When client relationships go south

The client/practitioner relationship has always been a tricky balancing act for firms to contend with. If left unchecked, agents can quite easily find themselves carrying out work for individuals who do not respect their expertise as qualified professionals. 

Moboffsol is one such user who has found themselves stuck between their contractual duties and a bothersome client, and was left posing the question to our Any Answers community: is simply reneging the end of a contract the ethical thing to do in order to escape a particularly irksome client?

Is it ethical?

“I have been lucky enough to have had good relationships with all my clients, until recently,” Moboffsol said, adding that the client in question has been “rude, awkward, over-demanding, late sending info and very unorganised.” 

While the client had recently decided to work with a different agent, the contributor pondered the ethics of simply closing up shop to the individual and moving on without finishing their contractual duties, as the emotional toll of working with said client seemed to far outweigh their obligations to them.

Interestingly enough, this sparked a lively debate among users who found themselves split between those who believe the immutable contractual duties of an agent must be upheld and those who argued that mental health and one’s wellbeing should always come first.

“He fired you. I suggest that subject to notice, all obligations end,” wrote Any Answers user JamesDS. Contributor indomitable concurred with this statement, adding that firms should “never accept bad behaviour, ever”. 

On the other hand, while many users sympathised with the agent about their troubles with nasty clients, some were still adamant that the contract needed to be upheld. “Whether you like the situation or not, this client is making the transfer process as smooth as possible by providing a very reasonable notice period,” wrote veteran contributor rmillaree. “You had your chance to disengage but did not do so.”

Circumventing the ethics of the question altogether, AA regular CalculatorBoy was quick to note that the problem in question arises due to “contractual issues” asking the OP “what have you agreed in the letter of engagement?”

Setting boundaries

The fact that a consensus was far from reached within the community highlights the need for practitioners to set clear personal and contractual boundaries with their clients in order to prevent this kind of situation from happening in the future. 

In a recent People Matters episode on AccountingWEB Live, Mazuma co-founder Lucy Cohen sympathised with the community on dealing with problem clients, rattling off a range of reasons why practitioners allow the individuals they work for to treat them disrespectfully.

However, Cohen was also keen to point out the importance of setting boundaries on what does and doesn’t fly when it comes to your practice, championing being courageous enough to say no when lines are crossed.

“When you’re saying yes, whether out of fear or out of obligation, you’re rating that other person’s needs above your own; this can be a slippery slope.” Cohen said. 

Jumping off from this point, Cohen emphasises the importance of “setting boundaries” by “giving yourself permission to say no” to clients in order to protect your mental health and avoid excess stress. 

The Any Answers community seemed to agree with the ideas Cohen touched upon, with JamesDS noting that the original poster was a victim of a “classic you-reap-what-you-sow case. You allowed him to behave poorly, and now you have to be hard on him to protect your sanity/billings”.

Cutting clients loose

However, when communication completely breaks down, sometimes cutting clients loose is the only option left for the burnt out practitioner. 

While contributors were undecided on the ethics of reneging on a contract in order to cut ties with a troublesome client, many were in agreement that they felt better once they had finally rid themselves of what can be an extremely stressful part of their job.

Talking on the subject, user Catherine Newman said that it was a “relief to not have an ex-client expect me to print off all of his invoices, turn up in the evening or week-end or have to argue with him”.

Director of OmniPro Des O’Neil agreed with this assessment during this morning's episode of Client Confidential with Lucy Cohen, arguing that it is essential for firms to work with the right clients for their business and having a keen understanding of when to let them go.

“As we mature we should always have a red velvet policy,” O’Neil said. “Ask yourself ‘what are the behaviours and attributes that are acceptable and what are not?’”

In order to decipher where the velvet rope lies, O’Neil structures his clients into A,B,C or D grades. “D grade clients are the dumpable duds, some of them are incurable and they are just not going to work for you.”

For these clients O’Neil believes it is important to allow both yourself and the client to move on in good faith, noting that agents change as time goes on, and clients who may have been good for your practice for 10 years can easily become a millstone around the neck. 

O’Neil concluded, “It’s about saying to your client ‘look, if we go on the way we are, I won’t be able to provide you with the service you require and deserve - it’s not you, it’s me.”