Frischling Going to Trial!

Instead of "awaiting plea," the case status for the October 28 court date says... pre-trial!

http://www.jud2.ct.gov/crdockets/CaseDetail.aspx?source=Pending&Key=7734f132-c776-45b9-9a1b-4d50349a6b3b

And Now for the 8th Time on the Criminal Docket... Steven Frischling!

Captain Continuance gets yet another delay in his double felony case. Next arraignment is September 30.

http://www.jud2.ct.gov/crdockets/CaseDetail.aspx?source=Pending&Key=4aadf5eb-bccd-46a6-983d-00af104ecb49

Since Frischling has already been sent a Bail Commissioners Letter, another failure to appear will result in a bench warrant issued for his (re)arrest.

Winning!

Frischling Gets Yet Another Continuance in Felony Case!

Just two days ago Steven Frischling was lying on Twitter to a stranger, insisting that the felony case against him had been dropped.

flyingwithfish Flying With Fish 

@ 

@colpuck You mean the case that's been dropped because of multiple reasons that showed I was in the clear? Again, do your homework. Goodbye

17 Aug 

colpuck John Butler 

@ 

@flyingwithfish I assume as you haven't responded to my question the answer is, a lot. Ps how's the felony case against you going?

17 Aug 

Oh really? The case has been dropped?

FishTard was due in court today to enter a plea, yet once again has requested a continuance! Well we've "done our homework" and registered for updates on the case and just received this:

8/19/2011

This notification is brought to you by Connecticut Statewide Automated Victim Information and Notification (SAVIN) Program.

This e-mail is to inform you that there is an upcoming court event involving the defendant STEVEN FRISCHLING and docket number K10KCR110313446S.  A plea hearing has been scheduled for 9/2/2011.  Please be aware that there is often more than one case scheduled for a particular date in this court.  The hearing you may be involved in will take place some time during that day.

This will take place in GA 10 Courthouse, at the following address: 112 Broad Street, New London, CT 06320.

For updates about this case or for driving directions to the courthouse, you can visit www.jud.ct.gov.  For more information, contact the Office of Victim Services at 1-(800) 822-8428 during regular business hours, Monday through Friday from 8AM to 4:30PM. 

This notification is sponsored by the Connecticut SAVIN Program.  It is our hope that this information has been helpful to you.

Thank you,

The VINE Service

You can also "do your homework" and register for automatic updates by clicking the text below the case details -  http://www.jud2.ct.gov/crdockets/CaseDetail.aspx?source=Pending&Key=a7dab892-149e-493c-8fbc-0c0a9dfd1fb0

So Frischling, how long are you going to drag this out for our entertainment? Why won't you be a man and at least work out a plea agreement? You've been caught committing two felonies. You're paying a lawyer instead of paying your rent. How is that working out for your children?

And what exactly are the "multiple reasons" that show you were  "in the clear" to commit forgery and embezzlement? Obviously the police and prosecutors have yet to hear of these "multiple reasons."

Frischling Fighting (At Least) Three Legal Cases!

Total winner Steven Frischling will be back in court YET AGAIN next Friday to be arraigned on his felony forgery/larceny charges. Who knows how the slippery Fish keeps getting out of entering a plea, but obviously the charges have not been dismissed (as per his lies on Twitter).

Then he was in court today on another much more domestic issue, which we hope to post about in detail later (but you can speculate about to your heart's content).

But our hero is due back in court on yet ANOTHER case August 30! Why?

In May 2010 a New Yorker named Elizabeth Klaproth sued Frischling, whom she unfortunately hired to photograph her wedding at some point. Obviously something went wrong (could it be she never got her photos?!). In October 2010 she won her case. We guess she's never seen a penny of the judgment, so she has filed to get the judgement enforced in Connecticut!

Ms. Klaproth, by the way, is an esteemed member of the New York bar specializing in litigation. Did he expect she would simply drop the case and say "oh well!" if he refused to pay her the judgement? How dumb is he?

The lovely Ms. Klaproth is suing him for $3,026.00. Captain Continuancy has been denied one continuance and granted another, but can't seem to get out of this one. Details here:

http://www.jud2.ct.gov/Small_Claims/sc_SearchDocketResult.asp?CaseStatus=ALL&Prefix=SCC&Docket_Number=393267&IncludeParty=on&Activity=ALL

Frischling Finally in Court Wednesday!

Despite his Twitter claims that the Connecticut prosecutor thinks the case should be dismissed, epic winner Steven Frischling is due for his first appearance in court Wednesday! He is finally supposed to enter a plea after numerous postponements.

According to the public docket at jud.ct.gov, Frischling is finally listed with a lawyer - Bachand Discala. It appears he found his name on a billboard or late night TV as this firm specializes in personal injury lawsuits!

Even better... check out Mr. Discala's background, as mentioned in this 2008 article:

A Norwalk lawyer, who is accused of violating ethical rules, forging signatures on legal documents and deceiving a client in order to thwart a potential malpractice suit, offered testimony Tuesday to the statewide committee that oversees professional standards among lawyers.

According to the Connecticut Bar Association, Discala was officially reprimanded for his actions.

Oh to be a fly on the wall at that courtroom....

UPDATE: Frischling has failed to enter a plea once again! His case still says awaiting plea. His next arraignment will now be 8/19. How long can he try to stall this?

Frischling Gets Court Pushed Back.... Again

Frischling is now scheduled for a third time on the docket...

