Giant want me to personally indemnify them

[20years]

That's what occurred to me Pondlife but if they are only offering a software solution to recruiters why the need for the indemnity for taxes from the OP

It's not just taxes I'm being asked to indemnify against.it's all and any losses related to this contract.

[JRCT]

A note the the OP and the recruiters watching this thread...



...are exempt from the requirement to be covered by Employers Liability and have been so since 2008.

Whilst there is no legal requirement, you can of course purchase insurance if you so choose.

I had a contract through Randstad a couple of years ago and they insisted that I had to have this. I pointed out that I can't ever make a claim, effectively, against myself so it would be completely redundant, but they insisted it was a deal breaker with the end client (Barclays Wealth).

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

It's not just taxes I'm being asked to indemnify against.it's all and any losses related to this contract.

Was it Giant that sourced the contract for you or did you source it through an agency who then put you in touch with Giant? Either way this is a strange arrangement and the request for indemnity even stranger as I cannot see that there could be any potential financial damage to Giant unless they are contracting directly, as an agency, with the end client

[20years]

9 months ago I sourced the contract directly myself with no agency involvement, the client asked that I operate via agency x, which was fine and this is how we have been working for the last 9 months.

The client has now moved away from using agency x ,and is now using GP , so from renewal GP will be acting as the agency, and this is where all this trouble started.

[TheFaQQer]

9 months ago I sourced the contract directly myself with no agency involvement, the client asked that I operate via agency x, which was fine and this is how we have been working for the last 9 months.

The client has now moved away from using agency x ,and is now using GP , so from renewal GP will be acting as the agency, and this is where all this trouble started.

That's even more reason to run away from a personal indemnity - if the existing agent sues Giant, then you're on the hook for their legal fees.

Put your trainers on, and start limbering up, ready to outsprint Usain Bolt to get away from this one.

[20years]

That's even more reason to run away from a personal indemnity - if the existing agent sues Giant, then you're on the hook for their legal fees.

I'm assured by agency x that they are 'happy' to hand over to GP. Maybe happy isn't the correct word, but there is no dispute that the client can ask them to do that.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I'm assured by agency x that they are 'happy' to hand over to GP. Maybe happy isn't the correct word, but there is no dispute that the client can ask them to do that.

Even so, in your position, I think I would check the original contract that I had with agency x

[SueEllen]

9 months ago I sourced the contract directly myself with no agency involvement, the client asked that I operate via agency x, which was fine and this is how we have been working for the last 9 months.

The client has now moved away from using agency x ,and is now using GP , so from renewal GP will be acting as the agency, and this is where all this trouble started.

Apart from moaning on here what have you done about the contract?

[JRCT]

Even so, in your position, I think I would check the original contract that I had with agency x

Is that a little kiss at the end of your message?

Nice.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Is that a little kiss at the end of your message?

Nice.