Scope Creep Examples — Web design
One more revision round, after the limit is already reached
The contract caps revisions at two rounds. The client asks for a third "quick pass" on the homepage — and frames it as too small to count.
The proposal specified two rounds of revisions on the homepage design, and both have been used — the second round closed with a Slack message from the client saying "looks great, approved." Four days later, a different stakeholder on the client side messages the designer directly: could the hero section just be tweaked one more time, lighter background, bigger logo? It's framed as tiny. It isn't a new design direction, and it isn't a bug. It's a third round of exactly the kind of feedback the first two rounds were for.
Clause typically implicated
Clause typically implicated
Revision limit clause→ — Sets the number of feedback rounds included at the quoted price — and what happens once that number is used up.
Suggested change-order wording
Suggested change-order wording (illustrative, not legal advice)
Per our agreement, the homepage design included two rounds of revisions, both of which are now complete and approved. Happy to make this additional adjustment — it'll be billed as a third revision round at [hourly rate] / [flat fee], estimated at [X] hours. Let me know if you'd like to proceed and I'll get it scheduled.
How this usually resolves
Most clients agree once the ask is named as a third round rather than absorbed silently — the friction is almost always about not realizing the limit had already been reached, not about disputing the contract. The risk is in the agency not naming it at all: doing the "quick tweak" for free sets the expectation that revision rounds are actually unlimited, which shows up again on the next project.
Related reading