Most bad website projects in Sri Lanka fail for the same three reasons: no agreed scope, no ownership of the code, and no measurable definition of done. All three are visible before you sign.
Verify the work, not the deck
- Open two or three of their live sites on mobile data and time the load.
- Check the page source: are titles, descriptions and headings actually there?
- Ask which parts they built versus subcontracted.
- Ask to speak to one past client about how change requests were handled.
Questions that expose weak vendors
- Who owns the source code and design files after final payment?
- What is the handover: repository access, documentation, deployment guide?
- What performance and accessibility standard are you committing to?
- How are scope changes priced mid-project?
- Who edits content after launch, and can I see that admin?
- What happens if the developer who built it leaves?
Contract terms worth insisting on
- Written scope with named page templates and integrations.
- Milestone payments tied to demonstrable deliverables.
- Explicit IP transfer on final payment.
- A defined warranty window for defects after launch.
- Named maintenance terms, or a clean exit if you leave.
Red flags
A fixed quote given in ten minutes with no questions asked. Rankings guaranteed in writing. No staging environment. Unwillingness to give you repository access. Design-only portfolios with no live URLs.
