[Silhouette]

In most places an individual can't be compelled to do much of anything for a client or employer regardless of what a contract says, since generic laws against slavery and similar concepts will apply. This is true almost everywhere in the first world, whether or not it has at-will employment. Normally there are some special legal provisions for cases where you need this not to apply, such as the military or emergency services.

However, it is entirely possible that a client could successfully claim back much of the compensation they paid for the original work via a civil suit if they subsequently argued that the original fee included maintenance and that maintenance was not in fact being carried out.

If it could be argued that the lack of maintenance also resulted in other damage to the client, they could potentially go after compensation for that damage as well. In the absence of a written contract putting clear (and legally enforceable) limits on such things, that could be far more expensive than just paying back the original revenues.

As an aside, this is particularly dangerous for freelancers, because if you don't have a written agreement making clear who the client was actually contracting to do the work, a court might find that it was the freelancer personally who was party to the agreement and not any corporate entity they normally work through. That would leave no legal shield to protect the freelancer from losing everything they personally own to settle a severe damages award.

[fat0wl]

Eh I'm sorry I just don't buy it. Without a maintenance contract, they could never win the argument that you were required to perform maintenance. And freelancers/consultants/employees-in-general have very little liability. I code people's websites all the time with 0% fear of losing my bank account in court.

[Silhouette]

And freelancers/consultants/employees-in-general have very little liability.

If what you wrote there were necessarily true, nobody working as a freelancer/consultant would need to set up their own corporate entity as a legal shield, nobody in that field would need professional indemnity insurance, and insurers who offer professional indemnity insurance to IT contractors here in the UK wouldn't routinely ask specific questions about whether those contractors were going to be working with clients in the United States because of the risk of having to cover significant legal bills increases so much in that case that a higher premium is indicated.

I code people's websites all the time with 0% fear of losing my bank account in court.

Well, that's your choice, and of course you're entitled to your personal opinion.

I've worked with other freelancers who didn't feel the need to have a written contract with a long-term client either, but I would never recommend that approach myself.