Salary/Dividend Level

[missinggreenfields]

Significantly different is in duration or/and cost. 10 miles east switch to 10 miles west is neither. The journey is the same.

A complete about turn doesn't meet the NLUK definition of being a significant change in journey? OK. On that theory, heading 24 miles east to Edinburgh from Whitburn is the same journey as heading 24 miles west to Glasgow

The bullet points make it much clearer. A 10 mile journery west changing to a 10 mile journey each doesn't meet either of those criteria. The only significant effect in your example is what he sees out of the window.

I agree that the bullet points help. Heading 180 degrees in the other direction for the duration of the journey meets the "significant effect on the journey an employee has to make to get to work" bullet point, and in some circumstances could also have a financial cost depending on the travel mechanism the employee uses.

I'd suggest that with that kind of change, the bullet points you are quoting support my point of view much more than they support your argument

[northernladuk]

A complete about turn doesn't meet the NLUK definition of being a significant change in journey? OK. On that theory, heading 40 miles north east to Edinburgh from Abington is the same journey as heading 40 miles north west to Glasgow

Christ no... As pointed out it is about cost and duration. Both mentioned many times in the guidance. Absolutely no where does it mention direction. I have no idea what those journeys are like but just to remind you about the point we are discussing. Bearing in mind this is relief on costs, how does direction have any bearing on that?

If you live in the centre of the town and client one is on the eastern outskirts, then if client two is on the western outskirts then the journey is different even though they are in the same town.

I agree that the bullet points help. Heading 180 degrees in the other direction for the duration of the journey meets the "significant effect on the journey an employee has to make to get to work" bullet point, and in some circumstances could also have a financial cost depending on the travel mechanism the employee uses.

I'd suggest that with that kind of change, the bullet points you are quoting support my point of view much more than they support your argument

#

We'll have to disagree then. To me a journey is made up of tangibles like time, type of transport and cost. I also believe that, depending on the size of the location (but you did say town), that it's in the same geographical location so arguing the details of west or east is irrelevant.

Like most 24 month rule arguments, it's highly dependant on the exact details of the situation, which we don't have so no point going further really.

[northernladuk]

Next you will be telling me you can reset the rule because your new client next door to your old one starts and hour earlier so you journey is significantly darker.......

[stek]

Next you will be telling me you can reset the rule because your new client next door to your old one starts and hour earlier so you journey is significantly darker.......

What if your new train journey is similar but the next gig you sit with your back to the engine instead?

My Missus can't stand having her back to the engine, and travelling via Bradford Interchange totally throws her, she just doesn't get it. Women, no spatial awareness....

Two First Class Honours Degrees and and can't work out why she can't point the same way all the time when a train has to reverse out of a Y terminus....

[SueEllen]

Next you will be telling me you can reset the rule because the client next door to your old one starts and hour earlier so you journey is significantly darker.......

There is no need to be rude.

Lots of us disagree with you about your interpretation of the 2 year rule.

Funnily enough even though I disagree with your interpretation I've pointed out to other contractors even with my looser interpretation that they are caught by it. They look p*ssed when I point out their journeys have been the virtually the same for the past 3+ years e.g. three stops down the same tube line, so they can't claim.

[northernladuk]

There is no need to be rude.

Coming from you?

I did put a cheeky tongue out smilie at the end. Back in your box you.

Lots of us disagree with you about your interpretation of the 2 year rule.

Enter the fray with your thoughts then. I'm happy to listen and discuss.

[missinggreenfields]

Not true - it depends on the journey. If you live in the centre of the town and client one is on the eastern outskirts, then if client two is on the western outskirts then the journey is different even though they are in the same town. Therefore, both locations are temporary, so the duration in the same town can easily exceed 24 months if the location is different.

Christ no... As pointed out it is about cost and duration. Both mentioned many times in the guidance. Absolutely no where does it mention direction. I have no idea what those journeys are like but just to remind you about the point we are discussing. Bearing in mind this is relief on costs, how does direction have any bearing on that?

If you live in the centre of the town and client one is on the eastern outskirts, then if client two is on the western outskirts then the journey is different even though they are in the same town.

So, you now agree with what I wrote some posts ago? Jesus wept.

To expand on your logic slightly - that the journey is only about duration and cost - let's look at how daft that idea is.

Let's say I live in Birmingham. That's about 120 miles from London if I drive it. It takes 2 1/2 hours to get there. If I use the same amount of fuel to travel 120 miles in 2/12 hours to Colwyn Bay, is that the same journey - I'm taking the same amount of time, I'm travelling the same distance, and it's costing me the same amount of fuel.

Of course it's not the same journey, but under the NLUK "it's the time and the cost and nothing about the direction of travel" interpretation of the rule, you would class the two journeys as the same. In which case, you're probably missing out on claiming a lot of valid travel and subsistence expenses.

[northernladuk]

Hmm do. Dunno what happened there. Must have pasted you comment in for reference and forgotten to edit it. Fair spot. Well done.

Edit. Oh I see now. It was to reference the original scenario cause you'd brought the other towns in. Must have gotten distracted.