how the other party has deviated in any way.

A firm handshakes and men looking into one another's eyes for honesty are gone. I also believe most PH's "size-up" a client from the time he steps off the charter, onward.

It may be judgmental, but there have got to be traits associated with problem clients that have a "tell" to them. It is from years of associating a client issue to a trait often repeated with said behavior.

Steve

Now Steve, you told me several years ago I should stop picking on shootaway- and I did back off for a while. Now the gloves are off-for everyone

quote:

Originally posted by Victor Watson:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I think it would be valuable (perhaps in another thread) to discuss what can go wrong with a hunt from the viewpoints of the PH and the client and work up a sample contract that protects both parties. With the feedback from so many knowledgeable AR members, this may be a valuable venture.

Many here remember my thread of June and July about hunt contracts. A contract that is so one sided to the agent or PH would never work. Neither would a contract that is slanted toward the hunter. As my attorney told me regarding the contract the agent sent me, "If all goes well you won't remember the contract. If the hunt goes to shit, you will have signed away all of your rights." There must be common ground.

And, what to do about enforcement? Should the contract spell out what is to be done should one side default? I mean, it is probably worth legal time for a 90K$ hunt, but not so for most hunts.

What do you think? Is there a better course all of us can follow? Just wonderin'.
Cal

I think a good start would to not pay these exorbitant deposits. If you're paying 90k for a hunt upfront, contract or no contract you have no power. But if you pay 20k of a 90k upfront, outfitters are going to be under pressure to deliver what was promised in the contract in order to get paid.

I hear what you are saying. I think about my business. I do my work. At the end of the month, I send out invoices. I hope to be paid by the end of the following month. I am generally funding the costs for at least 60 days, often more. On safari, i am asked to pay months ahead of time. Damn I wish I could get my clients to pay that way.

Steve:
You are a gentleman, patriot, a man of success and a man of honor. The problems with Shootaway can easily be overcome with some help from you. I suggest you now pair 2x1 with Shootaway to show him a better way. Not the rest of your life, but the next 15 to 20 hunting and fishing trips should do it. Think of the good you'd do for everyone here on AR.
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

quote:

Originally posted by Victor Watson:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I think it would be valuable (perhaps in another thread) to discuss what can go wrong with a hunt from the viewpoints of the PH and the client and work up a sample contract that protects both parties. With the feedback from so many knowledgeable AR members, this may be a valuable venture.

Many here remember my thread of June and July about hunt contracts. A contract that is so one sided to the agent or PH would never work. Neither would a contract that is slanted toward the hunter. As my attorney told me regarding the contract the agent sent me, "If all goes well you won't remember the contract. If the hunt goes to shit, you will have signed away all of your rights." There must be common ground.

And, what to do about enforcement? Should the contract spell out what is to be done should one side default? I mean, it is probably worth legal time for a 90K$ hunt, but not so for most hunts.

What do you think? Is there a better course all of us can follow? Just wonderin'.
Cal

I think a good start would to not pay these exorbitant deposits. If you're paying 90k for a hunt upfront, contract or no contract you have no power. But if you pay 20k of a 90k upfront, outfitters are going to be under pressure to deliver what was promised in the contract in order to get paid.

I hear what you are saying. I think about my business. I do my work. At the end of the month, I send out invoices. I hope to be paid by the end of the following month. I am generally funding the costs for at least 60 days, often more. On safari, i am asked to pay months ahead of time. Damn I wish I could get my clients to pay that way.

Larry,
You're not in the construction business are you? If so, don't forget the 10% retainage that is held on every month's payment.

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Steve:
You are a gentleman, patriot, a man of success and a man of honor. The problems with Shootaway can easily be overcome with some help from you. I suggest you now pair 2x1 with Shootaway to show him a better way. Not the rest of your life, but the next 15 to 20 hunting and fishing trips should do it. Think of the good you'd do for everyone here on AR.
Cal

Thanks for that Cal. There was a time that I went out of my way to give George the benefit of the doubt. I even defended him, as I have a friend who has met George and said "He's really a decent guy, English is his second language, give him a break."

