Originally posted by TheFaQQer
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Agency Refusing to Pay Me After Leaving Contract with No Notice & No Signed Timesheet
Collapse
X
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by TheFaQQer View PostDon't agree.
Advertising costs, plus agency time and effort plus client time and effort > £30 so why would they just say "it's OK, we'll take the loss here"?
They would do it all as part of defending the small claims court action by the OP, so it probably wouldn't cost them anything, and could send a message to every other contractor that if you breach your contract, expect an agency to fight for what is legally due to them and win.
Not sure if its just £30. When I did it the court date was set in court in my hometown so it wasnt going to happen that the agency sent someone down to represent them. In travel costs it would have been a bit even.
And of course, even if you win in small claims you cant claim costs like a full court.Rhyddid i lofnod psychocandy!!!!Comment
-
Originally posted by psychocandy View PostSerious question because I'm not sure how it works totally. So if I sue for payment they can add on and say yes but they breached contract later?
Not sure if its just £30. When I did it the court date was set in court in my hometown so it wasnt going to happen that the agency sent someone down to represent them. In travel costs it would have been a bit even.
And of course, even if you win in small claims you cant claim costs like a full court.Comment
-
Originally posted by Eirikur View PostYes if he would send a competent substitute to finish the work he started.
Careful what you ask for: At the interview you are the one and only person for that job! Now convince the client that you have an identical twin to follow on from you (without a prior interview/acceptance process) just so you can leave and still collect your fees for the week!
We can kid the client, the agency and HMRC but the reality of a subbie is a long way away from the promise in most cases.Comment
-
Originally posted by psychocandy View PostSerious question because I'm not sure how it works totally. So if I sue for payment they can add on and say yes but they breached contract later?
Not sure if its just £30. When I did it the court date was set in court in my hometown so it wasnt going to happen that the agency sent someone down to represent them. In travel costs it would have been a bit even.
And of course, even if you win in small claims you cant claim costs like a full court.
Also if you are defending a claim you can get it moved to a court near you.
Small claims cases are suppose to be easy enough to do without a solicitor, if they are not the judge can move the case to the high court. You can claim reasonable travel and administration costs but you need to add this to your claim before submitting it and you should have warned the other side while trying to sort the issue out without going to court."You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JRComment
-
Originally posted by Taita View PostAnd let's be truthful Guys. How many of us can send in a substitute at a moment's notice to fulfil our contract seamlessly?
That way if you need to find a sub or a replacement you can find some one quickly.
However the issue here is how the contractor dumped the client in it. As I mentioned if the OP had bothered to divulge the health problem he may still be in the contract."You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JRComment
-
.....
There is a lot of conjecture in this thread.
If the facts are correct in the OP and they are the only facts, the Agent breached the contract first by refusing to discuss the substitute. It is irrelevant as to whether a sub was available and even whether the sub may have been acceptable to the agent.
End of.Comment
-
Originally posted by tractor View PostThere is a lot of conjecture in this thread.
If the facts are correct in the OP and they are the only facts, the Agent breached the contract first by refusing to discuss the substitute. It is irrelevant as to whether a sub was available and even whether the sub may have been acceptable to the agent.
End of.
The Agent didn't "refuse to discuss" the substitute, they apparently simply did not respond. We don't know how long they were given, or how many times they were contacted to discuss it. And without seeing the exact substitution clause in the contract you don t know whether or not it is relevant that the sub may be acceptable to the client.
I'd be surprised if the OP could quantify the actual work done in one week. First week on most contracts is getting network logins, installing software, and reading project plans and functional specs.Comment
-
...
Originally posted by meridian View PostNice one, starting a reply with a statement about conjecture and then following it up immediately with "If..." Lol
The Agent didn't "refuse to discuss" the substitute, they apparently simply did not respond. We don't know how long they were given, or how many times they were contacted to discuss it. And without seeing the exact substitution clause in the contract you don t know whether or not it is relevant that the sub may be acceptable to the client.
I'd be surprised if the OP could quantify the actual work done in one week. First week on most contracts is getting network logins, installing software, and reading project plans and functional specs.
Given the OP has only given the facts that they have, there is only conjecture and supposition which you have carried on.
FWIW I doubt anyone could provide much value to a client within the first week and I seriously doubt that effort is worth what the OP is demanding. Personally, I would write it off as not worth the effort especially if my health situation was so bad that I couldn't even contemplate working notice.
Seems odd though that collectively, contractors seem happy to suck this type of thing up without a second thought and find it just as acceptable when clients and agents unilaterally impose additional detrimental conditions on a contract that is underway.Comment
-
Originally posted by tractor View PostI seriously doubt that effort is worth what the OP is demanding.Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment