October 1, 2026
Response to Claimant's Revised Statement and Supporting Evidence
I disagree with the claimant's revised statement and request for a refund.
The claimant has now retracted their earlier assertion that event B-roll was not received, acknowledging that event B-roll was in fact delivered. This supports SPIRO Creative Inc.'s position that content was provided. The claimant's submission appears to describe an internal communication and file-management issue between the claimant and their designated representative, Meghan, who acted as the primary point of contact throughout the project. SPIRO Creative Inc. delivered footage and files to the designated representative during and immediately following the event. Any subsequent issues regarding access to files, transfer of files between parties, or management of shared drives were outside SPIRO Creative Inc.'s control. To the extent possible, I remain willing to determine whether any additional files remain available in SPIRO Creative Inc.'s possession and can be provided again. I have also previously suggested that the claimant contact their representative regarding materials that may have been delivered directly to her. However, any dispute concerning files received by the claimant's representative is not a failure of delivery by SPIRO Creative Inc. With respect to footage featuring Meghan, I understand that she no longer wishes to be associated with the clinic. If she has withdrawn consent for the use of her likeness, that footage would not be appropriate for promotional purposes. This issue is unrelated to SPIRO Creative Inc.'s performance under the agreement and does not create a basis for a refund. The claimant also alleges that content was delivered late. The evidence and timeline submitted by SPIRO Creative Inc. show the communications, deliveries, and actions taken throughout the project. The claimant's allegations are inconsistent with the documented records already provided.
SPIRO Creative Inc. fulfilled its obligations under the agreement by capturing the event and delivering the content within its possession and control. The claimant has not established that SPIRO Creative Inc. failed to provide the contracted services, and therefore there is no basis for the requested refund, reimbursement of fees, or damages. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the claim be dismissed.
The claimant has now retracted their earlier assertion that event B-roll was not received, acknowledging that event B-roll was in fact delivered. This supports SPIRO Creative Inc.'s position that content was provided. The claimant's submission appears to describe an internal communication and file-management issue between the claimant and their designated representative, Meghan, who acted as the primary point of contact throughout the project. SPIRO Creative Inc. delivered footage and files to the designated representative during and immediately following the event. Any subsequent issues regarding access to files, transfer of files between parties, or management of shared drives were outside SPIRO Creative Inc.'s control. To the extent possible, I remain willing to determine whether any additional files remain available in SPIRO Creative Inc.'s possession and can be provided again. I have also previously suggested that the claimant contact their representative regarding materials that may have been delivered directly to her. However, any dispute concerning files received by the claimant's representative is not a failure of delivery by SPIRO Creative Inc. With respect to footage featuring Meghan, I understand that she no longer wishes to be associated with the clinic. If she has withdrawn consent for the use of her likeness, that footage would not be appropriate for promotional purposes. This issue is unrelated to SPIRO Creative Inc.'s performance under the agreement and does not create a basis for a refund. The claimant also alleges that content was delivered late. The evidence and timeline submitted by SPIRO Creative Inc. show the communications, deliveries, and actions taken throughout the project. The claimant's allegations are inconsistent with the documented records already provided.
SPIRO Creative Inc. fulfilled its obligations under the agreement by capturing the event and delivering the content within its possession and control. The claimant has not established that SPIRO Creative Inc. failed to provide the contracted services, and therefore there is no basis for the requested refund, reimbursement of fees, or damages. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the claim be dismissed.
Exhibit A – Service Agreement Shows Pacifica MD as client.
Shows Meghan Simington as contact person.
Exhibit B – October 14 Shows delivery of the event footage, speaker interviews, and B-roll. Includes the Vimeo links.
Exhibit C WhatsApp Communications Screenshots showing additional footage sent to Meghan. Any evidence of files, photos, or clips being transferred. Dates visible.
|
|
|
Exhibit D – November 14–15, 2025 Email Correspondence
Brad Marchant advising that he had not received the project files. Adera Angelucci responding and advising that project materials had been delivered to Meghan Simington and offering to provide any footage still in SPIRO's possession. Meghan Simington confirming she would upload the files to the shared folder. SPIRO subsequently providing Brad Marchant with all footage and Vimeo links remaining in its possession and control on November 15, 2025.