Not only is English his second language but it would seem, Earth seems to be his second home.

I shall not uptake the task of mentoring George. I have yet (until yesterday) seen someone blackballed from a hunting organization.

I hope not volunteering for this task doesn't make you feel any different.

quote:

Originally posted by Heeler75:

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

quote:

Originally posted by Victor Watson:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I think it would be valuable (perhaps in another thread) to discuss what can go wrong with a hunt from the viewpoints of the PH and the client and work up a sample contract that protects both parties. With the feedback from so many knowledgeable AR members, this may be a valuable venture.

Many here remember my thread of June and July about hunt contracts. A contract that is so one sided to the agent or PH would never work. Neither would a contract that is slanted toward the hunter. As my attorney told me regarding the contract the agent sent me, "If all goes well you won't remember the contract. If the hunt goes to shit, you will have signed away all of your rights." There must be common ground.

And, what to do about enforcement? Should the contract spell out what is to be done should one side default? I mean, it is probably worth legal time for a 90K$ hunt, but not so for most hunts.

What do you think? Is there a better course all of us can follow? Just wonderin'.
Cal

I think a good start would to not pay these exorbitant deposits. If you're paying 90k for a hunt upfront, contract or no contract you have no power. But if you pay 20k of a 90k upfront, outfitters are going to be under pressure to deliver what was promised in the contract in order to get paid.

I hear what you are saying. I think about my business. I do my work. At the end of the month, I send out invoices. I hope to be paid by the end of the following month. I am generally funding the costs for at least 60 days, often more. On safari, i am asked to pay months ahead of time. Damn I wish I could get my clients to pay that way.

Larry,
You're not in the construction business are you? If so, don't forget the 10% retainage that is held on every month's payment.

No sir. I am a CPA.

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Steve:
You are a gentleman, patriot, a man of success and a man of honor. The problems with Shootaway can easily be overcome with some help from you. I suggest you now pair 2x1 with Shootaway to show him a better way. Not the rest of your life, but the next 15 to 20 hunting and fishing trips should do it. Think of the good you'd do for everyone here on AR.
Cal

Great idea Cal. What a humanitarian.

Things are not to be taken seriously.It's nice to blow off some hot air once in a while.

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Steve:
You are a gentleman, patriot, a man of success and a man of honor. The problems with Shootaway can easily be overcome with some help from you. I suggest you now pair 2x1 with Shootaway to show him a better way. Not the rest of your life, but the next 15 to 20 hunting and fishing trips should do it. Think of the good you'd do for everyone here on AR.
Cal

Steve,

Before accepting this advice please remember the November trip is already fully booked.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Things are not to be taken seriously.It's nice to blow off some hot air once in a while.

It's for sure you have plenty of hot air to blow off and you certainly relieve yourself of it on a very frequent basis....

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Steve:
You are a gentleman, patriot, a man of success and a man of honor. The problems with Shootaway can easily be overcome with some help from you. I suggest you now pair 2x1 with Shootaway to show him a better way. Not the rest of your life, but the next 15 to 20 hunting and fishing trips should do it. Think of the good you'd do for everyone here on AR.
Cal

Steve,

Before accepting this advice please remember the November trip is already fully booked.

Jim,

November is 10 months away. I'm sure they could squeeze George in, but he may want to fish with his 458 Lott.

I think I will go and buy an Xbox and play the new battlefield game.

quote:

Originally posted by Texas Blue Devil:

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Steve:
You are a gentleman, patriot, a man of success and a man of honor. The problems with Shootaway can easily be overcome with some help from you. I suggest you now pair 2x1 with Shootaway to show him a better way. Not the rest of your life, but the next 15 to 20 hunting and fishing trips should do it. Think of the good you'd do for everyone here on AR.
Cal

Steve,

Before accepting this advice please remember the November trip is already fully booked.

Jim,

November is 10 months away. I'm sure they could squeeze George in, but he may want to fish with his 458 Lott.

