When two agents get together to discuss work that needs to be done in a landscape, inevitably each has a more or less different idea of what the final result will be. When there is a big discrepancy between these ideas there is likely to be friction. It is in the interests of both parties to minimize the difference, but that all involves work which adds to the expense and there is a temptation to enter into informal less detailed agreements.
It could be that "landscaping" is a category of business that is vaguely defined and presents special problems. If I ask a builder to build me a garage on my property he comes and constructs a wonderful building but walks away leaving a complete mess with piles of this soil here and there and sand exposed from the foundation and great swaths of bare soil. The builder calls and asks for the payment, I refuse, the builder says "that's landscaping", the garage is removed and the mess remains. The work was performed as requested and I was in the wrong.
With the garage in place I ask an electrician to lay an underground cable from the house to the garage. A digger (backhoe) is used to create a trench, the cable is laid, it works perfectly, the electrician calls for his check, I refuse since there is a great mound of soil over the trench and it looks ugly, he says "that's landscaping", pulls up the cable and the mess remains.
Are the expectations different when dealing with "landscapers"? How can we minimize the difference in understanding when one agent has a clear vision of the effects of work and the other may not? I don't think there is a clear answer to this question so don't answer if you are looking for 15 points, but do answer if you have experience and light to cast on this situation. I have ideas of my own but will delay on that.