Recently, accessibility advocate Sheri Byrne-Haber raised a sharp and necessary point: many agencies build websites with accessibility barriers, then turn around and charge clients again to audit and remediate the same problems later. Her argument is simple and fair: if a vendor knew enough to sell remediation, they should have known enough to flag those issues during the original build.
We agree with the principle behind that criticism, but we also think the conversation should go further.
The problem is not only accessibility remediation. It is a broader pattern in web development where clients are forced into dependency on the same team that built the site in the first place. A simple text change, a homepage update, a staff edit, a new blog post, or a landing page revision becomes another billable request. In practice, many businesses end up paying twice: first for the website, then for the ability to maintain it.
That is not how we think site development should work.
At Talknexo, we believe a modern website should be delivered with the assumption that clients will need to manage it. That means structure, clarity, and systems should be part of the original scope, not treated as optional extras added later once the pain becomes obvious.
That is why our Tier 1 site development now includes a built-in content management system. Clients should be able to update their own website without having to request more hours from a developer every time they need to change copy, publish news, swap images, update a team page, or keep information current. If a site depends on the original builder for every small update, then it is not fully serving the client.
This also changes how we think about fixes.
If something that should reasonably work as part of the delivered website needs correction, that should be treated as a fix, not as a new revenue opportunity. The line should be clear. Fixes are one thing. Major updates, added functionality, new integrations, expanded workflows, new sections, redesigns, and feature development are another. Clients should absolutely expect to pay for new scope. But they should not be nickeled-and-dimed for the basic usability and maintainability that should have been there from the beginning.
This is especially important now, as organizations pay closer attention to accessibility, compliance, editorial speed, and digital self-sufficiency. A website is not just a design object. It is a working system. If that system is hard to update, hard to navigate, or structurally dependent on its original vendor, then the client has inherited a liability, not just a website.
A better model is possible.
Build sites with accessibility in mind from the start. Build in content management from day one. Separate true fixes from true expansions of scope. Give clients the ability to run their own site. Charge fairly for real growth, not for basic control.
That is the standard we are working toward at Talknexo.
We build websites to be usable, maintainable, and operational from day one — not to create avoidable dependence later. For organizations that need a site they can actually run, update, and grow without constant developer intervention, that approach matters. And when the time comes for major improvements, new functionality, or expanded digital workflows, those investments can be focused on growth instead of patching preventable gaps.
If your current website feels more like a locked system than a working tool, Talknexo can help you rethink it. We design and build websites with the infrastructure clients need to manage content, keep information current, and scale with confidence.
Inspired in part by the broader accessibility accountability argument recently articulated by Sheri Byrne-Haber, CPACC, in her article, “Why you shouldn’t trust the people who built your inaccessible site to fix it.”
Featured image by Miguel Á. Padriñán/Pexels.com