Gallery Owe

The Fall of Gallerist Larry Salander

2008-04-04T14:22:00.000-07:00

An Old Master in Ruins

Why is an El Greco worth less than a Koons? Gallerist Larry Salander called it a moral travesty, and decided, catastrophically, to do something about it.

Read the full article in New York Magazine

Victory for artist Marc-André Fortier over Galerie St-Dizier

2008-03-11T11:07:00.000-07:00

HISTORIC RULING

Source: Christian Bédard Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec (RAAV)

The Quebec Court of Appeal decides in favour of the artist and confirms the lower court’s ruling.

Montreal, Tuesday, February 19, 2008 — In a highly anticipated ruling by the Quebec Court of Appeal in the case of Marc-André Jacques Fortier v. Gestion B. Brisson et Associés et Brian Brisson, the three justices confirmed the main points of the ruling by Her Honour Carole Julien, of the Superior Court, made on May 16, 2006. Justices Paul-Arthur Gendreau, Jacques Delisle, and Marie-France Bich upheld the several condemnation of Gestion Brisson et Associés, doing business under the name Galerie St-Dizier, and Mr. Brian Brisson. They also confirmed the obligation for the gallery to keep separate accounting records for each artist and to supply to each artist the names of purchasers of the artist’s works “and, if applicable, their respective addresses.”

These rulings – that of the Superior Court upheld by that of the Court of Appeal – are very important since they constitute, in fact, a first and solid jurisprudence affecting an artist represented by a gallery and the Act Respecting the Professional Status of Artists in the Visual Arts, Arts and Crafts and Literature, and their Contracts with Promoters (L.R.Q. c. S-32.01). For the first time, a visual artist, Marc-André-Jacques Fortier, sculptor and member of RAAV, dared to push to the limit the defence of his rights with regard to a private gallery that neglected to sign contracts and keep appropriate accounts relative to the artist’s works. Defended by an experienced lawyer, J. L. Wolofsky, the artist was able to demonstrate definitively the effectiveness of the statute when it comes to the obligation for artists and private presenters to sign individual contracts.

The effect of these rulings will reflect on the profession as a whole, since they have confirmed the obligation for gallery owners to sign contracts and to keep clear and separate accounting records for each artist whose works they sell, as well as specifying that a gallery owner must supply upon the artist’s request information on sales, including the names and addresses of purchasers of their works.

This ruling by the Quebec Court of Appeal, handed down on February 8, 2008, concludes a nine-year epic full of plot twists and emotions, and involving heavy legal costs for both the artist and the gallery owner. It is regrettable that it took such a drawn- out saga to affirm the importance of concluding contracts, keeping appropriate accounting records, and enabling an artist to know the names and addresses of purchasers. It sends a clear message to artists and to gallery owners: when you begin your relationship, negotiate and sign correct, clear, and complete contracts in order to set out your rights and obligations and avoid eventual legal proceedings, because it is the LAW.

Incidentally, the Act is celebrating its 20th anniversary this year, and this can be seen as a wonderful birthday present.

Richard Herman's story about Sergio Patrich

2008-01-04T17:55:00.001-08:00

I generally, as a rule, refrain from speaking ill of someone in the business, but I think this situation was unique, and besides this person was operating on the outside as far as I can tell. I count myself lucky to have lost around $10,000-12,000 ( it was a while ago now) in art, and not more. When I first spoke with Mr. Patrich a red flag was raised by his seeming lack of respect. He was very positive and enthusiastic to the point of impatience, but simply rolled right over anything I had to say. I backed away but was eventually won over by the grounded openness of a young woman (apparently not family) who was in the employ of the Simon Patrich Gallery. I sent four canvases and was content to leave it with the gallery to work with as they saw fit, according to their sense of the local market. I checked in with this woman now and then for feedback, but realized I had made a mistake as soon as I next spoke with Mr. Patrich. His manner and words were of the classic "wounded friend" type of huckster, and I realized that I could kiss the paintings and or money goodbye. Shortly thereafter the work and gallery disappeared, only to pop up again as this Gallery O. At this point my only concern was to dis-associate my art from this gallery. Pursuing the work would have entailed continued association, and I didn't even want a negative one. The problem for me, and the reason I am contributing to this blog, is that after repeated requests, then demands, he would not remove my name from the gallery website. This is what disturbs me, not the money. My name is still on there today after all this time.

Thankfully, this was my only experience like this. I disagree strongly with those who characterize the business as being rife with charlatans. In my experience most gallerists are descent people who want the artist, the art, and the gallery to succeed together. I think it would be unfortunate to fall into a mindset that sees artists as "Us" and galleries as "Them". Without trust success is impossible.

Richard Herman

"The Family Business" a painting by Amelia Alcock-White

2007-11-02T10:10:00.000-07:00

http://www.ameliawhite.net/3-6.html

Comments by Amelia Alcock-White:
Scientifically speaking, Scorpions are cold-blooded, opportunistic predators. Here we see a façade of forthrightness and generosity, supposedly driven by esoteric religious conviction. Behind the guise of evangelist in designer attire we discover a conscienceless, sociopath, both carrying and being driven forward by his family.

The woman with the whip represents his mother who initially condoned and later excused his increasingly socially unacceptable behavior. After years of defending her son she has begun to believe the lies she has taught him to disseminate, seeing him as both hero and victim and urging him on, unable to face his failure as a man or hers as a mother.

Of the ‘children’ pictured, one is a baby, tightly grasped by the controlling grandmother; one is a young man looking over grandmother’s shoulder at his father. However well-intentioned, he is too brainwashed to realize the extent of wrong doings, too naive to see his own complicity and too weak to accept responsibility. The monkey represents both ‘monkey-see, monkey-do’ and stunned and de-evolved complacency, symbolizing others that are being dragged ‘along for the ride’.

The sinfully corrupt practices of the puppet father, whose strings are pulled by his mother, have karmically bankrupted an entire family, permeating every aspect of their lives. The blood of the ‘Family Business’ is on everyone’s hands; the young, the unwilling and the innocent alike.

Kurt Lidtke faces prison

2007-10-23T08:57:00.000-07:00

Following up on the previous item on Kurt Lidtke, from the Seattle Times:

Former Seattle art dealer Kurt Lidtke, who was convicted of stealing artworks and still owes victims more than $400,000, left a tangle of deception in his wake that may never fully be unraveled. The scale and duration of his misdeeds are unprecedented in the Northwest art trade and have rattled a community accustomed to doing business on trust and a handshake.

Read the rest of the story.

Guilty plea in theft of art (Seattle Times)

2007-08-30T17:26:00.000-07:00

By Christine Clarridge and Nancy Bartley

Seattle Times staff reporters

A former Pioneer Square art-gallery owner who was accused of stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of valuable art has pleaded guilty to nine counts of first-degree theft.

Read the rest of the story.