Pending Case Detail

Data as of the Previous Business Day

Docket Information

Docket No:K10K-CR11-0313446-SProgram:Court:Arresting Agency:Arrest Date:Bond Amount:Bond Type:

Activity:	Awaiting Plea	Next Court Date:	7/29/2011 10:00 AM

Miscellaneous:New London GA 10CSP TROOP E6/2/2011$25,000 (This case only)Nonsurety(Released From Custody)Companion:

Defendant Information

Last, First:Birth Year:Times on the Docket:Represented By:FRISCHLING STEVEN E19753

Current Charges

Statute	Description	Class	Type	Occ	Offense Date	Plea	Verdict Finding
53a-123	LARCENY 2ND DEG	C	Felony	1	1/19/2010
53a-138	FORGERY 1ST DEG	C	Felony	1	1/19/2010

What is going on? He still has no lawyer listed.

Of course, Frischling is happy to put a spin on it:

flyingwithfish Flying With Fish 

@ 

@flyddw Had court. Wasn't arraigned. Prosecutor believes it's a civil case, charges will be dropped. @aschonland is being investigated.

9 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply

Really? If the prosecutor thought it should be a civil case, why did they bring charges in the first place? If charges will be dropped, why does he have a new court date? Why does it still say "awaiting plea?"

The lies never end with this guy. Too bad people on Twittter like @flyddw seem to fall for anything they are told and don't bother to investigate anything.

Will Frischling Show Up to Court Today?

Steven Frischling had his original court date postponed a week. Will he actually show up today? Has he sold enough lenses to pay for his bail?

Watch this space for updates: http://www.jud2.ct.gov/crdockets/CaseDetail.aspx?Key=1cb9b565-fbc2-4741-8385-04d2dfb5a9b9

Also he has let his Sportsshooter membership lapse after years of obnoxious, self-serving posts. Congratulations, universe!

Celebration here: http://fuckyeahsportsshooter.tumblr.com/post/6785098772/during-your-time-on-sportsshooter-you-posted-5464

Frischling Gets Court Date Postponed!

Giant winner Steven Frischling has moved his arraignment to 6/22/2011 at 10:00 AM.

On Wednesday morning he responded to @Lyingwithfish1 (who is not FishFraud by the way, though we do take credit for Lyingwithfish!) and claimed there is a "twist" in the investigation!

Could it be he needed to buy more time to pay for his bail? He's trying to unload some pricey photo equipment on Twitter and Sportsshooter.

And he can't keep his story straight as to why he's selling it - could he need money to flee the country?

But wait a second... he gives another reason for selling the lens in his classified on Sportsshooter (and again demonstrates he does not know the difference between "its" and "it's").

Meanwhile, when is the last time this guy actually had a photography job? How is he changing what he is shooting?

Happy Lying!

Frischling Gets Arraigned This Morning!

http://www.jud2.ct.gov/crdockets/CaseDetail.aspx?source=Pending&Key=70b92ae5-f7d2-4aea-81fb-2c05aadc0d95

Have Info on Steven Frischling?

Guess what happens if you call up the Connecticut Attorney General's office? While they do not give out the name of the prosecutor, they are happy to share the name of the investigator responsible for Steven Frischling's case:

Robert F Manley Jr.
Phone number: (860) 443-8444
Email: robert.manley"AT-SYMBOL-GOES-HERE"po.state.ct.us

We doubt anyone has info on the charges he is facing, but we think those who have been his previous victims might want a chance to speak out on Frischling's (lack of) character and why he does not deserve any leniency. Please use your real name though - we're sure it will be confidential.

Six days until arraignment.

New Article on Frischling's Arrest

A follow-up article in "The Day" with more details!

http://www.theday.com/article/20110607/NWS01/110609665/1047

Niantic consultant charged with larceny

By Karen Florin

Publication: theday.com

Published 06/07/2011 12:00 AM

Updated 06/07/2011 02:15 PM

A Niantic man who calls himself a “globe hopping professional photographer” and consultant to large global airlines is accused of altering an invoice to KLM Royal Dutch Airlines from a La Jolla, Calif., consultant he was working with on a social media project.

Steven Frischling, 35, of 49 Sea Breeze Ave. was charged last week with second-degree larceny and first-degree forgery. He posted a $25,000 bond and is scheduled to be arraigned June 15 in New London Superior Court.

An arrest warrant affidavit prepared by state police detective Christopher Greer indicates that Frischling was hired by Addison Schonland of the Innovation Analysis Group (IAG) in La Jolla to collaborate on a blogging project for KLM. As the lead consultant on the $22,000 project, Frischling entered into a verbal contract with Schonland in which he was to receive 75 percent, or $16,500, and Schonland was to get 25 percent, or $5,500.

Schonland told investigators that Frischling altered the bank accounting routing information so that he received the entire $22,000. Frischling then told Schonland he deserved the full payment because IAG had failed to provide the promised “back end support” for the project and his business reputation had been damaged by a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) investigation in 2009. Frischling, author of a travel blog called “Flying with Fish,” had been investigated for disseminating TSA search rules/protocol without authorization.

Questioned by police, Frischling said he had simply corrected errors on the IAG invoice at the airline’s request and provided his personal bank account number because he could not contact Schonland.

This is humorous.

First, how was Frischling's "business reputation" damaged by the TSA investigation, and what does that have to do with anything?

Second, his claim that he simply was correcting errors on the invoice: Obviously the police did not buy that lie, but it shows you how bold Frischling is with his lies. It's like he never thinks anyone will ever check anything he says. All they had to do was contact KLM and ask if it was true that the airline had requested that "errors" be corrected, and Frischling would be find out.

