Is It Out of Scope? — Web design
Is migrating to a new hosting provider out of scope for a web design project?
Usually yes. Most design engagements only cover a launch onto whatever host was agreed at the outset — moving the finished site to a different provider later is separate technical work, not a design revision.
The site launched on the host named in the proposal — often one the agency picked, sometimes one the client already had. Months later the client wants to switch, usually for cost or because an internal IT team wants everything under one roof. "Can you just move it over?" sounds like a small ask, but it means re-pointing DNS, recreating the environment on the new host, transferring files and any database, and testing that nothing broke in the move — real technical work with real risk of downtime if it's rushed.
Is it out of scope?
Yes, in most cases. A design engagement's scope is typically the design and build of the site on the originally agreed host, plus a defined post-launch support window — not an open-ended commitment to re-platform the site onto wherever the client wants to host it next. This holds even for agencies that don't do much server work themselves, since someone still has to coordinate the cutover and verify the result.
Clause typically implicated
Clause typically implicated
Hosting and maintenance clause→ — Defines what hosting-related work is included after launch — a migration to a different provider is a distinct, unscoped piece of technical work even when the original clause included some ongoing hosting support.
Example contract wording
Example contract wording (illustrative, not legal advice)
Our scope covers the design and launch on [original host], plus [X] days of post-launch support for issues with that build. Moving to a new host means re-creating the environment, migrating files and DNS, and testing the cutover — work outside that scope. I can quote it as a fixed migration fee ([$X]) or coordinate it with your new host's team if they're handling the technical side.
How MarginFlow flags it
MarginFlow checks the request against the hosting terms extracted from the contract rather than treating "hosting" as a single bucket — a request to fix a hosting issue on the original host classifies differently than a request to move to a new one. Because a migration isn't part of the extracted deliverables or support terms, the classifier marks it outside_scope, explains the distinction in plain English, and creates an Alert with a suggested charge based on the contract's hourly or fixed-fee rate.