Sleazebag Dealers

2007-08-08T07:09:00.000-07:00

Here is another website dedicated to the discussion about artists and their problems with dealers: edward_ winkleman

Another article in the Georgia Straight

2007-07-12T14:48:00.000-07:00

Arts Notes

Publish Date: July 12, 2007

Do your due diligence, artists warned

The lawyer and legal director of the Alliance for Arts and Culture's Artists' Legal Outreach is urging artists to practise due diligence when signing contracts with galleries and dealers. The warning comes following a slew of complaints from artists who have had difficulties collecting their earnings from sales.

Read the entire article

and another . . .

2007-07-09T22:09:00.000-07:00

Sergio Patrich and the Vancouver Police

2007-07-07T14:57:00.000-07:00

One thing that many have been wondering is whether or not anyone whose art is potentially still in the unrightful possession of Sergio Patrich and his colleagues has gone to the police. I can tell you that at least two cases have been discussed with the Vancouver Police directly and files have been openened. When Sergio Patrich and his colleagues closed the gallery and disappeared without telling all their artists where their paintings were going or what was happening this crossed the line from civil to criminal. Consultations with lawyers have confirmed this and the police are now listening. If there are any artists out there whose artworks are still unwillingly in the possession of Sergio Patrich and his colleagues it is important to file a claim with the police. If Sergio Patrich and his colleagues do open another gallery which contains your claimed paintings they will be in possession of stolen goods. If you do not talk to the police, nothing can be done. If you would like more information about this including how exactly to approach the police please do not hesitate to 'contact us'.

another case

2007-07-05T10:07:00.000-07:00

From the "Trouble" section of last week's Business in Vancouver magazine.

A letter from artist Brittani Faulkes to Chris Tyrell in response to his recent editorial "Protecting Ourselves" in the Opus Visual Arts Newsletter

2007-06-30T11:30:00.000-07:00

Dear Chris

Thank you, thank you, thank you so very much! We have corresponded before on the subject of contractual obligation and Sergio Patrich. It is wonderful that you and the authorities at Opus have put yourselves out there as true advocates of artists' rights and published this piece regarding Sergio Patrich and named him in print.

I always look forward to the monthly Arts Newsletter from Opus because you never fail to write a well rounded objective editorial on some aspect of art or the artist's life that somehow touches all of the artists reading it. Everything is pertinent and much of it is educational. In fact, you have become a bit of a voice for all artists. And I especially want to thank you for lending this ability of yours to speak for others with regard to Sergio Patrich and his activities.

At the time we last corresponded I felt quite raw and alone thanks to the Patrich ordeal, but now, although it is harsh that others are also affected, it is very nice to have the empowerment and camaraderie that a group of people can bring. This synergy has been very effective, and Hans Engel has proven to be an energetic head of this vanguard. All of us who are effected owe him our gratitude of thanks.

I'm guessing you will probably receive a lot of feedback regarding this July article. I hope it is all favorable.

Thanks again, and keep up the good work,
Brittani Faulkes

Story in Squamish "Chief"

2007-06-29T20:17:00.000-07:00

Following up on this previous post, the following story appeared in today's The Chief:

Local artists warned about gallery owner

"Protecting Ourselves" by Chris Tyrell

2007-06-29T12:50:00.000-07:00

The latest issue of the Opus Visual Arts Newsletter, contains Chris Tyrell's second editorial on the Patrich business. The first was in response to a letter I sent him a couple of years ago and dealt in general terms with the artist/dealer relationship. This latest one continues in that vein but names names!

Click here to read the full article.

Tyrell's first editorial is here.

Sergio Patrich in Squamish B.C.?

2007-06-23T10:31:00.000-07:00

We have reason to believe that Sergio Patrich is possibly in the midst of setting up a new gallery in Squamish B.C., possibly in conjunction with a restaurant. Certainly everyone has the right to make a living but no one should be allowed to do so with goods that are not their rightful possessions. If anyone knows anything more about this venture or knows of individuals in the media or in local government whom you think it would be beneficial for us to contact, please let us know by sending an email via our 'contact us' button.

Search B.C. Court Services Online

2007-06-21T17:29:00.001-07:00

For anyone interested in searching the B.C. Court Services Online site simply follow this link and type in the name you are interested in. It can be very illuminating:

https://eservice.ag.gov.bc.ca/cso/esearch/partySearch.do

Jordan Patrich and the Gallery O Controversy by Hans Engel

2007-06-17T14:20:00.000-07:00

There has been much talk since this all began about the role young Jordan Patrich, 21 year old son to Sergio Patrich, has played in all this. Much speculation as to whether he has been a willing participant in the deception, an active manipulator, or an innocent victim at the hands of his own family. Some are horrified by the last option; the possibility that perhaps Jordan has simply been another resource for his father to once again avoid his creditors – indeed it is one of the choices when considering why Jordan was made president of Tiferet Holdings and director of the Art Center building in which the Vancouver Gallery of Photography and Gallery O Contemporary were housed at 2060 Pine Street in Vancouver. Brian Nation writes in his testimonial “From the domain registration info for his new website it appears that Sergio's son Jordan Patrich is the president of Tiferet Holdings.” Why would Sergio Patrich, now former President and Director of Havilah Holdings and the Simon Patrich Gallery on Granville Street simply sign it over completely to his very young and inexperienced son? We don’t know. And until someone tells us otherwise it is all pure speculation. We do know, however, of at least two cases where sudden bankruptcies and corporate overhauls enabled Sergio Patrich, while facing claims in court, to completely avoid paying his creditors anything. And we do know that the fact of his not having any assets in his name has completely frustrated lawyers from getting anything from him.

But back to Jordan.

I met Jordan a couple of years ago as he helped his father at the Simon Patrich Gallery. When the gallery moved to it’s new location on Pine Street and changed names I had no idea that the gallery Director was now young Jordan. Whatever contact I had was still with Sergio although it seemed Jordan was there more and more. I was surprised when I did find out and found it quite strange – but given the nature of their seemingly very close family it was perhaps also quite laudable that Sergio would step aside and let his possibly ambitious son try his hand at the biz.

Things got ugly last summer as the facts and deception began to become frighteningly clear. I tried to get answers from Jordan, the gallery Director. I was asking for my money from recent sales completed under his Directorship. I was asking for answers. I was asking for reasons. I was asking for an inventory list. I was asking 'where's Sergio?'. Almost everything was deferred to his grandmother who had also suddenly become very active in the business of the gallery – also very strange. Jordan promised me my money. Very little came – but the two little cheques I managed to squeeze out of them before everything collapsed were signed by gallery director Jordan Patrich. Eventually, after dozens of emails and phone calls, all of which went unanswered, an inventory list was emailed to me by Jordan. As I checked the list I was surprised to find paintings I knew had sold, and horrified to find that many works were not on the list that should have been there. I emailed Jordan asking for an explanation and another list. No response or list ever came.

Some wonder what exactly Jordan knew about his father’s business practices. We don’t know. What I do know is that Jordan knew, because he heard it from me, that they owed me money. That they were selling my work without telling me. That I wanted an inventory list. That I wanted my paintings returned. That much I know he knew. There is no question that Jordan, no matter his youth, is complicit in his families actions even if it is because he knew what was going on and did nothing to change it. A lovely quote from Brittani Faulkes reads: “sometimes complicity is simply a matter of inaction”.

But what does Jordan have to say for himself? All we know directly is what he has published on his ‘Myspace’ blog.

“I own an art gallery in Vancouver. Two actually. This means I'm poor and work a ton.”

“My landlord came into the gallery this morning. I'm a bit behind. Well more than a bit.”

“I also had a visit from Marco Tulio who brought in a new piece! I love when artists bring in new art works! It's like Christmas!”

“For those of you who don’t know, the galleries are no more....well for now anyways. It was fun while it lasted, but was just a bit too much for me to handle I guess. Maybe soon people will realize that the posters they buy at Ikea are nothing but tomorrows garbage, and true art will be recognized. Unfortunately I wont be the one to do it. There are still plans to set up a new VGOP [Vancouver Gallery of Photography] somewhere though. I had just gotten it approved for non-profit status, so we'll see where that goes.”

Jordan as innocent or Jordan as co-conspirator? We don’t know. And perhaps knowing will change nothing. But it is yet another piece in this very elaborate puzzle.

Westender article, June 14

2007-06-14T08:46:00.000-07:00

From today's Westender (Vancouver)

Artists seek out vanished gallery director

By Mary Frances Hill
Jun 14 2007

Gallery O exhibitors claim loss of work and payment

Enter the name of Toronto-based artist Hans Engel and the name "Gallery O" into Google's search engine, and up pops a link to a tidy page with Engel's photo above thumbnail samples of his oil paintings. It's an ordinary page on a typical art-gallery website, designed for the perusal of collectors and the public alike.

But for Engel, who has shown his work at Vancouver's now-defunct Gallery O at the Center for Contemporary Art, and other galleries run by Sergio Patrich, it's a bitter reminder of his long struggle for compensation. And that struggle is still going on.

Patrich, who ran Gallery O (at 2060 Pine Street in Kitsilano) with his son, closed the space abruptly after a sudden eviction in April, after about a year and a half in business. Engel claims Patrich took with him $22,000 worth of Engel's paintings, and still owes him $4,000 worth of unpaid commissions.

Today, Engel has another web presence. With Brian Nation, Gallery O's former web designer, who brought Patrich to court last year to collect for work on the business's original website, he's created a cleverly titled blog, GalleryOwe.blogspot.com, which includes testimonials from various artists about their dealings with the gallery.

Response has been swift. Engel communicates daily by email to more than a dozen artists in Vancouver, Toronto and Europe who claim to be waiting for overdue compensation from Patrich. "I've spoken to many artists and no one has received even a phone call from Patrich [about unpaid commissions and unreturned artwork]," says Engel, whose contract with Patrich specified the gallery director and artist would split the proceeds from sales of Engel's art 50-50.

When Nation took Patrich to small-claims court, he won, although Nation says he has received none of the $600 he was due. Soon after they met in small-claims court, Patrich sued Nation for taking down the gallery website, citing lost business, Nation says. The court dismissed Patrich's suit.

North Vancouver artist Brittani Faulkes also brought Patrich to court, in September 2005, claiming he owed her $6,481 for paintings he told her had been misplaced. She won, but despite many attempts to contact him, she collected nothing. "My lawyer did a search and could find no visible assets for Sergio Patrich," Faulkes wrote on the GalleryOwe blog. "The new gallery was listed in the name of his son, Jordan Patrich, and his house was listed in his wife's name. All bank accounts were in names of family members, but none in Sergio's."

The Patrich name " including those of his 21-year-old son, Jordan, and his mother, Leah " has been linked to both Havilah Holdings and, more recently, Tiferet Holdings. Artists claim Gallery O was registered under the name of Jordan Patrich. Jordan's own MySpace page contains an introduction in which he claims to own two galleries. In an entry dated May 13, almost a month after his father closed Gallery O, he wrote that the galleries were closed: "It was fun while it lasted, but just a bit too much for me to handle."

David"Haughton, a doctor specializing in pediatric medicine who sidelines as an artist, says he had arranged with Patrich to display his artwork in a Gallery O exhibit called Kindertotentanz, which was due to launch 10 days after Patrich moved out of the space. But the artist and director had a prior history: Haughton claims he had an outstanding conflict with Patrich about payment of approximately $20,000 in commissions from sales of work displayed at the now-defunct Simon Patrich Gallery, which Sergio had run on South Granville until it closed about two years ago (Simon is Sergio's late father). But Haughton was so taken with Gallery O's open, elegant 10,000 square-foot space, he agreed to a new show there.

"I wanted to show in his new space," Haughton says. "I was willing to rationalize away what he owed me. I got him to sign the contract, and I kept asking, "Is business okay?" He said it was fine. Then, 10 days before I was supposed to open, he moved out in the middle of the night."

To Haughton's credit, he didn't let Patrich's eviction stop him from holding his exhibit. He negotiated with the landlord to use the space for a month, renamed it Gallery X Temporary, mounted Kindertotentanz, and sold 40 per cent of his displayed work. "It was a positive thing for me in the end, but it was stressful," he says.

For Faulkes, the stress of losing her work and going through with the lawsuit was particularly burdensome, she says. "I was unable to paint, questioned my choice of career, and was mad at the world."

The website for Gallery O, housed in what the Patriches named the Art Center, includes the Vancouver Gallery of Photography. The site, still accessible on the web (ArtCenter.ca), advertises the galleries' exhibits for March and April, and "upcoming shows" by Haughton and Vancouver painter Thomas Anfield. Anfield was scheduled to mount his show, Sprung, at the end of May. "I'm pretty pissed off that I lost my show," he says. "I was left high and dry, and that was a drag."

Still, Anfield says his experience on the commercial side of the art business has taught him to be assertive " a lesson that paid off in his dealings with Patrich over a previous show."I went to him last year and said, "I want to have a show with you, but I don't want any bullshit," Anfield recalls. Other than the sudden loss of the late-May show, he says he was treated in a fair, professional manner. "[Sergio] phoned me [to report] every sale, and... he paid in full, two days before he closed up."

Facing business and financial conflicts, artists often find themselves feeling helpless, according to Mira Sundara Rajan, a UBC law professor and Canada Research Chair in Intellectual Property Law who specializes in art and the law. "If [a businessman] doesn't have enough to pay anyone, he would have to declare bankruptcy," she says. "If [a] signature is on a contract, [that person] is liable... and it could be a situation for a class action."

Sergio Patrich insists that his landlord's order to close Gallery O was sudden and unexpected. He had already sent out thousands of dollars worth of invitations to Haughton's exhibit, he says, when he received the eviction notice, which cited four months" rent in arrears. This was doubly unfortunate, he says, because after a time of financial constraints, it looked like the business was entering a period of recovery. "Someone told me that to run a gallery you have to be very rich or stupid," he says. "It's not like youre sticking money in your pockets. I haven't taken a salary out of there for years."

Patrich admits he still owes some artists. including Engel, some compensation, and that he plans to deal with each case individually while he searches for a new gallery space and sorts out his finances.

"I'm not saying we're the perfect saints, but it's not because we're trying to screw anybody," says Patrich, who adds that he and his family hosted many community events in the Art Center space, at great expense. "We were trying to build something. Maybe our dream was too big."

Engel says some artists have considered launching a class-action suit, although their distance from each other, and lack of time and organization, has been frustrating, he says. "[The situation] really does need someone to spearhead a class-action suit. I haven't seen anyone with the energy or the money, but I keep the collective-information mill churning amongst us."

That gesture, at least, goes a long way toward helping artists in Faulkes's position, as she wrote on GalleryOwe.

"It's been energizing to realize how many of us are out there who are linked by Patrich's... activities and that we are strong in numbers and unity."

(Copyright (c) 2007 Black Press Group Ltd.)

Hans Engel's story about Sergio Patrich

2007-06-08T08:23:00.000-07:00

I’m an artist based in Toronto. Five or six years ago, in an effort to find representation, I sent out a catalogue and letter to galleries across the country. Sergio Patrich, then director/owner of the Simon Patrich Gallery on Granville in Vancouver, was one of those who responded favourably. Sergio was and is always extremely charming. I was very new to the gallery world and extremely trusting. When we discussed how our relationship would work, Sergio, obviously as a sign of his good business ethic, told me that if a painting sold, the artist would be paid immediately in full, even if it was on a payment plan. Recovering the funds from the client was the gallery’s responsibility, he told me. I believed this was a professional gallery and given the stories I was told of the lengthy history of the gallery and of Sergio and his father as dealers, I had no reason to believe I was at risk. Sergio offered me a solo show and I was, of course, thrilled. When I attended the opening Sergio was very gregarious and threw a good party, full of hugs and tequila. Thereafter there was almost a solo show every year. Every now and again I would be casually informed through one of the gallery workers that something had sold at some point and I would ask for payment. They would have to talk to Sergio and see what was going on. Every time I would be given a run-around – the accountant, payment plan, don’t know, call you back, it’s coming soon – but, to my knowledge at the time, I was eventually, albeit slowly and reluctantly, paid for everything I knew had sold.

During the summer of 2006 I received a phone call from another gallery which represents me, informing me of a phone call they received from a buyer in California who was looking to talk to me about my Vancouver gallery. I contacted this buyer and was told that he had purchased one of my paintings from Sergio Patrich but was having a very difficult time getting the painting and an even harder time communicating with the gallery. I called the gallery (now relocated and renamed as Gallery O Contemporary at the Art Center on Pine Street) and Jordan Patrich (Sergio’s young son who had surprisingly been made ‘director’ of the gallery) answered the phone. I asked about this particular sale and what I had been told. He told me that it was his mother, Leah Patrich, who was handling the case and that from what he had witnessed the buyer in California was ‘insane’ and being abusive towards them. I found this surprising since the buyer in California was perfectly calm and polite with me. Jordan told me that I had to speak to his mother but as far as he knew the painting was simply stuck in customs. I spoke to Leah and asked her the same questions and she gave me the same replies. I asked when I would be paid and she informed me that they hadn’t received payment yet. This was surprising as well. Why would they, I asked, ship one of my paintings if it hadn’t yet been paid for. Now apparently it was Jordan who had all the information or the ‘accountant’. I was cut off and the conversation was over. I went back to the buyer in California and told him what I had been told. He was dumbfounded and assured me he had paid in full on his credit card but was having such a horrible time dealing with the gallery that he was considering reversing the payment because even the sight of my painting would only remind him of the frustration that he was experiencing trying to receive it. He didn’t even want it anymore. I started to get suspicious of what was going on and contacted the gallery again demanding to know what was going on and why they would treat anyone, particularly a buyer and me, with such disrespect. I began asking for immediate payment in full and for an inventory list. This is when Leah Patrich began to scream at me on the phone to such an extent that I literally held the phone away from my ear. I asked if she was done so that we could talk business. She was done and she hung up on me. Eventually my painting did reach the buyer in California who was thrilled, and loved it, and paid for it in full on his credit card. He also advised me that he had never before dealt with such an unprofessional gallery and suggested I get far away from them. This marked the beginning of months of attempting to contact them, making numerous unanswered phone calls and emails daily asking for payment and an inventory list. Their only response to me was silence.

I emailed another buyer who had previously purchased two large paintings of mine asking that, since in the past he had expressed a desire for another piece, if he were to act on that desire, that he do so directly with me. He responded saying that, as I knew, he had three of my pieces but that if he were to want more he would contact me. Three!? Another painting gone.

In the Spring of 2007, with the help of CARFAC, I began conversations with a lawyer about my situation. She helped me to write a letter to Sergio, Jordan and Leah describing what I knew had transpired and what I now expected, ie: payment and the return of all of my paintings. After having spoken to other artists in a similar situation I had a feeling that this letter would go unanswered. It did.

I booked a flight to Vancouver. The weekend before my departure, Sergio and his associates packed up the gallery and all of its contents and disappeared. I arrived in Vancouver to find the gallery locked and swept clean. I was devastated. While in Vancouver I received a phone call from someone claiming to be Sergio’s brother, Gabriel Patrich, informing me that my paintings would be delivered to a shipping company for me to pick up but he claimed not to know how many (there should have been 28), when, or what happened to the gallery. I demanded he get Sergio to call me. He told me Sergio was too busy. Later that week I received a phone call from the shippers saying that an anonymous driver had delivered some of my paintings. I asked how may. He said, 17.

I now know that there were other paintings being sold or given away about which I was not informed nor paid. Obviously during the years I was happily painting paintings for all my Vancouver shows they were systematically selling off my work behind my back. Eleven paintings are simply gone, two were sold for which I received partial payment, and two were sold for which I’ve received nothing. A total of fifteen paintings and a value of around $26000. Gone. For me, an entire year’s worth of production.

My story is, unfortunately, not unusual. I’ve spoken to many other artists who have been through this and more. Some are posting on this blog and you can read what they’ve done and what they’ve lost. Most have resigned themselves to the idea that their paintings are gone and their money is gone. Some have been so exhausted and humiliated by their ordeals that, at least for a time, and it has happened to me, they have stopped painting entirely. Some, so beaten and shell shocked by the betrayal that they no longer want to trust any gallery anywhere. Some, so disillusioned by the court system that they no longer believe any form of contract would help in protecting them from other scam artists.

My story is not unusual, but I think we as artists need to work towards making it much less than usual. Telling these stories to each other is one way of doing that. There is power in collective knowledge and there is power in collective action.

Noah Layne's story about Sergio Patrich

2007-06-08T03:57:00.000-07:00

I started showing work at the Simon Patrich Gallery in fall 2003.

I was part of a five-person “magic realist” show at Simon Patrich Gallery in spring 2005.

At that time I found that a couple of my paintings were damaged at the gallery and I was not getting a good feeling from Sergio and the gallery.

I had no idea that the gallery was closing for the summer of 2005 and moving to a new location. I found out that the gallery had moved when my father was in Vancouver and went by the old gallery’s location. I was shocked that the gallery would move without letting me know.

I had a very hard time both contacting Sergio and finding the new location of the gallery. When I did contact Sergio, I told him I wanted to pick up my paintings. He didn’t return any of my calls after that. When I found out where the new gallery space was (it was not yet open to the public) I went to Vancouver to try to get my paintings back. Sergio would not let me take them back that day as he said that he was too busy….. But I could pick them up the next Friday.

I got a lawyer to write a letter to Sergio letting him know that if I was not able to pick my paintings up on Friday I would sue him for the value of the paintings. I went to Vancouver the next Friday and managed to pick up all six of my bigger paintings. I was told that my two smaller painting were “miss-placed” (more likely sold.) and Sergio would call me when he found them. I was so relieved to be able to pick up my big paintings that I just left. My lawyer continued to send Sergio letters to pressure him into paying me for the missing paintings but we never heard anything back. I decided that at the time it was not going to be worth my time and emotional energy to fight for my money through small courts clams in Vancouver. I’m still owed $1100 for my two small paintings.

Noah Layne

Linda Nardelli's story about Sergio Patrich

2007-06-08T03:50:00.000-07:00

I am writing this testimonial regarding the Partich Situation in hopes that it can help fellow artists better represent themselves to insure their artist rights. I could have avoided financial and emotional loss with Simon Patrich Gallery (now known as the Gallery O) by being more assertive form the start. Presently I have a very organized system to keep track of inventory and insist on statements of sales with all gallery payments. Also I insist on being paid no more than 30 days after the sale of my artwork. My Consignment Agreements are clearly defined with thumbnail photos of each painting consigned. I keep track of art sold and correct any errors that can occur, without the unnecessary delays and confusion. This wasn’t the case with Simon Patrich Gallery – A Division Of Havillah Holdings Ltd.

I began gallery representation with Simon Patrich Gallery in June 1999. The sales were slow at first, but quickly ameliorated after my first art show in May 2000. About six months later I recognized that the cheques from the gallery did not match the sales from the art show. When I spoke with Sergio, he said that some of the art had been purchased on payment plans and that I would soon receive a payment. Payments were sent to me by mail with no statement of sales or mention of which paintings sold. When I asked for statements of sales, Sergio agreed to organize it but refused to indicate the payment plans, as that wasn’t their normal procedure. Several months went by with the assistance of a gallery representative to try to organize the statements and inventory. Her time was limited as was Sergio’s time, and there were delays. Sergio would say that they were having computer problems to explain the delay. Meanwhile I was very busy juggling my art studio work with my day job, and personal family issues that made it all the more difficult to deal with the underlying gallery problem.

The cheques continued to not match the sales, though I could not determine specifically which paintings were sold. It can also be challenging to keep track of gallery inventory as some paintings may be out on loan to possible clients for viewing in their home or business. I must say that in retrospect I should have left the gallery the year after the show, but I persisted, seduced by a sense of loyalty and love. Sergio engendered a sense of family, which many other artists who have exhibited at the gallery have attested to.

The first set of statement of sales given by the gallery did not clearly add up, and it wasn’t until my second art show in 2003 that I finally identified the paintings sold and gallery inventory. Once I confronted Sergio with this discrepancy he began to elude me: not answer phone messages, complain of ill health and lack of funds. He suggested that all galleries cover their own expenses before paying the artists, and that when he could he would pay me. I wanted regular monthly payments with posted dated cheques, which he refused; he only wanted to send me cheques, as he had already been doing, and only when he had the funds. I continued to try to arrange a payment plan or at least a more substantial payment to cover the amount owing. Sergio deferred me to his accounted that also did not answer phone messages. By the spring of 2004, I removed my art except five missing painting, which are still missing. After a lengthy legal process both Sergio and his mother/partner Leah Patrich met with my lawyer. Sergio argued that I owed him two paintings for the two shows. I had never heard of this before. After a grueling discussion I settled for the sum of $16,000.00. It was agreed that they would pay me $600 per month, which they did for four months. The payments stopped when they moved the “Simon Patrich Gallery” to Pine street, which is when they renamed the gallery “Gallery O”. My lawyer entered a Consent Order For Judgment by September 2005, which was granted. A Writ Of Seizure was obtained as well as Sheriff services, which produced no results. No monies were found - it turns out that Sergio has protected his assets very well, as he has no valuable assets in his name. Leah Patrich could not be found.

I have learned a valuable lesson: law-abiding contracts make absolutely no difference. The law system does not enforce payments of debts. nor does it regulate business practices, which is why Sergio could remain in business for so long with a track record of not paying artists.

I wish there was a regulatory body to maintain good working agreements between artists and gallery owners, because I have since heard many stories of artists who have not been paid by prominent galleries. I believe that patrons who buy art wish to support the arts. I know that when I purchase an artist’s creation I want the artist to be paid his/her rightful percentage. How else can artists sustain their artistic gifts?

Sincerely,

Linda L. Nardelli

Response to Georgia Straight article May 17, 2007 "Closure Leaves Artists Scrambling" by Hans Engel

2007-06-01T12:26:00.000-07:00

Hello Jessica Werb and the editors of the Georgia Straight. Thank you for your article of May 17, 2007 “Closure Leaves Artists Scrambling” in the Arts Notes section. I am glad that after a very long period of abuse of artists the media is finally deeming it of value and interest to begin to expose the actions of Sergio Patrich. This particular subject, however, requires more than a note to cover its pervasive expansiveness. Let’s not mince words here. I, and the many artists with whom I have spoken since this ordeal began, have been cheated, lied to, robbed, humiliated, screamed at and downright brutalized by Sergio Patrich and his associates. A total of $26 000 worth of art has been stolen from me, representing more than a years worth of paintings and for some, easily a years income. Is this so insignificant a ‘claim’ that Sergio’s whining about ‘sudden’ eviction (when is eviction ever sudden?) should take precedent? And shall we ask why does someone get evicted? Because he’s not paying his landlords either. And my story is not new nor is it isolated. To date I have not yet spoken to a single artist who has shown with Sergio Patrich (and I have spoken to more than a dozen) who has not had similar experiences at either of his two previous galleries. Were this a story of stolen diamonds (and some of the ‘missing’, ‘stolen’, ‘lost’ paintings are worth more than diamonds) would it gain more credence as grand theft? Or if Sergio Patrich and his group were stealing cars and then telling you (as quoted in the article) “It’s not like I have money in my pockets. We’re trying our best to take care of people whichever way we can” would you accept that as a valid response or would you simply go to the police? Please consider this carefully as I believe that until we understand the value of this work monetarily as well as intellectually and emotionally, artists and their work, created with the same blood, sweat and tears as anyone else, will continue to be abused by their dealers and ignored by the media. I guarantee you we’re not done with this and I hope you aren’t either.
Sincerely,
Hans Engel
Toronto

Brittani Faulkes Testimonial and a response to the Georgia Straight article

2007-05-30T00:08:00.000-07:00

In the late summer of 2004, I telephoned to make an appointment for an interview with the director of Simon Patrich Gallery (2329 Granville Street, Vancouver BC), Sergio Patrich. I attended the interview with a portfolio and a dozen examples of my oil paintings. I was made a stable member, and my oil paintings were written in as received by the gallery, with wholesale/retail values at a 50/50 split, and I had to sign a contract. The contract clearly stated that the artist would receive the due consignment value within 30 days of collecting the sale price.

Sales were slow at first but picked up. I was floored to learn about my first sale, when the purchaser of a painting managed to acquire my email address from my website to let me know how my painting was bringing happiness to him and his wife. I contacted the gallery and spoke with gallery employee Marianne Dell, who informed me the painting had sold 3 months earlier. I had not seen any money, and thus began a pattern where I had to go and beg or demand financial restitution for a sale.

In the beginning, Sergio Patrich would pay partial amounts until I was eventually fully paid for sold work. It got more and more difficult, however, and at one point, knowing I had admired paintings by fellow stable member Hans Engel, I was asked if I would like to accept one of Engel’s paintings in lieu of a cheque (it turns out the artist was not even aware of this activity). I declined as I needed money in order to eke out a living.

In January 2005 I was offered a solo show from April 29 to May 15. I was happy to accept the offer. Some paintings sold at the opening and a few after. I was told that purchasers had bought paintings on an installment plan and I would not be paid for those until the final amounts were received. I was paid a bit to cover what I was told were all at once purchases. I was never paid for the outstanding amount, $4300.

I was told that Simon Patrich Gallery would be moving to a warehouse on Pine Street in the summer. Worried about damage to my work, and since my husband had a large cargo van and was willing to assist, I offered to help by moving my work, and this offer was declined. Further offers were declined. I had some intuition that things were not what they seemed. On August 2 2005 I telephoned Patrich regarding payment. He said people are slow to pay him and money is going out. He said he had no money to pay me and to call again in three weeks. I informed him I wanted to remove my work from the Simon Patrich Gallery space on the upcoming Saturday. He said he would call back regarding Saturday, but didn’t.

My work was moved to a warehouse at 4th and Pine in Vancouver without my permission. My husband and I tried repeatedly to remove it from the warehouse but it was always padlocked. I tried to contact Patrich by telephone and cellphone to no avail. At this point, I learned I could ask legal aid to set me up with a free appointment with a lawyer to see if I had a case. I was matched to a local contractual lawyer and had a 20 minute interview. The lawyer said that based on the terms of the gallery contract, I had a case and I had a few methods of paying him. I had to pay him a retaining fee, and for fees on top of that, chose to pay a percentage of money collected, if it could be collected.

The lawyer advised me to sit and wait outside the warehouse with some strongarmed male company until we had an opportunity to enter the warehouse and retrieve my art. After several attempts (different days, several hours of waiting) to gain entry, we were finally able on August 5 to follow the computer and reproduction employee Colin into the building. Colin assisted us the whole time with full cooperation, and in the last half hour Sergio’s son Jordan also attempted to help. Artwork for each artist had not been stored in groups by artist, but was stacked willy-nilly on both levels of the warehouse against any flat wall or surface and also crammed into the freight elevator. We covered every square inch of the warehouse and went through each stack at least 3 times. In the end we retrieved all but 2 paintings. Colin suggested they might be at either Sergio or his mother Leah Patrich’s residences.

Upon the lawyer’s advice, I attempted to confirm the whereabouts of the missing pieces by telephoning Sergio. I guess my calls were being screened by caller ID, because no one at the warehouse chose to answer the phone during the afternoon until I tried calling using my cell phone rather than our home telephone. Sergio stated that the missing pieces had not been sold, were not at anybody’s residence, and should be at the warehouse. Well, they weren’t. The value to me of the missing paintings is $1925.

Over the time I had received actual payments from Simon Patrich Gallery, all cheques were signed by Sergio Patrich, and the cheques were issued from the following sources: Simon Patrich Gallery, Spirit of the Northwest Gallery, Imogene Reproductions, and Havilah Holdings; all from Scotia Bank at 1801 Broadway, Vancouver BC.

At the suggestion of my lawyer, I paid filing and service fees of $256 and sued Sergio Patrich in small claims court. We sued for $6481, the amount of the unaccounted for paintings, the balance of outstanding painting sales, and the fees I had paid. Sergio Patrich did not respond to the issue of the writ. Eventually the suit went to court and the judge’s verdict was that Sergio Patrich was to pay me $6481. The lawyer did a search and could find no visible assets for Sergio Patrich. The new gallery was listed in the name of his son Jordan Patrich, and his house was listed in his wife’s name. All bank accounts were in names of family members, but none in Sergio’s.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff Irwin Commercial Finance Canada Corporation sued Havilah Holdings Ltd. (operating as Simon Patrich Gallery, 59 Patricia Court, New Westminister), for $28,349.74 under an equipment rental agreement. Since this is an incorporated business, it is first in line if any money or assets become visible. This means that all the unincorporated artists and small businesses who have won lawsuits against Patrich don’t stand much of a chance at all of ever collecting money.

How has this impacted me? At first I was embarrassed to admit how incredibly humiliated and angry I was. I had carefully vetted Simon Patrich Gallery by contacting represented artists and asking how they felt about the gallery, and I had subtly interviewed Sergio Patrich just as he was interviewing me during the portfolio meeting. I was treated like family until I started asking for overdue payments of money owed. When it finally came to my realization that the judge accorded me a favorable judgment but that I had little likelihood of getting paid, I was hit harder emotionally than I could have possibly anticipated. I suppose you could say I went through emotions that lingered long on anger and short on acceptance, and when I finally accepted the fact I had been bilked of hard earned income that I required for sustenance by someone who had had my trust, I was incapacitated and for a time acted like I hated everything and everyone I came in contact with. I was unable to paint, questioned my choice of career, and mad at the world. Thankfully these angry emotions eventually passed when I started communicating with web artist Brian Nation, and realized I was not alone in being maltreated by Sergio Patrich. It was a comment by Brian, who said he had to stop being angry and put it behind him and get on with life, that made me realize that I could no longer allow Patrich to dominate my life, and I moved on.

Just recently I was contacted by Hans Engel and it has been energizing to realize how many of us are out there who are linked by Patrich’s criminal activities and that we are strong in numbers and unity. For this reason I have decided to pull my head from out under the wing and become proactive again. If for no other reason, to try to prevent other innocent artists and business owners from being robbed by a man who knows how to skirt the law and profit by robbing hard working people.

Brittani Faulkes
May 21, 2007

Contents of a letter I emailed to Jessica Werb, Dan McLeod, Charlie Smith, Martin Dunphy, and Brian Lynch on May 17, 2007.

Hello Jessica

While I am happy to see an article articulating the actions of Sergio Patrich (Closure Leaves Artists Scrambling, May 17 2007), you have barely scratched the surface of the tip of the iceberg. It has been my hope for some time now that the media would grab hold of this huge beast by the horns and if not wrestle it to the ground, at least try to grasp the horns.

Sergio Patrich's actions are not new. I was a stable artist at the Simon Patrich Gallery for the last year before he packed up and moved from that facility to the most recent one at 2060 Pine Street. At the time he moved from the Granville Street space I had been actively seeking payment of money owed, approximately $4300. At one time I was offered another artist's painting in lieu of monetary restitution, without the knowledge of that artist. The contents of Granville Street Simon Patrich Gallery were moved to a warehouse at 2060 Pine Street, a space which required a great deal of renovation. My husband and I tried repeatedly to remove my work from the warehouse, but there was no access to the building and no way to contact Patrich. I retained a lawyer, who advised me to sit and watch from a vehicle for an opportunity to access my art. After several tries, we were able to follow the reproduction employee into the space. All the artwork from the Granville Street space was stored willy-nilly throughout the two floors, in filth, with no protection between pieces, and even the cargo elevator crammed with art. We were able to locate all but 2 of my paintings, so the total amount lost to me was $4300 in owed money, and the total with the missing artwork and filing fees for the lawsuit came to $6800. It went to court, which Patrich did not attend, and the judge's decision was that Patrich owed me this amount. Unfortunately, since the new gallery space was placed in his son's name, his house in his wife's name, and with no visible assets, there was little likelihood of receiving payment unless Patrich slipped up in his elusiveness and was caught in the act. At the same time, a company that sold and rented reproduction equipment sued for a large sum of money Patrich owed. Since the company is incorporated, it is first in line to collect money if it becomes available. While going through all of this, I came into contact with several artists and small business owners who were also owed money but never paid by Patrich. This is not a new pattern, it is a repeated pattern.

While your article is a step in the right direction, it comes across as implying that Hans Engel is "claiming" his case and Sergio Patrich is "stating" his case. This is adding insult to injury. Sergio Patrich's actions are illegal and immoral, preying on artists' livelihoods and swindling businesses. If nothing else, I would hope your article alerts other artists to be aware of any business dealings with Sergio Patrich and those associated with his business dealings. His pattern is to gain the trust of an artist by paying for the first few sales, then making it more difficult to collect, then not paying at all. When I became a stable member at Simon Patrich Gallery I carefully vetted the business by contacting other represented artists and asking how they regarded the gallery, and by assessing Sergio Patrich as he assessed me during an interview and portfolio examination. This careful approach did not help me at all. Ultimately, I would hope that other artists, web designers, print companies, reproduction equipment companies, landlords, and all others who come into contact with Sergio Patrich do so with eyes wide open...in all likelihood he will set up another space, ingratiate himself to other artists and businesses, stop paying owed money, and move on. Those of us who are honest, beware.

Thank you, Brittani Faulkes

The Fortier case: The Law at the Defense of Artists

2007-05-28T22:31:00.000-07:00

"The Fortier case represents a classic example for anyone interested in the status of artists and the visual arts. The decision made on May 16, 2006 by Superior Court Judge Carole Julien brings to the forefront both the helplessness of an artist and the merit of the Act Respecting the Professional Status of Artists in the Visual Arts, Arts and Crafts and Literature, and Their Contracts with Promoters.3 For the purposes of this comment, we will insist on elements from the judgment that legally impact on the artist/gallerist relation."

Read the full text here.

Frank Zeidler's personal account

2007-05-21T20:08:00.000-07:00

My name is Frank Zeidler, I am an artist living and working in Vancouver and have been associated with Sergio Patrich for close to ten years.

I first entered the Simon Patrich Gallery in the summer of 1996 or 1997. I was knocking on the doors of galleries all over Vancouver looking for a venue. Sergio Patrich, the owner of the gallery, took the time to look over my presentation and, after some discussion, agreed to represent me and my work. In 1998 I had my first solo show, a collection of collages. The show was well attended and admired, but I failed to sell a single piece. This did not seem to dismay Sergio though, he continued to praise my work and suggested ways in which I might improve upon what I had accomplished. I felt I was getting moral support from him. On the other hand, I rarely, if ever, saw my work hanging on the walls of his gallery, and but for a handful of ceramics that I had decorated with the help of another potter, never sold a single piece out of his gallery over the next eight years. I had however, used the intervening time advantageously to increase and diversify my artistic production and I finally came out with a collection of oil paintings which, after a lot of pushing on my part, Sergio agreed to exhibit in the spring of 2005. This time, the exhibition proved a success, and a number of paintings sold with a gross total sales price of approximately $20,000.

Sergio said he would be paying me my 50% very soon; he only needed to catch up on his paperwork and arrange the details of those people who had elected to pay on an installment plan. I had no problem with that, we were leaving on vacation, and my state of euphoria had not abated. We returned from our vacation mid-summer. Once back in the city I wandered down to the Gallery on Granville Street, only to find it shut down with a notice in the window that the premises had moved and was starting up again as The Art Center at 2060 Pine Street. I thought that was kind of unusual but was not really concerned. I went down to the Pine St. address and eventually caught up with Sergio. We greeted each other warmly and he gave me an enthusiastic tour of his new space. The place occupied two floors with lots of interesting nooks and crannies and options on adjoining spaces that could be adapted to a variety of uses. Sergio was excited about its possibilities and had already put carpenters, painters and electricians to work renovating his new gallery around all the paintings and artworks that had been brought over from the Granville St. address. After a while spent sharing his dreams about his awesome new plans for the Vancouver art scene and a new solo show for myself, I broached the subject of the money he still owed me from the show back in the spring.

At this, his mood turned more somber. "I can't pay you right now Frank," he said, "I had to use your money to pay for the people who are renovating the gallery." I was a little taken aback when he said this. "You did what?" I allowed. Sergio then went into a long talk about how the rent on Granville had doubled, how, after all the overhead, he never managed to make any money on my show and that now he had this great opportunity with this space on Pine St., but he couldn't get any credit from the banks and had started all this work and now he had to pay all these people and what could he do, he had no choice and he was going to pay me as soon as he got the money.

It was a strange kind of scenario but there didn't seem to be many options for me other than to accept his explanation and put off my payment to a later date. I dropped into the gallery from time to time to check up on the renovation and try to establish a date when I might reasonably be expected to be paid. The gallery, after some delays, did finally open. Sergio was taking out ads in the local publications and mounting shows again without, however, some of his bread and butter artists. This made me a little uncomfortable and I was beginning to wonder how he was pulling all this off as far as money went. Nonetheless, I had told myself that I would give him a year to pay up and I stuck to that.