Thirdly, if he couldn't contact Schonland, why would his first step be to change the bank account numbers to his own? Who does that? If this was really a misunderstanding in any way, the police would not have chosen to pursue felony charges.

Finally, all this flies in the face of what he has been posting. He has repeatedly said that he did all the work and it was all pitched, executed, etc by him. What does that tell you? That he feels he was entitled to the full amount, period.

He tweeted this the day after his arrest:

The yfrog link goes to this screenshot of the description of the blog:

Remember that the blog ended suddenly and mysteriously at this time. Obviously KLM canceled the project on their end, or Frischling probably would still be writing it, don't you think?

Frischling's outright stupidity never fails to astonish us. Think of how much money he could have potentially made if he had simply acted like a normal individual. We're not in the industry but can still see that writing the official blog for an airline like KLM must be pretty prestigious. He could have gone on to start blogs at all kinds of airlines and raked in way more than $5,500 or whatever the disputed amount was.

Did someone drive a railroad spike through this guy's brain? What is wrong with him?

Frischling Says He Will Plead Not Guilty to Forgery, Larceny!

Those hoping Frischling would plead not guilty and force a trial, guess what? That's what he's planning!

http://www.tnooz.com/2011/06/06/news/tnooz-nuggets-mon-6-june-2011/

Aviation blogger Steven Frischling is slated to appear in a New London, Conn., courtroom June 15 on larceny and forgery charges in connection with a dispute over his writing services for a KLM blog. Authorities allege that Frischling forged an invoice in January 2010 from the Innovation Analysis Group to KLM for blog writing services and pocketed $22,000. Authorities maintain that IAG had a blog contract with KLM and Frischling, who did the actual writing, was a subcontractor who wasn’t entitled to the full $22,000. IAG declined to comment on the matter, and Frischling, who currently pens the Flying With Fish blog, says he will plead not guilty to both counts.

Let's hope they set a trial as quickly as they set the arraignment so we don't have to wait for the fun to begin! As to whether he plans to represent himself, we will just have to wait and see.

Travel Blogger Steven Frischling Shares the Details of Arrest!

Steven Frischling's arrest for forgery and larceny did indeed involve none other than airline giant KLM! What a shocking turn of events for a self-described travel blogger and travel strategist!

As two newspapers have reported, Frischling turned himself in on an arrest warrant Thursday and is out on bond. (Though contrary to evidence in the public record, he denies he was ever arrested and denies he is out on bond and produces nothing to substantiate these claims.)

On his hilarious/pathetic/deranged new blog, iagfraud.blogspot.com, he has posted only two sections of the arrest warrant that lays out the case against him. Why doesn't he post the whole thing? It's going to be available online soon enough. What is he trying to hide?

Add to that, he's arguing about details that have jack shit to do with the crimes he's accused of committing! Is he going to show up in court and defend himself against larceny and forgery by arguing his title was "Director of Emerging Media" and not "Director of Emerging Social Media?" Oooh if the title does not fit, you must acquit!

However, then he posted the letter he received from IAG attorneys back in March that lays out their complaints against him. He made reference to receiving this letter at the time and is now stupidly sharing it:

The letter, voluntarily posted by Frischling in yet another bonehead move, and the news report fill in the pieces:

From the Norwich Bulletin newspaper:
"Police say Frischling was a consultant with Innovation Analysis Group and forged documents on a company invoice for personal gain."

From the letter:
"We are in the possession of clear evidence that at the completion of that contract, after IAG invoiced KLM for the work performed, you fraudulently redirected KLM to wire funds directly to a bank account controlled by you and/or your wife."

Now we can put two and two together. Frischling already wrote in March about some dispute with IAG over this KLM blog, which was only around for a few weeks, mysteriously. Frischling "forged documents on a company invoice" to get KLM to pay him the entire amount directly using IAG letterhead! This is felony forgery and larceny, plus wire fraud (a federal offense). This would not be difficult to track in any way and in fact is one of the stupidest things we've ever heard of! How stupid are you, Steven Frischling?

Naturally, Frischling does not mention this part at all. There is nothing on his new blog that admits what he did or defends it. However, you don't need to read between the lines to see that he is thinks he and he alone deserved the money:

"This dispute stemmed from a December 2009-January 2010 for a project I had created, pitched, built and executed for KLM Royal Dutch Airlines. The original terms of the verbal contract were for a US$30,000 project, in which IAG would receive 10% to provide support. The project was eventually negotiated to US$22,000 and then executed, at which time Addison Schonland began stating he intended to take US$5,500 from the project.

During this project, where I have evidence of my creation of the concept, pitch and sole execution, Addison Schonland and IAG failed to provide any support, with the exception of an analytics platform with a cost of approximately US$20."

OK, so you say. This fails the stink test. If Frischling alone "created, pitched, built and executed" the project as he is stressing, then why was this other group of people involved at all? Why did they even deserve 10 percent? Is this group of people so desperate they are begging to ride Frischling's coattails to success at even 10 percent? Why did KLM think they should be paying an invoice sent by IAG in the first place? When you're talking about this kind of money, there must have been a contract. Frischling insists this was all a verbal contract but that's ridiculous. Does KLM do verbal contracts for five figures? Or did they in fact have a written contract with IAG?

Secondly, he is again being inconsistent. Back in March in his Facebook tirade (thoughtfully preserved on flight attendant Brad Sapit's blog here), Frischling claims he was going to give $3,000 (more than 10 percent) back to IAG (why, if they were not involved? Was it a charitable donation?) but that IAG demanded $5,000 and THEN demanded $7,000! Now he claims it was a yet another amount: $5,500!