If Steve brings George, he can have my spot. I don't think i would enjoy the trip.

quote:

Originally posted by Victor Watson:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I think it would be valuable (perhaps in another thread) to discuss what can go wrong with a hunt from the viewpoints of the PH and the client and work up a sample contract that protects both parties. With the feedback from so many knowledgeable AR members, this may be a valuable venture.

Many here remember my thread of June and July about hunt contracts. A contract that is so one sided to the agent or PH would never work. Neither would a contract that is slanted toward the hunter. As my attorney told me regarding the contract the agent sent me, "If all goes well you won't remember the contract. If the hunt goes to shit, you will have signed away all of your rights." There must be common ground.

And, what to do about enforcement? Should the contract spell out what is to be done should one side default? I mean, it is probably worth legal time for a 90K$ hunt, but not so for most hunts.

What do you think? Is there a better course all of us can follow? Just wonderin'.
Cal

I think a good start would to not pay these exorbitant deposits. If you're paying 90k for a hunt upfront, contract or no contract you have no power. But if you pay 20k of a 90k upfront, outfitters are going to be under pressure to deliver what was promised in the contract in order to get paid.

Sounds like a plan here.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

quote:

Originally posted by Heeler75:

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

quote:

Originally posted by Victor Watson:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I think it would be valuable (perhaps in another thread) to discuss what can go wrong with a hunt from the viewpoints of the PH and the client and work up a sample contract that protects both parties. With the feedback from so many knowledgeable AR members, this may be a valuable venture.

Many here remember my thread of June and July about hunt contracts. A contract that is so one sided to the agent or PH would never work. Neither would a contract that is slanted toward the hunter. As my attorney told me regarding the contract the agent sent me, "If all goes well you won't remember the contract. If the hunt goes to shit, you will have signed away all of your rights." There must be common ground.

And, what to do about enforcement? Should the contract spell out what is to be done should one side default? I mean, it is probably worth legal time for a 90K$ hunt, but not so for most hunts.

What do you think? Is there a better course all of us can follow? Just wonderin'.
Cal

I think a good start would to not pay these exorbitant deposits. If you're paying 90k for a hunt upfront, contract or no contract you have no power. But if you pay 20k of a 90k upfront, outfitters are going to be under pressure to deliver what was promised in the contract in order to get paid.

I hear what you are saying. I think about my business. I do my work. At the end of the month, I send out invoices. I hope to be paid by the end of the following month. I am generally funding the costs for at least 60 days, often more. On safari, i am asked to pay months ahead of time. Damn I wish I could get my clients to pay that way.

Larry,
You're not in the construction business are you? If so, don't forget the 10% retainage that is held on every month's payment.

No sir. I am a CPA.

I have the same gripe, Larry.

At least I don't have to worry about ISNetworld crap when I go hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:

quote:

Originally posted by Texas Blue Devil:

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Steve:
You are a gentleman, patriot, a man of success and a man of honor. The problems with Shootaway can easily be overcome with some help from you. I suggest you now pair 2x1 with Shootaway to show him a better way. Not the rest of your life, but the next 15 to 20 hunting and fishing trips should do it. Think of the good you'd do for everyone here on AR.
Cal

Steve,

Before accepting this advice please remember the November trip is already fully booked.

Jim,

November is 10 months away. I'm sure they could squeeze George in, but he may want to fish with his 458 Lott.

If Steve brings George, he can have my spot. I don't think i would enjoy the trip.

Not sure Becky would enjoy replacing your slot with George. Just saying'

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:

quote:

Originally posted by Texas Blue Devil:

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Steve:
You are a gentleman, patriot, a man of success and a man of honor. The problems with Shootaway can easily be overcome with some help from you. I suggest you now pair 2x1 with Shootaway to show him a better way. Not the rest of your life, but the next 15 to 20 hunting and fishing trips should do it. Think of the good you'd do for everyone here on AR.
Cal

Steve,

Before accepting this advice please remember the November trip is already fully booked.

Jim,

November is 10 months away. I'm sure they could squeeze George in, but he may want to fish with his 458 Lott.

If Steve brings George, he can have my spot. I don't think i would enjoy the trip.

