>>>>Sometimes the best choice is to throw everything away and start over.
>>>
>>>It's often my preferred method once I lock onto the idea the original guy didn't have a good design. It's just faster. Writing code doesn't really take very long once you know what it is you need to accomplish.
>>
>>That is 100% right. Provided that you are after real solution.
>>
>>Problem is that some times temporary consultants (or even entire inhouse dev teams) are more interested in max# number of (vaguely justifiable) billing hours (or prolonging their project/contracts) then solving problem that they are brought/paid to resolve at first place. If you have company unfortunate enough to depend on these kind of ______, then bad code is keep on piling up on top of each other into massive piles of garbage, until it all become complete madness.
>>
>>After it all fall apart, there comes someone with your approach who finally decide to cut the cr*pp and do full rewrite.
>>However not long after you are gone, there comes someone fresh off the latest tech convention, who find that your system/code is good, but not done according to the best coding practices (or latest technology) and thus in need of some major refactoring...
>>
>>And there we go again. Never ending cycle of exciting technology innovation... :))
>
>I've never come across a consultant trying to inflate their billing like that. Usually (like me I like to think) they are trying to produce the best and most cost effective solution for someone. On the other hand I have come across clients who question every hour spent as though they continually suspect me of that. Its very tiresome and I'm usually happy to see the back of them. And on the whole that sort of client gets a much worse service s my main motivation becomes get the thing deliverable and get out asap.

There are good consultants and bad consultants. Good developers and bad developers. Good teams and bad teams.
Good technology and not so good technology. Unfortunately our trade is very ambiguous field, where two people can see the same
thing very differently. You never witnessed development project that went nowhere and was simply abandoned after (entire) budget was spent ? Or found pile of crappy code done by multiple consecutive contractors applying patches on top of patches to the same
(hopeless) code base ?
There are cases when good consulting is finding best possible patch and there are cases where good consulting is refusing to patch all together and suggest (and convince company to do) full rewrite. (Which I believe Naomi should do)
And then do the rewrite do the best you can. Not everybody is both honest and skilled (like I believe you are) in this profession. I was half joking in that post, but results of those things you must have seen many times. I have.