Thirdly, even if Frischling felt he fairly deserved the majority of the $22,000, that is something sane professionals negotiate before they do the work! Can you imagine in your job or in any business partnership, if you simply altered a customer invoice to pay directly to you and not your company, because the project was "created, pitched, built and executed" by you and therefore you deserved all the money? You would be fired and hauled away in handcuffs! What kind of sociopath does this kind of thing and expects to get away with it?

How deranged is this freak?

Frischling apparently posted this on Facebook today: "I've got news for you folks ... anyone can accuse anyone of anything. Being accused means nothing without the evidence to support the accusation."

Isn't that exactly what he is doing? Where is the evidence that he is innocent of these charges? He is accusing IAG of fraud AND of being behind this blog and now he's accusing them of texting his 10-year-old daughter, but where is the evidence of ANY of that? (How would anyone get the cell phone number of a 10-year-old kid they are not related to? It makes no sense!)

Once again we state for the record and swear on a stack of Bibles, Torahs, Korans and Oprah Book Club selections: This blog is NOT associated with Addison Schonland or IAG in any way, shape or form. We have never, EVER met Addison Schonland or anyone involved with his business and we would like Frischling to produce an iota of evidence to the contrary. The sole and continuing purpose of this blog is to expose Steven Frischling aka flyingwithfish as a giant liar. That he is also apparently a criminal is a nice surprise for us... but is entirely his choice.

Oh he's also arguing the following two stupid (pointless) points about the attorney's letter:

The correspondence from Attorney Winick is posted below. Oddly, in the first decade of being admitted to the California Bar Association, Attorney Winick has twice been listed as "Inactive.” These periods of being listed "Inactive” were 27-December 2006 and 14-February-2007 and between 28-January-2008 and 23-October-2008.

...

Additionally, Attorney Winick's letter has glaring errors, such as the ownership of the KLM Project, which the airline acknowledges as being executed by Steven Frischling of Flying With Fish. The letter also refers to my wife ... I am not now, nor have I ever been, legally married.

First part, who cares? What does the guy's lawyer's period of inactivity have to do with anything in this case?

And the second part... this guy sure is special. How many times has Frischling made reference to his wife, even mentioning "my wife" in the March Facebook post still on Brad Sapit's blog? So is he now admitting he was lying? Click here to see a search results on Sportsshooter alone to see how many times Frischling has referred to his wife!

For the umpteenth time, we ask, what the hell is wrong with this guy? Is he a sociopath? A lunatic? Is he mentally challenged in any way?

We hope he will address that on his new blog.

Frischling Denies Arrest ... Here's the Link to Arrest Details!

As two newspapers have reported, Frischling turned himself in on an arrest warrant Thursday and is out on bond. However, we've watched in delight all day as Frischling has denied this repeatedly on Twitter, then taken to his new blog "IAGFraud" to voluntarily share details of his case!

On Twitter, he denies he was ever arrested and he denies he is out on bond.

On his new blog he says the same:

He claims he was not arrested because he was not handcuffed and walked in voluntarily. Huh? Who do you believe - Steven Frischling or the State of Connecticut? The details are available here for anyone to see - listing the name of the arresting agency and the date of the arrest:
http://www.jud2.ct.gov/crdockets/CaseDetail.aspx?source=Pending&Key=ce9225e5-341e-4482-84b6-840cfc8ef017

Happy Lying!

Second Article About Steven Frischling's Arrest!

A kickass FishFraud follower alerted us to yet another article about Steven Frischling's arrest. (It sure pays to live in a small community, doesn't it?)

http://www.norwichbulletin.com/communities/x437335206/Niantic-man-faces-larceny-forgery-charges#ixzz1OHlyeqt8

The Bulletin

Posted Jun 03, 2011 @ 11:28 PM

A Niantic man was charged with larceny and forgery after an investigation into allegations of embezzlement from a consulting company.

Steven E. Frischling, 35, of 49 Sea Breeze Ave., was charged with second-degree larceny and first-degree forgery after a yearlong investigation by detectives with the state police Eastern District Major Crime Squad at Troop E in Montville.

Police say Frischling was a consultant with Innovation Analysis Group and forged documents on a company invoice for personal gain. Frischling turned himself in to police Thursday.

Free on $25,000 non-surety bond, he is due for arraignment June 15 in New London Superior Court.

This one has more details. It basically confirms that he ripped off the IAG peeps through forgery, which explains the first-degree forgery charge.

We looked it up - in Connecticut, first-degree forgery and second-degree larceny are both Class C felonies. They have 1-10 year prison sentences plus $10,000 fine! Unsure if they carry a minimum sentence, but Frischling could be looking at prison time and a gigantic fine.

Not only that, what kind of work can you get once you're a convicted felon?

Can't wait for the mug shot!

Let's hope these small papers see this as the "Trial of the Century" and give lots of coverage.

FRISCHLING ARRESTED FOR EMBEZZLEMENT!

BUSTED!!!

http://www.theday.com/article/20110602/NWS04/110609876

Niantic man charged with embezzlement

Published 06/02/2011 12:00 AM

Updated 06/03/2011 11:59 AM

Montville — A Niantic man turned himself in Thursday to state police on a warrant that alleges he embezzled more than $5,000.

Steven Frishchling, 35, of 49 Sea Breeze Ave. was charged with second-degree larceny and first-degree forgery.

