Dealt with something similar recently. Client’s project needs a full overhaul, but they’re only able to manage short-term solutions at the moment.
It’s tough figuring out how to balance what’s best for them against what they can afford. Definitely a dilemma.
I just do the patch if that’s what they want. Make sure they know it’s temporary and move on.
I give clients two quotes upfront - band-aid fix vs. doing it right. Then I explain what happens when the cheap fix inevitably fails.
Most people pick the cheaper option first. Fine by me, but I make sure they know they’ll probably call me back in 6 months when it breaks.
Be honest about timelines. Don’t say “this should last a while” when you know it’ll fail next month. I tell them exactly how long the patch will hold.
Sometimes the temporary fix gives them time to save up for the real solution. Other times they just keep patching forever. Either way, they can’t say I didn’t warn them.
I quote both options separately and explain what each one does. The patch fixes the immediate issue, but they’ll need the real repair down the road. Most people prefer knowing the full cost upfront instead of getting hit with surprises later. I do tons of patch work - nothing wrong with it if that’s what their budget allows. Just be clear about what they’re getting and when they’ll probably need the permanent fix.
I show them the proper fix first - what it looks like and why it matters. Then I explain what the patch job actually gets them.
What I always cover:
Clients often think patches are 80% as good for 20% the cost. Reality? More like 30% as good and fails way faster than they think.
I don’t push expensive options, but they need to know what they’re buying. Want the patch after hearing everything? Fine by me. Just document it so there’s no confusion when things break.
Some clients come back for the real fix once they see how patches perform. Others keep patching forever. Both work as long as expectations are clear upfront.
Tell them both options and let them decide what works.
I explain both options but tell them straight up which one I’d pick. If they still want the patch job, fine - but I document everything that could go sideways. Just be upfront about the risks so they know what they’re signing up for. Sometimes people genuinely can’t afford the real fix right now, and that’s cool as long as everyone’s on the same page.
Be upfront about what needs fixing and why. Document everything - make it clear the patch is temporary and what risks they’re taking. Get their signature on it.
This covers you when stuff breaks, and they can’t claim you didn’t warn them. People sometimes need time to save money for the real repair.
Just don’t let your temp fix make the permanent solution cost more. That’s when things get ugly.