Jerry, Your spot is completely safe. However, where we are going is extremely isolated and remote. "They" say, people often disappear in these South American jungles. So, there might have been an upside to having him come along.

I guess there is always a need for cut bait

I'm guilty of taking part of the hijack.
Cal

quote:

".... to escrow trophy fees on condition of game harvested for area booked"

Tim,

Assume that for whatever reason, there was an unexpected and unannounced change of hunting area but the goods were delivered and the game was still successfully harvested.

Wouldn't you consider the quoted statement or contract clause a tool for litigation regardless of the fact that the primary objective was delivered?

There's no shortage of sleazy clients who would embark on such a claim.

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

".... to escrow trophy fees on condition of game harvested for area booked"

Tim,

Assume that for whatever reason, there was an unexpected and unannounced change of hunting area but the goods were delivered and the game was still successfully harvested.

Wouldn't you consider the quoted statement or contract clause a tool for litigation regardless of the fact that the primary objective was delivered?

There's no shortage of sleazy clients who would embark on such a claim.

In addition, I did say that changes to area accepted by the client and outfitter in writing as well. I have never seen or drafted a contract that allowed major changes without both parties agreeing in a separate executed writing before hand. Respectfully, I am not paying 5k, 20k, or 90K up front without protection against now we got you here and have your money we are going over there. Mr. Pieters would have counted 90k out on the tar mat. I then would have got back on the plane. They paid for x at x location. Everyone, has agreed the place was part of that price. The place was an essential term.

Love me, hate me, make love to me with a whiskey bottle, or call me Shootaway jr, that is my position.

I can just imagine all the silly things that would be included in the contract.

It would be drawn by a lawyer, and he will make sure there are so many ambiguity in it, no matter what happened, someone will have something to complain about.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

".... to escrow trophy fees on condition of game harvested for area booked"

Tim,

Assume that for whatever reason, there was an unexpected and unannounced change of hunting area but the goods were delivered and the game was still successfully harvested.

Wouldn't you consider the quoted statement or contract clause a tool for litigation regardless of the fact that the primary objective was delivered?

There's no shortage of sleazy clients who would embark on such a claim.

In addition, I did say that changes to area accepted by the client and outfitter in writing as well. I have never seen or drafted a contract that allowed major changes without both parties agreeing in a separate executed writing before hand. Respectfully, I am not paying 5k, 20k, or 90K up front without protection against now we got you here and have your money we are going over there. Mr. Pieters would have counted 90k out on the tar mat. I then would have got back on the plane. They paid for x at x location. Everyone, has agreed the place was part of that price. The place was an essential term.

Love me, hate me, make love to me with a whiskey bottle, or call me Shootaway jr, that is my position.

+1

The "let's make a plan" line only works one way.

If a particular area is agreed and if a premium is paid for that area - any changes need to be communicated asap. Not after the client has flown 10,000 miles.

Mike

The irony of certain of the foregoing purported lessons on integrity, honesty and doing the right thing makes you chuckle considering some of the sources.

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

".... to escrow trophy fees on condition of game harvested for area booked"

Tim,

Assume that for whatever reason, there was an unexpected and unannounced change of hunting area but the goods were delivered and the game was still successfully harvested.

Wouldn't you consider the quoted statement or contract clause a tool for litigation regardless of the fact that the primary objective was delivered?

There's no shortage of sleazy clients who would embark on such a claim.

Lets say I am a travel agent. You book with me, for you and your wife to spend a week at Sea Cliffs in Dar es Salaam. You fly from the USA and land at Julius Nyerere. I pick you up and say there has been a change of plans and take you to the Salvation Army's Mgulani Hostel out by the football stadium for the week.

You have a clean bed. Fenced compound. Security guard. HVAC. Free breakfast. Unfortunately the two king size beds you asked for has been replaced by one bed for you and your wife, but what does that matter. You can still sleep good. What more can you ask for.

Are you a happy and satisfied client? Surely you don't want a refund. You did sleep didn't you?

(fulvio, from your past posts I think you reside in Tanzania. If not I apologize for the example, but I think you follow my point.)

