Client did not pay? Add opacity and decrease it until their site fades away
github.com
github.com
Back in the 1990s I supported a website whose users were all in our local business group. It was mostly html tables, with black text on a jarringly bright yellow background.
Asked my users if I could change it to something more subdued. All said “good idea” except for one adamantly stubborn person who threatened much commotion if anything changed.
So, every week or two I slightly tweaked the background color such that each week’s change wasn’t really noticeable.
After 6 months the brightness was exactly where I wanted it to be, and the stubborn user was none the wiser.
opacity = (opacity < 0) ? 0 : opacity;
opacity = (opacity > 1) ? 1 : opacity;
if(opacity >= 0 && opacity <= 1) {
document.getElementsByTagName("BODY")[0].style.opacity = opacity;
}In university, he and his friends contracted with a cook who would make them lunch and dinner. The cook made his money from students in the university especially student sick of canteen food.
Around the end of the month, which was payment time, the food would keep getting hotter each passing day till he and his friends paid up.
The cook never asked for the money directly, something to do with his cultural background.
I thought it was brilliant. The students had to figure out themselves why the food kept getting hotter. Debugging in real life.
Some discussion then: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19088941
From a jurist POV, I think I'd be much more forgiving if this "solution" ended up in a courtroom (i.e. I would side with the fade-out site's creator).
BRILLIANT!
FYI civil breach of contract cases like this almost never go to a jury in the US. Mandatory arbitration or small claims for small amounts, heard by a retired judge or professional arbitrator. The process takes a long time, costs money and your time, and very often ends up with a "split the difference" settlement. Lawsuits are public record, the client will badmouth you to everyone, and you can't fix the damage to your reputation.
If I was the person doing the work here, i'd much rather just take down the site and have them have none of the work, as it encourages this kind of behavior from the customer again, and other customers who know that this happened.
Is removing your work entirely an option ? Not paying the agreed price feels like theft.
Edit: if you are truely correct, why pay for anything ever again, just let it settle in arbitration and save money.
The best protection for both sides is to document everything, in writing (email works), so there’s a trail of every decision, every update, and the beginnings of the conflict. A reasonable arbitrator can infer what happened if they have evidence.
Charging for defined deliverables rather than fixed fee for a big project, or hourly, mitigates the risk for both sides. That also requires the freelancer does real analysis and breaks the task into specific tasks and deliverables. I rarely see that when I get called to mop up.
You might be surprised at how many freelancers write a boilerplate contract with vague requirements and deliverables, cash the down payment, then stop communicating with their customer. I’ve made a good living cleaning up after those messes. The customer could have done things differently, of course, but they too often trust the contractor as an expert and don’t understand technical decisions or costs.
As a freelancer you run into unreasonable, crazy, cheap, and toxic customers. Usually lots of red flags. Part of professional freelancing is learning how to identify bad customers and walking away, not trying to draft the perfect contract.
Not exactly the same as tearing down a fence but not all that different either. Not getting paid for work doesn’t make it ok to punish the customer yourself. The remedy is to sue. If you do end up in court or arbitration, the customer showing that you delivered a disabled site won’t play well for your case.
If you get into a position where mediation is happening, that means you have a piss poor contract, and you should get a new lawyer. Similar for if lawsuits cost you money: your contract terms should include the client covering all legal costs involved in recovering payment.
Contracts by themselves don't force the other party to perform according to the contract. A contract only gives the parties evidence of the agreement, which may or may not stand up when interpreted along with other evidence and arguments in front of a mediator. In other words, a contract can't prevent a lawsuit if one party fails to perform -- that's literally how breach of contract lawsuits happen.
Whether a case goes to mediation or not, and who pays legals fees in case of a dispute, is covered by state law. Any provision of a contract that overrides or contradicts state or federal law is void on its face (that's why contracts have a severability clause). 90% of what appears in contracts usually gets covered by state or federal law, it's just boilerplate and attorneys lining their pockets.
I have served as an expert witness in several of these case, in front of arbitrators. The surprising thing, to me, was how little weight the arbitrators gave to the wording of the contract, and how much weight they gave to what was promised, what got delivered, what payments got made, and the apparent intent and motivation of the parties. The mentality that thinks a perfect contract is the key is the same mentality that thinks "the blockchain" is the place for contracts and enforcing them. In real life the state statutes and the presentation to the arbitrator makes the difference. It's more important to carefully document with emails and so on every exchange with the customer.
If you have a bad feeling about the customer, or they have a questionable reputation (ask around!), or they ask you to do something unrealistic, shady, or illegal -- walk away. No contract will save you from them.
Almost every one of my customers tells me about the last people they hired and how they didn’t communicate, didn’t deliver on time, kept increasing the price. Way more incompetent and unethical freelancers out there than fraudulent customers in my experience.
I’ve never had a customer stiff me, but I have said no to customers who seem toxic. No amount of legal help can fix that.
What is morally right usually have little bearing in legal matters Im afraid.