Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A web developer posted a payment shaming message on their client's site

joseph-smith.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 115 posts

Re: A web developer posted a payment shaming message on their client's site

#41

Post by JohnGB »

ecb_penguin wrote: post #29

I have no idea what the contract says, what was paid, or any of the other conversations they've had. All I see is someone complaining publicly about a private matter. When that happens, I assume they're wrong. Normal people don't air petty grievances on the internet. They use the courts and other mechanisms. According to another comment, the business is dissolved. They don't care if their site goes down. So this guy…

You say that as if the courts are a reasonable solution for most people. In many cases the cost and time render them useless and often cost more than the invoice that is due. In some jurisdictions you may recover this, but in many you can't.

Re: A web developer posted a payment shaming message on their client's site

#42

Post by hinkley »

KomoD wrote: post #17

This probably explains why they're not paying: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/c... > Company status: Dissolved > Dissolved on 16 December 2025 His other company: > Company status: Liquidation People are now attacking the guy on Instagram because I guess the developer or someone, made a Tiktok video about it.

The thing about dissolving a company is that they generally should have done it before getting a bunch of services without paying for them.

Like a gambler they think the big win is coming any second and they drag it out too long, leaving a bunch of unpaid bills behind then.

Re: A web developer posted a payment shaming message on their client's site

#43

Post by neogodless »

munchler wrote: post #16
intellix wrote: post #4

I did this like 20yrs ago. Would ask him for payment and he would go quiet until he needed changes. I made the changes and he would be like oohhh I need to pay you don't I! I give the details and he goes quiet again until he needed more changes

Why would you do additional work after he failed to pay?

I had a client like this. It was easy work, easy money, even if a bit delayed.

After one such "non-payment" incident, the next time they needed something they basically offered xx hours of payment for 15 minutes of work to get back on my good side. In general they'd end up "overpaying" for each project to make up for their tardiness in paying.

Re: A web developer posted a payment shaming message on their client's site

#45

Post by bityard »

Less-than-fully-reputable shared hosting providers have been doing a variation on this for decades. Although normally in the form of a pop-up or banner at the top of the page.

When I worked for a hosting provider, an overdue account would get daily emails for up to a month. After a month, the site would be disabled (404) or the VPS would be turned off. After three months, the site/VPS would be archived. After one year, the archive was deleted.

Astonishingly, there was always a fairly steady stream of customers who would come back over a year later and ask for their site to be restored, or to get a copy of it. I never enjoyed being the person who had to give them the bad news of the consequences of their choices.

Re: A web developer posted a payment shaming message on their client's site

#46

Post by EGreg »

ecb_penguin wrote: post #37
EGreg wrote: post #13

[flagged]

> 4 seconds after I posted it, it got downvoted. Then 10 seconds later, -2. Because it has the word cryptocurrency. No one can load, read and react that fast. This is getting ridiculous. Turn off the bots based on a word, and engage with the substance. Because as soon as you said Cryptocurrency, you lost the plot. Everything you said is literally how freelancing already works. You pay a certain amount upfront, and th…

I normally think pg has been very reasonable in his views, but his historic approval of downvoting things merely to signal disagreement, or worse, being triggered by a word, is a mistake, this norm makes HN much less useful.

It chills speech to the point of not being able to suggest correct solutions to things, or correctly diagnose problems. Well, I refuse to participate in that.

I only downvote if I think the quality of a comment is bad, it is completely off-topic or absurd for example, or in bad faith. Not if I disagree with it and certainly not because it contains — gasp - a word for a technology I would prefer not to see discussed!

And I also refuse to be bullied into silence by some downvotes. I am saying that downvotes within 4 seconds is not likely to be organic, because it requires someone to have refreshed the page at nearly the exact time I posted, magically scroll down to the exact comment, read it first and downvote it. And then 4 downvotes in quick succession after. There is more going on here, I suspect, than mere “losing the plot”.

I could attempt to test this by posting comments with the ahem blacklisted word as a reply to some comments even further down the page, where it would be absurd for someone to scroll to that exact comment within, say, 10 seconds. But I have noticed that a specific set of words seems to produce that effect on HN.

Re: A web developer posted a payment shaming message on their client's site

#47

Post by slowmovintarget »

hinkley wrote: post #42
KomoD wrote: post #17

This probably explains why they're not paying: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/c... > Company status: Dissolved > Dissolved on 16 December 2025 His other company: > Company status: Liquidation People are now attacking the guy on Instagram because I guess the developer or someone, made a Tiktok video about it.

The thing about dissolving a company is that they generally should have done it before getting a bunch of services without paying for them. Like a gambler they think the big win is coming any second and they drag it out too long, leaving a bunch of unpaid bills behind then.

Or worse, planned on not paying in the first place and made off with investor cash while maintaining the appearance of moving on their venture.

Re: A web developer posted a payment shaming message on their client's site

#48

Post by mkl95 »

ecb_penguin wrote: post #29

I have no idea what the contract says, what was paid, or any of the other conversations they've had. All I see is someone complaining publicly about a private matter. When that happens, I assume they're wrong. Normal people don't air petty grievances on the internet. They use the courts and other mechanisms. According to another comment, the business is dissolved. They don't care if their site goes down. So this guy…

It looks like the company's owners didn't give a simple heads up to their providers before dissolving it. In my eyes, that's way worse than what this particular provider has done. If the sums aren't large, they might lose money by going to court.

Re: A web developer posted a payment shaming message on their client's site

#49

Post by WhitneyLand »

ecb_penguin wrote: post #29

I have no idea what the contract says, what was paid, or any of the other conversations they've had. All I see is someone complaining publicly about a private matter. When that happens, I assume they're wrong. Normal people don't air petty grievances on the internet. They use the courts and other mechanisms. According to another comment, the business is dissolved. They don't care if their site goes down. So this guy…

Yeah, I’d be wary of hiring the developer even if he’s in the right.

Re: A web developer posted a payment shaming message on their client's site

#50

Post by elevatortrim »

petercooper wrote: post #9
fabiensanglard wrote: post #3

As much as I want to side with the developers I think they are exposing themselves to legal repercussions and made their situation worse.

In the UK, this is less of a problem, though it depends a lot on the contract between the company and the developer. Assuming nothing exotic, that the statement on the site is true (and not a malicious falsehood) and that if the hosting belongs to the end customer they did not revoke the developer's access (i.e. no unauthorised access occurred), then the developer is in a reasonable position legally. IANAL, of course…

So if I'm a builder, can I build a wall in front of your grocery store's door if you did not pay me, as long as I do not lie and I do not break in?
Post reply on HN