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I think it would be valuable (perhaps in another thread) to discuss what can go wrong with a hunt from the viewpoints of the PH and the client and work up a sample contract that protects both parties. With the feedback from so many knowledgeable AR members, this may be a valuable venture.

Many here remember my thread of June and July about hunt contracts. A contract that is so one sided to the agent or PH would never work. Neither would a contract that is slanted toward the hunter. As my attorney told me regarding the contract the agent sent me, "If all goes well you won't remember the contract. If the hunt goes to shit, you will have signed away all of your rights." There must be common ground.

And, what to do about enforcement? Should the contract spell out what is to be done should one side default? I mean, it is probably worth legal time for a 90K$ hunt, but not so for most hunts.

What do you think? Is there a better course all of us can follow? Just wonderin'.
Cal

Just an observation. When you think about areas where there is a strong practice of using industry standard contracts, e.g., gas industry (NAESB), power (EEI), financial power and gas (ISDA), real estate sales (groups like TAR in Texas), construction (AIA), etc., the common element is an industry association that decided that standardizing contracts would help facilitate transactions, make entering into transactions more efficient and timely and result in more uniformity in terms. It takes a lot of work and drafting committees spend lots of time coming up with the agreements and ensuring that they remain up to date. So SCI or DSC is going to do this? Should this be a priority for either group given everything else that is going on? It would be like herding cats.

I am an oil trader, and from experience I can say this would simplify things so much if done in a balanced manner. It would make sooooooooooo much sense, but it will never happen.

Not referring to the difference in price and quality between Sea Cliff and Mgulani Hostel near the Saba Saba grounds.

If you had for example booked the camp in Selous LL1 but were relocated without notice to a similar camp in LL3 and still got what you were after would it make a difference?

The proposed clause refers to "on condition of game harvested for area booked"

In this case, the client did not get what he agreed and paid for.

They agreed on two separate ares, hunting 1x1.

They did not get the areas they agreed on - and from my understanding so far they did question that, and were told the change was only for paperwork sake.

To me, that bait and switch, and should never be accepted.

quote:

Originally posted by AilsaWheels:

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

".... to escrow trophy fees on condition of game harvested for area booked"

Tim,

Assume that for whatever reason, there was an unexpected and unannounced change of hunting area but the goods were delivered and the game was still successfully harvested.

Wouldn't you consider the quoted statement or contract clause a tool for litigation regardless of the fact that the primary objective was delivered?

There's no shortage of sleazy clients who would embark on such a claim.

Lets say I am a travel agent. You book with me, for you and your wife to spend a week at Sea Cliffs in Dar es Salaam. You fly from the USA and land at Julius Nyerere. I pick you up and say there has been a change of plans and take you to the Salvation Army's Mgulani Hostel out by the football stadium for the week.

You have a clean bed. Fenced compound. Security guard. HVAC. Free breakfast. Unfortunately the two king size beds you asked for has been replaced by one bed for you and your wife, but what does that matter. You can still sleep good. What more can you ask for.

Are you a happy and satisfied client? Surely you don't want a refund. You did sleep didn't you?

(fulvio, from your past posts I think you reside in Tanzania. If not I apologize for the example, but I think you follow my point.)

I'd only pay 90k for a hotel if I was buying it, but it would be a crap hotel.

To clarify another issue that has been overlooked, Chris was informed on September 26th ( one month prior to the safari ) of the area change.
I discussed it with him and based on my correspondence with the Namibian PH's/ operator, the elephant movement was good. I trusted them and that was a mistake which has led to this unfortunate situation.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
In this case, the client did not get what he agreed and paid for.

They agreed on two separate ares, hunting 1x1.

They did not get the areas they agreed on - and from my understanding so far they did question that, and were told the change was only for paperwork sake.

To me, that bait and switch, and should never be accepted.

Saeed,

Don't get me wrong - the client involved in the MP issue is well within his rights to be pissed off because he did in fact get stiffed.
He was not given the areas originally agreed and to make matters worse, among other issues, the ones he got as substitute were not up to standard.

My point refers to a proposed clause presented by Tim regarding the holding of TF in escrow on condition that game taken applied to the hunting area which was originally agreed upon.

