• 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!

Contract changes by the agency without notice and agreement

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    It sounds like the client simply want to reduce the rate paid.

    If they want to do this, they are effectively saying "We are terminating your contract. Would you like a new one on a reduced rate?"

    This is relatively common mechanism when a client wants to cut a rate.

    Comment


      #12
      Originally posted by jmo21 View Post
      It sounds like the client simply want to reduce the rate paid.

      If they want to do this, they are effectively saying "We are terminating your contract. Would you like a new one on a reduced rate?"

      This is relatively common mechanism when a client wants to cut a rate.
      It could be that the client doesn't know what a massive cut the agent is taking.

      If the client is paying £500 and the OP (with due respect) is a £300 a day contractor, then the client would no doubt want to reduce the rate.
      The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
        It could be that the client doesn't know what a massive cut the agent is taking.

        If the client is paying £500 and the OP (with due respect) is a £300 a day contractor, then the client would no doubt want to reduce the rate.
        One of the many reasons they want to reduce the rate, yes.

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by jmo21 View Post
          One of the many reasons they want to reduce the rate, yes.
          As you say, it's also the standard way that rate cuts across the board are done - notice served and all contractors reissued with contracts taking them up to the same end date as the original.

          If it's an isolated incident, I'd always think that the agency is on a massive margin.
          The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
            As you say, it's also the standard way that rate cuts across the board are done - notice served and all contractors reissued with contracts taking them up to the same end date as the original.

            If it's an isolated incident, I'd always think that the agency is on a massive margin.
            Very true, and something for the OP to keep in mind.

            Comment


              #16
              Originally posted by teapot418 View Post
              I would also add -

              Was the mistake an obvious one? e.g. a daily rate being listed as an hourly rate? i.e. did you know it was wrong and think "woohoo", or did you genuinely think the new one was what was intended?

              If the mistake was obvious, then the courts would not find the contract binding.
              Define, objectively and unambiguously, "obvious".

              Comment


                #17
                Originally posted by billybiro View Post
                Define, objectively and unambiguously, "obvious".
                Judges Ike other lawyers are use to reading complex documents and as this is a B2B contract the OP doesn't get the same leeway as a consumer.
                "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

                Comment


                  #18
                  Originally posted by billybiro View Post
                  Define, objectively and unambiguously, "obvious".
                  That's for a judge to decide. In the 1939 case that I referred to earlier, the negotiations were for "30000 skins at 10d per skin" but the contract for "30000 skins at 10d per lb" so there was clearly an obvious mistake.

                  If the negotiations were for £300 a day and the agent has put £300 an hour in the contract, that's an obvious mistake.

                  If the negotiations were for £300 a day, the agent put £300 a day in the contract, but is now saying "we meant £250 a day" then that's not going to be an obvious mistake.

                  Judges will use a degree of common sense every now and then.
                  First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. But Gandhi never had to deal with HMRC

                  Comment


                    #19
                    Originally posted by RonBW View Post
                    That's for a judge to decide. In the 1939 case that I referred to earlier, the negotiations were for "30000 skins at 10d per skin" but the contract for "30000 skins at 10d per lb" so there was clearly an obvious mistake.

                    If the negotiations were for £300 a day and the agent has put £300 an hour in the contract, that's an obvious mistake.

                    If the negotiations were for £300 a day, the agent put £300 a day in the contract, but is now saying "we meant £250 a day" then that's not going to be an obvious mistake.

                    Judges will use a degree of common sense every now and then.
                    True; there could have been an admin cock-up where someone has realised that the contractor is getting the whole fee and they forgot to knock off the agency cut before passing it on.
                    The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

                    Comment


                      #20
                      Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
                      True; there could have been an admin cock-up where someone has realised that the contractor is getting the whole fee and they forgot to knock off the agency cut before passing it on.
                      The contractor shouldn't be aware of that.

                      They shouldn't have knowledge of the full contract between the client and agency including payment amounts and terms which is why you don't want to see it.
                      "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X