Police said charges were brought against Frischling after an extensive investigation of an embezzlement via a forgery. Police did not provide specifics of the crime or say how much was taken, but second-degree larceny involved the theft of $5,001 to $10,000.

Frischling is out on a $25,000 bond and is scheduled to appear in New London Superior Court June 15.

Wow. So now we know the impetus for his new blog. The funniest part is that he thinks starting a blog will somehow prove he is innocent... good luck with that! The only thing he has succeeded so far in doing is dragging FishFraud out to laugh at him and spread the news of his arrest!



Check out the comments from "someone" angry that the newspaper published the news of Frischling's arrest, calling it a "non-event story"! Yet, funny that this "non-event story" is the MOST POPULAR item on the entire site!

Steven Frischling's sad attempts to defend his behavior! LOL!

One of Steven's wedding victims just pointed me to the following blog exchange. It's pretty hilarious actually, as Steven attempts to defend himself against the facts, specifically the solid F rating he has from the Better Business Bureau. He basically says the only mistake he made was not weeding out the demanding brides. He claims that everything will soon be cleared up in his favor, and then starts claiming he had cancer. Yet a year or so later, nothing has been cleared up. Instead he no longer pretends to be photographer and now pretends to be a "travel strategist."

Taken from: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7553278593406733377&postID=6417193555303801040

(Our comments in red)

"You And Your Online Reputation"

24 Comments - Show Original Post Collapse comments

flyingfish said...

John, It is interesting that you bring this up. For the past few weeks I have been working on clearing up Yelp.com and the BBB. I fully agree with you about maintaining and following up on your online reputation. Yelp.com has actually been quite helpful and should be removing all the information shortly. I have provided documentation to them regarding the complaints, and they have initially agreed that the complaints are factually incorrect. The problem in some ways with the internet is the anonymity. Yelp.com contains a complaint from a bride who ran out of money, asked me to halve the pricing of my contract, and then canceled her contract shortly before her wedding when I refused to rewrite the contract. This bride demanded her 'non-refundable retainer' be returned, and I refused. Following her canceling of her contract she reversed the charges with her credit card company. Her credit card company found in my favour reinstating the funds to my account less than 24 hours after submitting my contract and a series of dated e-mails to their complaints department. Since this series of events I have tracked down her posts and had them removed from many forums. Of course this online-complainer does not mention this in any of her posts online. This former client just rips into me because she is upset she lost her How did this bride find me on Yelp.com? She tracked down a negative entry posted by a bride who decided she wanted to be able to choose the images in her photo album; nearly a year after the album was delivered. When I create albums I let my brides choose approximately 10 images, from there it is all up to me. This bride never replied to my requests for her selection of images. I waited and waited and waited then when ahead and designed the book and sent it off. I heard nothing for almost year. What did I hear after nearly a year? A complaint from the BBB about her album and a complaint stating she never received her prints (which were shipped to her on the 14th of March 2007). This same bride also wrote up a negative review on Yelp.com. This bride's primary complaint to the BBB was that she did not like her album and that she wants me to custom design a new book with images she has selected. This is not a service I offer. I expressly do not allow my brides to play a large role in the image selection of their albums. I am absolutely not redesigning and delivering an 8.5x11 20-page leather covered book to this bride. I have a number of e-mails from her telling me how much she loved her photographs. If she complained to me about the album image selection within a month of receiving the book I would have done something. But waiting a year, then contacting me through the BBB and using Yelp.com rather than dropping me an e-mail or calling me is the sign of someone who just wants something for free. Surprisingly Yelp.com has been much easier to work with than the BBB. Two complaints at the BBB are from non-brides. They are complaints from people I have not worked with, they are ghosts are faux-complainers. As the BBB cannot verify these complaints to ensure they have been 'resolved' they will not remove them. This has been quite frustrating. I have been asked to show contracts and tracking information for two 'phantom' bride complaints. Despite my repeated enquiry of asking how to show documentation I didn't work with someone is becoming frustrating. The BBB shows that I didn't respond to these complaints. This is true, I have been unable to properly respond to these two complaints, but I have diligently been attempting to address these. As for the bride who complained to the BBB about her album, I have been submitting all the information I need to in order to have that removed. I have e-mails, receipts, tracking information and order information from my print lab and album producer. Hopefully this detailed information is enough to have her unwarranted complaints removed. So given these two websites, it appears I have 7 complaints against me. In reality I have 1. The one complaint is from a very difficult to please bride. I have been learning to weed out the difficult (to nearly impossible) to please brides because they are extremely difficult to work with. I have made this mistake a few times in my 3 years of shooting weddings. In my first two years I did a poor job at times matching up who I am to whom I will work with. I am up front with my couples, some still move forward. I have learned to say 'No' and pass along the contract info for photogs who may be better suited to these couples and their personalities. My style is informal, my images are relaxed and overall my personality does not mesh well with 'bridezilla.' So one complaint will stand at the end of me working to clean up these complaints. The internet allows people to have the personality of 20 people instead of one. I ruffle feathers. I have always ruffled feathers. I have my opinions and they can be strong. I have been known to go out on a limb or stand out in the wind and that draws attention. Some people like me and some people don't like me, that I OK. What is not OK is that the internet allows people to become unknown attackers. I have found one wedding photographer who has gone into a popular wedding website simply to create faux brides and not only trash talk me but other photographers they feel they compete with. I have had this personls 'fake bride complaints' removed a number of times. I know quite a few other photographers who have also has this person's fake-complaints removed as well. This type of anti-marketing is unfortunately not as uncommon as many would like to believe it is. Have an argument with someone? It is easy to make up a fake e-mail address, a fake user name and log into a forum as a whole ‘new person’ and begin your assault. Being unable to verify who your accuser is can be challenging, especially when defending yourself in front of a potential online audience of billions of readers. For those of your readers who do not use Google Alerts they should absolutely set up an account immediately. Everyone needs to know what is being said about them and when. I was slow to use Google Alerts for certain keywords, but now have that sorted out. With Google Alerts in place I am able to move ahead in clearing up potential roadblocks in bringing in clients and be more aware of my online reputation. -Steven Frischling

October 6, 2008 10:15 AM

John Harrington said...