My concern with this clause are the closing words in that sentence: "area booked"

Question: would such a clause not open the door to possible litigation even if the desired quota of animals was fully concluded to the client's satisfaction regardless of the agreed area? ..... there is no shortage of sleazy clients who would do anything to short-change the outfitter.

There have been numerous cases of last minute, unannounced area changes which in spite of the change, have still produced the desired results and a happy client.

"Holding the TF in escrow until the hunt is concluded" would IMO be more acceptable.

quote:

We were unaware of the change until we were in Johannesburg the night before we left for the Caprivi!

quote:

To clarify another issue that has been overlooked, Chris was informed on September 26th ( one month prior to the safari ) of the area change.
I discussed it with him and based on my correspondence with the Namibian PH's/ operator, the elephant movement was good. I trusted them and that was a mistake which has led to this unfortunate situation.

Someone is lying. Which one? Documentation?

Here's one side:

quote:

9/22/16, 8:48:05 AM: Chris Drazan: So, the invitation letter says Bumunu conservancy not Mayuni or Kwandu? Is that a change or just for the paperwork?
9/22/16, 8:49:10 AM: Martin Pieters: Just paperwork
9/22/16, 9:00:20 AM: Martin Pieters: They have given me an option as it is extremely dry right now and there is more movement Bumunu side.

As we found out later, he had NO access to Mayuni and Kwandu and he was (or should have been) completely aware of this. This change had nothing to do with water as both the Chobe and Linyante were dry. Again, these changes in the background were never communicated to us.

At this point, I say post the paperwork.

If Martin is supported by doing so I would damn sure do it as he is seemingly taking a beating here.

However, there is a lot that just doesn't pass the sniff test on both parties sides.

Paperwork please.

Jeff

. . . don't hold your breath. As the original poster as apparently said to his hunting companion:

"Tonto, I think our work here is done."

I’ve not ‘riden off ‘, I’ve simply lost track of the post. But I've caught up. Mike, you seem really smart but terribly cynical. I understand that you're an attorney, so is combination of traits 'correlation' or 'causation'?

Martin suggested we knew of the change, but he simply told us we had the option of Bumunu as a third concession and not as the sole area to hunt, and hence my pushing him on when we arrived in Johannesburg. That should seem obvious.

For may part, I will post no more documentation on the subject as both parties have ’submitted facts to a candid world”. You may decide who amongst us is being forthright based on that. Just understand that I would never post something in a public forum unless I was absolutely sure of the facts and have the documentation to back it up. For obvious reasons. If that seems insufficient, Saeed should delete the thread immediately.

All of that aside, I DO think the thread within my post about contracts, booking, risk mitigation, etc. IS good. There are a lot of folks on AR who bring both technical expertise and experience. I’ve given a lot of thought to this and will start a thread with some ideas that protect both the client AND the outfitter. I believe there is a role for a 3rd (or 4th) party around contracts, dispute resolution, funds management, etc. in this industry. Please tell me not to if this has been done before.

Lastly and hopefully a more positive note, I’ve received many PMs with respect to this incident. I have no experience with Martin’s areas beyond the Omay, but when asked “should I hunt the Omay with Martin Pieters?” my answer is and will be this:

YES, absolutely. It is a fantastic area with good buffalo (challenging, but very rewarding, hippo, croc, and exceptional cat hunting. It’s really a jewel and I’ve had great experiences with the camp staff, PHs, and Chris. If someone wants pictures or specifics, simply PM me.

But with these CAVEATS –

Have a contract
In addition to the contract - perhaps an amendment – set forth the specific elements of the hunt that are material to the clients expectations (e.g., facilities, amenities, game availability, etc.)
Work with a booking agent that is perhaps mutually agreed upon to minimally, manage funds transfers and dispute resolution
Understand who your PH will be a get references on him or her.
Be clear on trophy expectations if that is of major concern

To be clear, this is what I will do with ANY hunt in the future to protect both me and the outfitter and eliminate ‘communication’ issues.

So, that’s all from me.

Best,

Chris