Web Design Contracts and Agreements: What Should Be in Writing

Most website projects in Nepal begin with a phone call, a Viber chat, and a bank transfer. No paper anywhere. Then, months later, two honest people genuinely remember the same conversation differently: was e-commerce included? Were revisions unlimited? Who pays for the domain renewal? A web design contract exists to make those arguments impossible, and it doesn't need to be intimidating. A one-page agreement, even a detailed email both sides confirm, prevents 90 percent of disputes. Here's what needs to be in it.

Scope: The Clause That Does the Heavy Lifting

Most project fights are scope fights wearing disguises. So the agreement's core is a specific list: number of pages by name, features by name (contact form, WhatsApp button, payment gateway, admin panel, booking system), languages, and who supplies content. Then one more sentence most agreements forget: how additions are handled. Something like "work outside this list will be quoted separately before it begins". That sentence protects both sides. You can't be surprise-billed, and the designer can't be scope-crept into unpaid weeks. Fair deal.

Money: Three Numbers, Not One

A price is not enough. You want the total price, the payment schedule, and the future costs. Schedule first: 50 percent advance and 50 percent on approval is the healthy standard here; larger builds run in 3 or 4 milestones. That structure is what we use at WebsNP because it keeps pressure symmetrical, both sides always have something to lose. Then future costs, in writing: what domain and hosting renewal will cost in year two and beyond, and what maintenance costs if you want it. The most expensive words in Nepali web design are "we'll discuss renewals later".

Timeline and Revisions

The agreement needs a delivery date, plus the client-side dependencies that date assumes: "delivery within 7 working days of receiving complete content" is honest and specific. It also needs the revision terms: how many rounds, and what counts as a revision versus new work. Numbers, not adjectives. "Reasonable revisions" is not a term; 3 rounds is a term, unlimited is a term.

Ownership: The Clause Worth the Whole Exercise

One paragraph, non-negotiable, and if the whole document contained only this it would still be worth signing: on final payment, the client owns the website files, the design, the content, the domain (registered in the client's own account), and the hosting arrangement. Add one line about credentials: all logins delivered at handover. This single paragraph is the difference between owning your website and renting it from your vendor forever. We've written elsewhere about businesses discovering their designer owns their domain; every one of those situations would've been prevented by this paragraph.

The Uncomfortable Clauses That Save Friendships

Two scenarios feel rude to raise and are essential to raise. What if the client walks away mid-project? Standard answer: the advance covers work done, remaining balance is cancelled. What if the designer fails to deliver? A refund term, or a money-back guarantee if the designer offers one, with the conditions stated. Agreeing on these while everyone is friendly takes two minutes. Negotiating them mid-dispute takes months. Add a support clause too: what's free after launch and for how long, so "the site is broken" three months later has a pre-agreed answer.

Keep It Human

None of this requires a lawyer for a typical NPR 30,000 to 150,000 website. An email titled "Project agreement" listing scope, price, schedule, timeline, revisions, ownership, exit terms and support, with a reply saying "Confirmed", is a real agreement and a real deterrent to bad behaviour. Here's the useful test: propose exactly that to your designer. The professionals will say yes before you finish the sentence, because written terms protect them from difficult clients as much as they protect you from difficult designers. Anyone who prefers to keep a commercial relationship undocumented has told you their plan for it.