Steve -- Thanks for the commentary. It surely is a cautionary tale. I've used Google Alerts for some time - interestingly enough, the police chief of St Paul - where the RNC convention was and all the protesters were arrested - his name is John Harrington (no relation), so I get his information with my alerts. Maintaining your reputation in this era of worldwide access to data means it's not something to be taken lightly, or to be ignored. -- John

October 6, 2008 2:37 PM

Kenny said... (We highly suspect this is Steven, as it uses his typical language and vision of himself, ie referring to himself as a kid, "slugging it out in the trenches")

Bravo Steven! Bravo John! This kid, whom I don't know but have followed his career online on the forums for years has been slugging it out in the trenches and working his behind off it an example for us all IMHO. Not only has he competed with the best in this industry, he has done so while all the snot nosed upper tier have tried to squash him at every...EVERY opportunity they can and they all know who they are. Good for you Steven. I can't speak for anyone else but I'll start getting subscriptions to sports magazines again when they start using more of your work instead of the photographers they use, who use the name of their publication to flaunt(call us out)about how nothing we are when they have a bad day. A simple search will find those threads too. Integrity/Photography... I doubt it.

October 7, 2008 8:04 AM

Kara said...

John, I am one of the brides (Miss K) that complained about Steven on Yelp.com. As he mentioned, he tried to get my review taken off of on Yelp, but they actually wrote back and told me that after careful review, they will leave my review on Yelp.com as is. You can see that my review is still there. I'm not sure if I'm the bride that Steven references as the one who "ran out of money" and tried to get a discount and renegotiate the contract because that is completely false. Steven was in breach of the contract. Period. It is important for consumers like me that have had bad experiences to alert others to be careful when selecting a vendor...especially when it has to do with one of the most important days of your life. When I chose Steven to be the photographer, I actually googled him as well but didn't see any negative or positive reviews about him, so I gave him the benefit of the doubt considering he has numerous websites out there and seemed legit. The reason why I started posting reviews is so that consumers out there can at least get one person's point of view on their experience. After that, it's up to them to decide. I agree that everyone should be aware of what is being said about them on the internet. I'm sure there are false reviews out there, which is unfortunate, but in my case, it's all true. Speaking of false reviews, I find it funny that my Yelp review has been up for 2 months now with one other bad review, but as soon as Steven sees his bad reviews, all of a sudden, there's 6 raving reviews (all 5 stars) about Steven, all with accounts created in October 2008. Hmm...fishy. In any case, I hope, my review will help at least one bride, or give some insight to Steven that he should follow better business practices and uphold his end of the contract. Thanks, Kara

October 7, 2008 10:55 PM

Kenny said... (fake Steven again)

Dear Kara: I feel your pain. I have never known or been involved in a business or industry that lacks the most basic of professional protocols or ethics. You will find that the higher up the food chain you get in this business the more important burrito's become and the less important professionalism becomes. The old guard is dieing out but it's more about self-aggrandising themselves and their wallets at all costs and at anyone's expense and the rest are liers and theives. This is all before you even start looking at Editors, SID's, Event Planners.... Your lucky, for those of us who cherish integrity and professionalism, it's a life sentence to love photography. Be glad your not in this business, at least your feelings as an outsider read...."customer" have meaning in real life. Good luck, be well, buy a good digital camera and you can be a photographer too! Kenny

October 8, 2008 6:00 AM

 

flyingfish said... (... a bunch of stuff but does not back up any of it)

Kara, I understand you are upset that you lost your retainer. Please keep in mind that whatever the circumstances were for your cancellation, my contract clearly stated in the first line that retainers are non-refundable. I photographed your engagement session on the 4th of April and delivered your images via e-mail less than 48 hours later. You even received a few more images than your contract specified within that 48hr period. Following this I sent your engagement session DVD to you via USPS Priority Mail with tracking. The package was delivered to the address on your contract, and the USPS confirms that the package was delivered. Following this you inform me that you have moved to Southern California and provide me with a new address, and another DVD was sent off. You never confirmed receipt, but this DVD was sent with tracking as well. A short while after the DVD was delivered you asked about your 30-page engagement session album and I was puzzled. Your wedding album in the contract was 20 pages, yet you seemed to think you were entitled to a 30 page e-session album. When this was questioned you sent me back a contract that was not all the contract I sent you. In fact the contract you sent me back did not match the format or language of any wedding contract I have ever used. I am sure you got confused in all of this, as you are now claiming on Yelp.com that you were not supposed to receive a 30-page album, but only 30 images from your engagement session. We had a 2-hour session, in 3 locations, which you were roughly 45 minute late for and you expect 30 images from your e-session? Why were you late? Your friend was in a car accident, I then photographed the damage to her car, as well as the bus that dinged her and dealt with her insurance company for you after sending off the photos of the accident. This brings me to August 15th. 11 days before your wedding. You filed a chargeback with your credit card company for $1875, not the $2,000 that you claim. Your reason for filing the chargeback was 'services not rendered." It would have been impossible to have rendered the services as stated in the contract, as the service date for the contract was 11 days in the future. After speaking with the credit card company I supplied them with a link to your engagement session; a tracking number for your wedding DVDs; an email correspondence between us; a copy of the contract I submitted to you, forwarded from my box; a copy of the doctored contract you sent back to me in early August (again forwarded from my box); and discussing the fact that the reason you were filing the chargeback was invalid. The credit card company reviewed the documents and reversed the chargeback returning the funds to my account in less than 24 hours. If you plan to come after me you should please stick to the facts. You should keep track what stories you are telling what people and in what forum. I have screen shots of your slip up, as well a copy of the doctored contract. As for the number of positive posts that sprung up? I contacted some former brides and other clients I have worked with and they were happy to supply positive reviews. (Yeah right) Should you wish to continue this course of action I will have no choice but to sue you for the remainder of your contract, $1,875. The evidence is overwhelmingly in my favour. (Overwhelmingly in his imagination) I wish you and Howard a long and happy life together. -Steven Frischling

