And sure, contracts *should* be there to protect both parties & manage expectations. But the truth is, lots of people are befuddled by the wizard-speak of law. And lots of people only bother with contracts because they want to “sort any nuisance clients out”. Doesn’t make it right, right?

The ideal contract should be in place to protect both parties and manage expectations.

This looks like a quickly hashed up “this should sort any nuisance clients out” type contract.

I am particularly horrified by the line stating that you will sack the client and charge them for any time spent if they do not comply with your time frame.

It is the clients prerogative to dictate time frames.

Ever heard the phrase “The customer is always right”? Well they are. Even when they are wrong.

Your customer support is clearly lacking in many many ways.

In fact as I’ve typed this my view of your company has developed from naive to charlatan!

Wheres:
* jurisdiction
* arbitration clause
* opportunity to cure clause?

I could go on.

Change orders during the project are generally 50% to start and 50% upon delivery to keep things simple (or, if a small change, all at delivery).

All expenses, such as travel for meetings, are due upon delivery too though I’ve seen other firms invoice expenses monthly.

If we don’t get the start payment within 10 business days, all work stops until the client understands that the project cannot move forward without their foot in the water. In each case, the up-front payment is about client commitment and participation.

We also have a paragraph that basically says what we get paid if they cancel the project partway through. We’ve had to invoke that several times to get paid for work done in good faith. In fact, several projects were allowed to complete when client management realized they still had to pay something.

I heard a quote from a collections agency some time ago (um, a client) that I found true, if not a little hard: “A contract is only as good as the sleaze who signs it.”

While I probably wouldn’t use the word “sleaze” (not often anyway) I have experienced this first-hand. It is amazing the number of people who sign a contract then decide to change the terms or scope – and refuse to change budget or schedule – or just remember a completely different set of meetings.

The lesson: always make sure the contract is clear and always make sure the scope is outlined well or the description includes your assumptions / project boundaries.

While it may seem excessive to say “12-15 static content pages” and “all final approved copy provided by client at least 3 business days before launch” those boundaries can keep you from 55 pages, endless revisions, and red ink in your bank statement.

Many of my repeat clients know the phrase “hmmm. that sounds like a change order..” I don’t start out confrontational but they know where we are going. The trick is knowing when to use the phrase and when to kick in a (little) freebie.

For small projects (<15k) we keep the description in the contract. For large projects or if the client requires a separate detailed spec the contract refers to that document but the contract remains the control document.

That is, if you detail functionality later, that document is always subordinate to the contract. How? The spec has a paragraph in chapter 1 that says “this document is subject to the contract terms, conditions, and scope”.