Ed Fasula wrote:
"Many people have mentioned contract documents. Does this apply to the $350
jobs you do? I never see many of the contractors who send me prints to work
from. I have thought of drafting up a generic contract for the on-site
visits. I agree that a 3 minute discussion and then hoping for the best is
not wise, but a separate contract for each little job seems really
cumbersome. Maybe another argument against the small jobs. By the sound of
it, not many people are messing with jobs less than $1000."
I will reiterate. Even for a $350 job, you should have a boilerplate
contract. If the time it takes for you to identify and write in the
appropriate scope of services means you have to charge $400 so be it. If
the $50 difference means you don't get the job, it is probably for the best.
Without a defined scope of serices you will be continually open to the type
of problems you indicated in your original post.
You don't need to see the contractor to fax a contract back and forth, and
the fact that you are not sitting down to review the work is all the more
reason to have a defined scope of services.