October 9, 2008 1:14 AM

Anonymous said... (Probably Steven)

Guy, you should charge this woman for all your time wasted online searching for her fake complaints and damaging accusations as well as for the time to answer each time.

October 12, 2008 7:28 PM

Anonymous said...

They're most likely not fake, and she is not the only one...and he knows this. That's why he's online waiting for when the people he hasn't fulfilled paid contracts with write reviews to let others know. He's so vigilant about scouting out his negative reviews because he is just waiting for the people he didn't complete contracts with (or just completely cut off all communication with...very professional) to show their face. Well, here we are.

October 14, 2008 10:59 PM

Kenny said... (Steven again)

A false complaint with the intent to besmurch another persons reputation should be easy enough to prove through the posters isp, even if the call themselves anonymous,if I'm not mistaken. I look at it this way. If I have a contract with someone and they don't fulfill the contract I can sue them and get satisfaction. If not, shame on me. After all, it's the most important day of my life? Any laywers around to comment? PS: Get use to the silent treatment. It's almost the first thing they teach on some photography websites. Unprofessional treatment? I would have to agree but we are talking about upper tier photogs aren't we :)

October 15, 2008 5:16 AM

 

Anonymous said...

I am not surprised that negative reviews are now surfacing for fishfoto, and I don't believe they are false. Steven is quite arrogant and it's only natural for him to try and squash any negative thing said about him out there. If you're not careful Steven, the fact that you try to remove all negative posts will ALSO become a part of your online personality, which will be even more damaging than the reviews themselves. I found this blog on a simple Google search of fishfoto reviews. I'm not sure your responses help your case. (Which makes me wonder if one day this blog entry will cease to exist as well.) Quite simply if you want to maintain a stellar online reputation, try maintaining stellar customer service and a good reputation off the internet first. If the reviews were all false, then why are there so many of them from different brides with similar but not exactly the same experiences? Maybe you need to stick to editorial and let the weddings go. You don't appear to have the sensitive heart necessary to photograph weddings.

December 8, 2008 6:08 PM

Anonymous said...

*Sigh of relief*....I am glad to see that people can see through him, despite his efforts to save face. Do the right thing Steven, do the right thing. You know where to start.

January 2, 2009 11:38 PM

Anonymous said...

I like how "mysteriously" there are 5* reviews next to 1* reviews of his work. I understand asking your customers to post good reviews of you and the good reviews may very well be true, but they look SO fake next to the many many bad reviews! "I got my all my photos 2 days after the wedding". Yeah right. Anybody who knows anything about photography is going to think one of two things: A. The photos are unedited and thus poor quality (who can edit an entire wedding properly in two days?) or B. This review is blatantly false (who can edit an entire wedding in two days?) Steven Frischling needs to quit trying to be a wedding photographer and go back to being an editorial photographer where no one cares if you're an arrogant prick.

January 5, 2009 8:25 PM

Anonymous said...

Steve & John: I am not a bride. I am the groom. My lovely wife and I were married July 5th in Philadelphia and Steven was paid in full 3 months prior to the wedding! Steven has yet to fullfill his end of the contract. Not only have we not received our photos or albums from the wedding as promised, he never sent the album from our engagement shoot as described in his contract. I would say that after having been paid in full prior to the event that his professionalism for providing eveything that he says he will provide in his contract would have been provided within 30 to 60 days after the shoot. We have have very little to show for our wedding besides his fee (of which we have receipts). One of the photos that he took was of my wife's grandmother who died December 27, 2008. We were not able to include it in our family album because he will not complete his contract. He has now left me no alternative but to contact one of my associates in Connecticut and seek legal recourse against him including punitive damages for his conduct and actions. It is now not a matter of obtaining the photographs but to show him that he must be held accountable for everything that he puts in his contract. My wife has sent him several emails and he has given one excuse after another - If we were a publication would he being doing the same thing???? I think not. It's time the Mr. Frischling step to the plate and honor his contract. No, I have not been to yelp.com. That is next on the agenda. Will

January 9, 2009 6:31 PM

Anonymous said...