The year passed. This has gone far enough now I thought and so one morning in the late spring of 2006 I went to talk with him in his office. I told him I had waited for a year to receive payment and that I had not received even a dollar from him in all that time. Again he claimed not to have any money. I let him know that I had run out of patience and could no longer waste my time fruitlessly trying to convince him to pay me his debt. I was going to turn over this problem to an outside agency and I was going to wash my hands of any further personal contact with him. His response was to wave his arms about. "What do expect me to do?" he said, "You can send a collection agency around but they can't get anything from me, I don't have any money!" "I'm, sorry Sergio," I replied, "but that's all I can do." He said that I “should get used to this, it’s the nature of the business.” That really shocked me. Thanks for the tip, I thought to myself.

Not that I really knew what I could do either. I gave it a bit of thought and came up with a plan, I would take him to small claims court, and retrieve my paintings from his gallery. Believing him to be in a somewhat delicate situation financially, I didn't want to show up at the gallery some day and see padlocks across the door and my paintings inside so I felt I had to get them out. I enlisted the help of two friends of mine and a panel truck and showed up at the gallery on a Saturday afternoon, combed every inch of the gallery for my work and reclaimed all but three pieces of mine which were nowhere to be found. I felt better knowing my work was out of there.

The next stop was small claims court on Robson St. I soon became well versed in the niceties of filling out government forms, paying fees, and waiting in line. While doing my research into the names of the business and it’s directors I would be listing as defendants I learned that Sergio had closed down Havilah Holdings Inc., the holding company responsible for the Simon Patrich Gallery, and set up a new company, Tifferet Holdings Inc. listing his son Jordan as the director. How sleazy, I thought, setting up his own son to take the fall in case anything should go wrong. I also dug up a list of claims registered with the courts that name Sergio Patrich and various members of his family as defendants in numerous cases against him that numbered more than forty. I was beginning to get a fuller picture of the man.

I finally served Leah Patrich, the mother of Sergio and the other co-director of the gallery with a notice of my claim. She was furious. She said she felt betrayed, that after they’d sheltered and nourished me over the years this is the thanks they get. I hastened to remind her that I had not been paid for over a year and this was completely unacceptable. At a later date I went in and saw Sergio himself to confront him about the missing pieces. He told me that I was extremely low priority and he wasn’t about to waste time looking around for my work. I reiterated my frustrations with him, telling him he had no right to take my money, the money he was holding in trust for me, and give it to other people. I told him in no uncertain terms that I considered his actions criminal. At that point his mood turned foul, he led me to the door and told me that unless it was to serve court papers, never to set foot inside his gallery again.

My three missing pieces were now hostages. I did get my day in court. Sergio showed up at the appointed hour and took his turn on the stand. While he and I argued morality the judge was having a look at the bank statements he had brought along. She finally interrupted us to tell me that I no longer had a case. As she explained it, the company that I was suing, Havilah Holdings Inc., no longer existed, and in any case had no assets to speak of. There was no way I could sue them. I was told to seek further legal advice.

I was shattered. After all the efforts I’d made to get Sergio to court I was the one walking out of there in defeat. I felt awful, and decided not to pursue the case any further. It had proven very draining emotionally. I felt torn up inside and really wanted to put it behind me. I got back to work and started looking around for a new gallery, though full of suspicion of galleries and their owners.

Then I got an e-mail from Hans Engel who’d heard that I’d had some troubles with Sergio. He explained his situation with the gallery to me and I advised him to get his work out of the gallery as soon as possible. Then, all hell broke loose.

Hans has informed you about his adventures. I put off writing my account until today as I had some time to devote to studio work, work which needed to come first. I hope this account may be of some use to you and your article/ on going story about Sergio and his way of running art galleries and their artists into the ground. I know now, as you are aware, of many other artists who have suffered at the hands of Sergio Patrich and his family. His actions need to be exposed and the public needs to be warned. I myself have still not been paid nor have my missing pieces shown up.

Frank Zeidler

Georgia Straight article

2007-05-18T07:56:00.000-07:00

Arts Notes

News from the art world

Arts Notes

Publish Date: May 17, 2007

CLOSURE LEAVES ARTISTS SCRAMBLING
Bewildered artists are wondering what happened to their work after the Art Center at 2060 Pine Street, which ran Gallery O, the Vancouver Gallery of Photography, and Revolution Press at the space, suddenly closed shop on the weekend of April 21 after receiving an eviction notice.

Toronto-based painter Hans Engel, whose work was being shown by Gallery O, told the Straight he had been negotiating to retrieve his paintings from the gallery because of a dispute over commissions when he was caught off guard by the closure.

"I started getting phone calls in the middle of the night from artists in Vancouver, saying 'Hans, there are moving trucks in the alley, they're moving out, we don't know what's going on,'" he explained in a phone call. He said he has since received a number of his paintings, but claimed he is still missing 11, worth $22,000 in total. He also claimed he is owed another $4,000 in commissions.

In a phone conversation with the Straight , gallery director Sergio Patrich confirmed the eviction. He said he was forced to leave the space in a hurry, and that he was in the process of contacting artists and returning their work.

"We've been trying to return work as we go," he said. "We were very rushed to do things, and some artists might be owed money, and I can see them getting nervous...It's not like I have money in my pockets. We're trying our best to take care of people whichever way we can."

David Haughton, who had been scheduled for an exhibition of his work this month at Gallery O, scrambled to find another way to show his paintings and etchings. Haughton, an emergency pediatrician by profession, said he was able to negotiate with the landlord to rent the former Gallery O space for a month. He estimated he has forked out about $20,000 in rent, lighting, cleaning, and repainting costs to pull the exhibition together.

Lisa Barrett, former mayor of Bowen Island, a member of the Vancity board of directors, and Haughton's former art dealer, has been helping run Haughton's exhibition since it opened May 3. "In the time I've been here I've met a dozen people, from artists to tradespeople, looking for Sergio," she said.

Patrich insisted the eviction took him by surprise and that the move was not premeditated. "I know there are some artists that are pissed off at us, but there's nothing we could do," he said. "It's not like somebody said, 'Okay, let's close down and take off.' We were forced off very quickly." He said he was hoping to relocate the gallery to a smaller space.

Before heading the Art Center, Sergio Patrich ran the Simon Patrich Gallery on Granville Street.

> Jessica Werb

The way forward

2007-05-16T18:45:00.000-07:00

There is power in collective action. There is power in collective knowledge.

Gallery Owe?

2007-05-14T10:21:00.000-07:00

A couple of years ago I sued Sergio Patrich, owner of the Simon Patrich Gallery, for payment owed to me for work I had done for the gallery website. Since that time I have discovered that he owed many artists money for sold work or the return of unsold work. Some sued and won, others never pursued their claims, but in most cases he never paid up either way.

The purpose of this blog is to collect the stories of the victims of this man as a warning to others and to also bring to light the little know fact that artists everywhere are often victimized by gallery owners.

"Gallery Owe" is a reference to one of the Patrich galleries, know as "Gallery O"