Another ridiculous contract

[Abraham]

Every time some idiot falls for contracts like this and tha other guy with the 13 weeks wages it just makes it a little bit harder for the rest of us that do have a clue and give a crap about what we do.

Hard lessons learnt. Yes, I agree that it was idiotic decision on my part to have believed the agency and started the contract in good faith without the paper work completed.

[Bee]

Good advises over here.

If the Agency doesn't have the paper work on time before start, become very suspicious and we should ask ourselves why.

They need to pay one week, if you work one week. What kind of losses they are talking about?

[Abraham]

Good advises over here.

If the Agency doesn't have the paper work on time before start, become very suspicious and we should ask ourselves why.

They need to pay one week, if you work one week. What kind of losses they are talking about?

They did not specify what these losses would be.

One more thing. The agency sent the contract by email without their signature, asked me to sign the contract first - and asked me to send the scanned pages with signature before they signed. Is this correct? Who has to sign the contract first? It is the agency that came with the contract but they didn't want to sign the contract first. Is this normal practice?

[northernladuk]

They won't sign until you have not in case you make any amendments. If they signed, you amended, signed and sent back they are going to have a hard time arguing in court that they didn't accept the changes.

[Bee]

They did not specify what these losses would be.

One more thing. The agency sent the contract by email without their signature, asked me to sign the contract first - and asked me to send the scanned pages with signature before they signed. Is this correct? Who has to sign the contract first? It is the agency that came with the contract but they didn't want to sign the contract first. Is this normal practice?

I'm curious to know what kind of losses an agency can have to justify this.

Anybody can help?

[ASB]

They won't sign until you have not in case you make any amendments. If they signed, you amended, signed and sent back they are going to have a hard time arguing in court that they didn't accept the changes.

No. They would have no trouble whatsoever.

reverse your argument, the agency modify afterwards. Do you think it would be hard for you to aregues you signed something different. Of course not.

amendments need signing (or at least annotating).

[NotAllThere]

They did not specify what these losses would be.

One more thing. The agency sent the contract by email without their signature, asked me to sign the contract first - and asked me to send the scanned pages with signature before they signed

While it's true that once you've started work, you've implicitly accepted the contract, it doesn't mean the contract is unamendable after that point. Did you cross out the unacceptable clauses and sign and date each crossing out before signing and sending back? At the very least, if it comes to court, it shows that you had been against these things from the start.

I know one chap who received the contract via pdf, edited the pdf directly to remove some spectacularly dumb clauses ("You agree not to work in this country for anyone else for a period of 12 months"). He then printed off the amended pdf, signed and dated it and sent it back. Never heard a word about it. An interesting approach, and I'm not sure of the legality.

[SueEllen]

I'm curious to know what kind of losses an agency can have to justify this.

Anybody can help?

The only losses the agency would incurred are:
1. Losing their margin
2. The costs of finding another contractor

These costs would not add up to 4 weeks money. Also if the client removes the contract totally e.g. cans the project their losses are zero.

One of the reasons I said if the client did terminate, phone up the agency and ask them why (making sure you got a recording to transcribe), and then take the agency to court for the money.

[SueEllen]

They won't sign until you have not in case you make any amendments. If they signed, you amended, signed and sent back they are going to have a hard time arguing in court that they didn't accept the changes.

I've had a few contracts were the agency has signed before I have. Also when doing electronic signatures most have used something like Adobe. Those sending paper copies have sent them in the post not sent an email.

The reason some agencies don't sign before you do or on some occasions don't sign at all is because they mistakenly think if they don't sign the contract it's not valid.

[SueEllen]

No. They would have no trouble whatsoever.

reverse your argument, the agency modify afterwards. Do you think it would be hard for you to aregues you signed something different. Of course not.

amendments need signing (or at least annotating).

Agreed

Plus the fact that neither party can show that amendments were discussed also means the side who didn't amend the contract would be believed.