Customer wants their services on hold

[Ben Anderson]

Basically, I provide a pay monthly web design service, where the customer pays for their website over a 12 months period. They have signed a contract with me.

I have a customer who is currently claiming that they have a medical emergency abroad (of course no one will ever know if that's true or not). They said I can take the website down and they will be back in a few months. So basically they don't want to start paying until there back as their business will not be operating.

I have made their website and is currently published. I have been very polite to the customer and have just said we will need to set a date for the payments to start again. They said there not sure exactly when there back and they're starting to get a bit funny with me.

I am just wondering where I stand with this and what you would do.

 

[UrbanRetail]

What provision does your contract have for the date the payments commence?

 

[Ben Anderson]

I just have the following statement regarding payments via payments in my terms below:


"You will agree that all website plans are bound to a 12 months minimum contract, this means that you will be required to pay your monthly fee for at least a period of 12 months. After the 12 months period, your subscription will renew automatically, and you will be placed onto a 1-month rolling contract, it is the responsibility of the client to ensure they keep track of their payments and no refunds will be given for customers failing to cancel (if they want to) after the initial contract term."

 

[obscure]

Your customer is a business (Ltd or Sole Trader) or a non-business/private individual?

 

[Mike W]

Personally I'd make him stick to the payments for the first 12 months (as per the contract) but then offer him a 3 month grace period when he returns (if he returns ...which I doubt).

 

[arnydnxluk]

I agree with @Mike W

As you have already completed the bulk of the work I would insist on the payments being made.

The website can then be launched on his return and the month-to-month costs (presumably for hosting/maintenance) can begin 12 months from the launch date.

Alternatively you can ask the client to pay upfront the cost of the actual work done so far (the development/design process) minus the cost of the first 12 month's hosting/maintenance, then dive straight into month-to-month costs once he's ready to launch the website.

In any case, he needs to begin paying immediately for the work already complete.

As for where you stand with this, I can't advise on the legal aspect but you have to judge how far it's worth going to pursue this based on the value of the work.

 

[obscure]

Mikes idea is a good one.

Assuming that this is a B2B deal and not B2C then the contract is binding and they have no right to cancel or delay it. Given that they are a business (albeit obviously a small/one man business) you would be well within your rights to ask for details and proof of the medical emergency before agreeing to any extension/grace period.

If they are being truthful and can not run their business, then they obviously wont want to be paying now. However I would be careful not to make any open ended offers... if they can't give you a resumption date then any front end grace period you chose to offer should have a fixed limit.

 

[Newchodge]

Your rights and your customer's obligation to pay are irrelevant if they are out of the country and not paying. I would take the website down, request payment for the work done so far and wait and see.

 

[Mike W]

Your rights and your customer's obligation to pay are irrelevant if they are out of the country and not paying. I would take the website down, request payment for the work done so far and wait and see.

Wow. I wouldn't be coming to you for any legal advice if you consider a signed contract 'irrelevant'. And certainly not if you think that's the first course of action.

 

[Ben Anderson]

Hi, Guys thanks for your replies. Just to confirm he is a sole trader.

 

[Mike W]

Hi, Guys thanks for your replies. Just to confirm he is a sole trader.

You mean a fishmonger?

 

[Newchodge]

Wow. I wouldn't be coming to you for any legal advice if you consider a signed contract 'irrelevant'. And certainly not if you think that's the first course of action.

What do you suggest if the client is out of the country and not paying?

 

[Mitch3473]

Wow. I wouldn't be coming to you for any legal advice if you consider a signed contract 'irrelevant'. And certainly not if you think that's the first course of action.

I think what is meant here is that if your client is out of the country and not paying it's going to have to a pretty big invoice to bother chasing it up therefore making it ' practically' irrelevant, contract or not.

 

[Mike W]

Your rights and your customer's obligation to pay are irrelevant if they are out of the country and not paying. I would take the website down, request payment for the work done so far and wait and see.

What do you suggest if the client is out of the country and not paying?

Well I certainly wouldn't advocate taking down the website as the first step. That almost guarantees a dead relationship and probably will be seen, by some, if it goes legal, to minimise the damage. (although taking the site down saves nothing). As it is, the Op has spent the money as he's completed the job, so he is entitled to the full contract value of 12 monthly payments.

My advice would be to contact the client again, reiterating that the work has been done and that the terms were what they were. Providing the total due, less any amount paid, he can advise the client of the balance, stating he is happy to accept the full payment now and leave up or take down the site as the client wishes. As for moving forward the Op will be prepared to offer a period of grace once the client returns and is ready to start again.

Assuming the client comes back in the full negative (ie. no compromise offer), the Op can then go back with the threat of legal action and advise of the site coming down within, say 7 days, if nothing is concluded satisfactorily.

This way, the Op has done the decent thing and has everything he will need to sue.