Firing a Supplier Mid-Project

Be sure it is the right call

Changing supplier mid-project always costs something: time, money, and a period where nothing progresses at all.

A new supplier will not simply continue. They will need to understand what exists, will frequently want to redo parts they did not build, and will price the risk of inheriting somebody else's work.

So the bar is higher than dissatisfaction. Slow progress, a design you do not love, or a personality mismatch are usually better addressed by a direct conversation than by starting again.

What justifies ending it is a pattern rather than an incident: repeated missed commitments, work that does not function, no communication over an extended period, or a loss of confidence you cannot recover from.

Try the conversation first

Frequently skipped, and it resolves a meaningful proportion of these.

Suppliers are often unaware that a client is close to leaving, because the client has been polite in every exchange while becoming steadily more frustrated.

A direct conversation naming the specific problems, with what needs to change and by when, gives them the information they need and gives you a clear record if it does not improve.

Put it in writing afterwards, briefly and without hostility, summarising what was agreed.

If nothing changes after that, the decision is straightforward and you have documented that you tried, which matters if the ending becomes contested.

Secure everything before you say anything

The step that determines the outcome, and it must come first.

• Domain: confirm it is in your account, not theirs.
• Hosting: get the login or confirm you can access it.
• Site administrator access with full rights.
• A full backup of files and database, held by you.
• Content and images exported at full resolution.
• Any accounts created in their name on your behalf.

Do this quietly and without urgency, as normal project activity, because a supplier who suspects the relationship is ending may become less responsive to routine requests.

Work out the money before the conversation

So the discussion is about facts rather than positions.

What have you paid, and against which stages. What is invoiced and unpaid. What is genuinely complete.

If the agreement has a termination clause, read it, since it usually says what is owed on early termination and that is the starting point.

Where there is no clause, the reasonable position is payment for work completed to a usable standard, which is a judgement rather than a formula.

Decide what you think is fair before you speak, and be prepared to pay it, because the alternative is a dispute that costs more than the disputed amount.

End it plainly

Short, written, unemotional.

State that you are ending the engagement, from when, and what you propose regarding outstanding payment.

Ask for the handover items in a numbered list with a date.

Do not itemise their failures. It changes nothing, invites a defence, and turns a transaction into a dispute, which reduces the chance of a cooperative handover.

Thank them for the work done, if any of it was useful, because most of these relationships end with both parties frustrated and neither being unreasonable.

A worked example

A business ended a project at around sixty percent complete after four missed deadlines and six weeks of silence.

They spent two days first: confirming the domain was theirs, taking a full backup, exporting content, and collecting logins that had been shared during the project.

Then they wrote four paragraphs ending the engagement, offering payment for the two completed stages, and requesting a numbered list of handover items within fourteen days.

The supplier replied within a day, agreed the amount, and sent most of the items.

Two items never arrived, and the business had already secured equivalents themselves.

Their assessment was that the two days of preparation had been the whole difference, since almost every problem they had feared was one they had already removed.

Do not brief the new supplier before it is over

A point of judgement worth stating.

It is tempting to line up a replacement before ending the current arrangement, and doing so while the incumbent is still working can go badly if it becomes known.

Speaking to potential replacements in general terms is reasonable. Handing over materials, granting access, or having them begin work is not, until the first arrangement has ended.

It also creates a practical problem, since two suppliers with access to the same site produces conflicting changes and confusion about who broke what.

End one, then start the next, even if that means a fortnight of no progress.

What to tell the new supplier

Honesty here saves money.

Explain what happened factually, what state the work is in, and what you have.

Expect them to want to review before quoting, and expect that review to be chargeable, which is reasonable given they are pricing an inheritance.

Also expect a proposal to redo more than you hoped. That is not always a sales tactic: taking over half-built work is genuinely riskier than starting fresh, and sometimes rebuilding is cheaper than untangling.

Ask them to be specific about what they would keep and what they would replace, and why, which lets you evaluate the recommendation rather than accepting it.

The counter-case

Sometimes staying is the better decision even when leaving is justified.

A project close to completion, with a supplier who is slow but competent, will usually finish faster by being pushed than by being restarted, and the sunk work is real.

Ending an arrangement over a personality difficulty, when the work is sound, exchanges a known irritation for an unknown risk.

And where a supplier is struggling for a reason they have explained, such as illness or an unexpected departure, a renegotiated timeline is often better for both than a termination.

The question is whether the problem is capability or circumstance. Circumstance can be waited out. Capability cannot.

The order

1. Have the direct conversation first, in writing afterwards.
2. Secure the domain, hosting and access quietly.
3. Take your own full backup and content export.
4. Work out what is owed before speaking.
5. End it in writing, briefly, without listing failures.
6. Request handover as a numbered list with a date.
7. Only then engage the replacement.

Steps two and three are the ones that cannot be done afterwards, which is why they come before the conversation rather than after it.

Taking on a site you did not build is covered in auditing a site you inherited.

Frequently asked questions

West Coast Media Solutions Inc. provides web design, web development, hosting, digital marketing, and business consulting to organisations across Canada, drawing on more than twenty-five years in the field.