Steven, More "mysterious" 5* star reviews on yelp have popped up, yet they are mostly written by new members to yelp who joined in January 2009, and any other reviews they have written (to make it look like they are legit yelp members) are all written on the same day as their review of Fishfoto. How dumb do you think the public is? I'm sure you are getting up there in the number of yelp ids. It's disgusting that you have done absolutely nothing to make amends to your numerous dissatisfied clients, yet you (and your wife) go through all this effort to increase your rating, probably because you are now booking weddings for 2009. Are you even planning to complete those contracts? Why bother to book if you're just going to continue to leave unhappy brides in your wake?

January 13, 2009 6:56 PM

Anonymous said...

Steven, Your online reputation is a train wreck that I can't look away from! All your padding of 5* reviews by "happy clients" (or yourself) is like a soap opera. It's down right comical, and yet it's tragic because your REAL clients still haven't received what you've promised them. All of you fishfoto brides out there who have a bad review, keep posting everywhere that you can! He can't spend all of his time padding your reviews if they are everywhere. Post on cityvoter, theknot, wedding channel, onewed, eventective, facebook, and any place you can find that allows you to review his services. Unfortunately, Steven removed his facebook page due to the bad reviews he had listed there. You can counter that by making a group where all fishfoto brides can join and share their experiences. Do it now! Do you really want another bride to go through what you've gone through? Take him to court and keep fighting the good fight. Cheers

January 13, 2009 8:42 PM

Steven Frischling said...

Shaunelle & Will, I am going to address a number of your online forum postings here in one reply. First off it is important to note that you did not spend more than $4,000 on your wedding photography. (WHY is this important?!) Secondly, I am sorry that I was diagnosed with a significant medical issue in late June. This medical issue resulted in major surgery on the 26th of August where my thyroid was completely removed, along with a 48oz cancerous mass from within my neck. (Who believes this?) I did go out and shoot a wedding less than a week after surgery in New York and another in California a week later. (A week after surgery? Literally unbelievable) I did these weddings, and others, because I felt like I was ready to feel better and get back on with working. In fact I kept shooting will advised not to because I knew in order to complete my contracts, even if delayed, I first needed to shoot the weddings. My working was against all medical advise, and due to my medical condition, following shooting I was completely wiped out. I am sorry there have been delays, but my health has become a significant factor, and medications have taken somewhat of a toll on me, and my post production productivity, however all of my contracts are being fullfilled. (All facts, including court cases, prove  otherwise.) You should also note that aside from delays I have so far met and exceeded your contact. (Why would they be bothering to post if this was true?) You contracted stated you'd receive 8 fully edited ready-to-print image files within a few days of your wedding; you received 25 of these images less than 24hrs following your wedding . You contract stated you'd receive a 50 image photo gallery; you received an 80 photo images gallery. Additionally your gallery was changed to a fully downloadable image gallery so you'd have direct access to your images as would anyone else you wanted to share the photos with. In other forums you indicated that you had received 70 fully edited, ready-to-print, image files from me. Your contract stated you'd receive 80 fully edited, ready-to-print image files as part of your package and you were delivered 80 fully edited, ready-to-print, image files from me. So yes, I was sick, I am still not really healthy, but I am also working as hard as I can with someone limited energy to not only complete all my contracts, but also make sure my family is taken care of, as considerable personal risks to my health. (Steven, as always, likes to see himself as a hero) I agree Karma can be a bitch, but there is no need for foul language, and is troubling for me to believe that someone who is so devoted to their faith, such as yourself, has a hard time understanding that another person's health is not something you should hold against them. (Steven tries to guilt them by invoking their religion and fails miserably) I'd also like to address Will stating that he has retained an attorney in various forums is incorrect. I have requested that he send me the contact information for his attorney more than once to work though his attorney, yet Will has repeatedly refused to produce any contact information for an attorney. (Highly unbelievable, considering Steven's numerous failures to appear in court) I will not bow to strong arm tactics. I also will not bow to people who do not have a legitimate complaint whipping up a whirlwind of mob mentality. Hopefully neither Will nor Shaunelle will ever become ill, and if this do, hopefully they are never self employed with five mouths to feed. The stress is unbearable, and they clearly fail to have the compassion it takes to work through it.  (Tries to use guilt again to distract from the issue) -Steven Frischling

January 30, 2009 6:02 PM

 

Steven Frischling said...

Kara Lee, On the 6th of November I filed a suit against you in the New London District Court of Connecticut. You and your husband have both now been notified by the Connecticut Centralized Court System, regarding Docket #: SCA10-94913. (This ridiculous case was dismissed!) Your required answer date is the 11th of February and at this time neither you nor Howard have answered the courts to enter a plea. At this time I have substantial evidence against you in this case, should you wish to settle the case out of court you know how to contact me. Should you default, I will transfer the judgment and come after you in your home state. -Steven Frischling

January 30, 2009 6:06 PM

Steven Frischling said...

Will, To further counter act your claims that I have not delivered your wedding images to you, I'd like to direct you to Shaunelle's "The Robersons... The beginning" page , which was set up through her account on The Knot under the My Real Wedding section. You may review your wedding page on The Knot here: http://myrealwedding.theknot.com/photo/view/The-Robersons-The-beginning Your wedding page clearly shows multiple images, shot by me, credited to me, placed online by you and Shaunelle. Further more, the comments for these images appear to be made in September 2008. Clearly you have had your wedding images for quite some time. The fact that you and Shaunelle would like additional custom editing and additional pages in your album is no reason to grossly twist the facts as the continue to present themselves against you and your public statements. Clearly you have not heard the term 'you catch more bees with honey and vinegar.' (We hope they've never heard of this because 1) it's a phrase, not a term, and 2) this is not the correct phrase!) -Steven Frischling

February 1, 2009 11:49 PM