Hi All,
I'm one of a large number (00s, if not 000s) of contractors for the same client. A few days ago I finally received my CEST based SDS. Unsurprisingly, it was inaccurate, and ISIR35 (QDOS reviewed it some time ago, and it's OSIR35)
What did surprise me a bit, was it was simply the one they had produced in Feb 2020 before the deferral - they haven't even bothered to re-run CEST - which AIUI has been updated in the past year. Is that still a valid SDS? The terms of my contract haven't changed, BUT there's at least 1 question for which their answer 13 months ago was correct and now incorrect (ironically one that would make their IS determination stronger!). Do such SDS have a limited 'lifetime'? Perhaps it doesn't matter that much as the client has given obviously inaccurate answers to all of us, in order to ensure an IS determination.
However, beyond just churning out an old SDS, and arguably the bigger question....
Unsprisingly a number of the contractors have spoken to one another about their SDS. And it appears the client has simply run CEST once, generated a PDF, then edited the PDF to replace names etc. The creation date/time is the same for everyone's SDS! Surely this constitutes blanket assessment, and is unlawful?
Ultimately it seems to me that for many contractors - not just with this client - the benefit of appealing is almost zero. Such clients are not going to change anyone's status. However, I feel it's important to at least document that we clearly disagree with it. My feeling is that if I provided them with a list of points that were wrong, the best I could hope for is they'd change anything 'cosmetic' - and refuse on the rest such that they still generated the same outcome - weakening my argument in case of investigation. Would I be better to simply write to their appeals department saying "This is clearly not representative of my contract, but I am aware that there is nothing I could tell you that would cause you to give me an accurate determination"?
Many thanks for your thoughts
I'm one of a large number (00s, if not 000s) of contractors for the same client. A few days ago I finally received my CEST based SDS. Unsurprisingly, it was inaccurate, and ISIR35 (QDOS reviewed it some time ago, and it's OSIR35)
What did surprise me a bit, was it was simply the one they had produced in Feb 2020 before the deferral - they haven't even bothered to re-run CEST - which AIUI has been updated in the past year. Is that still a valid SDS? The terms of my contract haven't changed, BUT there's at least 1 question for which their answer 13 months ago was correct and now incorrect (ironically one that would make their IS determination stronger!). Do such SDS have a limited 'lifetime'? Perhaps it doesn't matter that much as the client has given obviously inaccurate answers to all of us, in order to ensure an IS determination.
However, beyond just churning out an old SDS, and arguably the bigger question....
Unsprisingly a number of the contractors have spoken to one another about their SDS. And it appears the client has simply run CEST once, generated a PDF, then edited the PDF to replace names etc. The creation date/time is the same for everyone's SDS! Surely this constitutes blanket assessment, and is unlawful?
Ultimately it seems to me that for many contractors - not just with this client - the benefit of appealing is almost zero. Such clients are not going to change anyone's status. However, I feel it's important to at least document that we clearly disagree with it. My feeling is that if I provided them with a list of points that were wrong, the best I could hope for is they'd change anything 'cosmetic' - and refuse on the rest such that they still generated the same outcome - weakening my argument in case of investigation. Would I be better to simply write to their appeals department saying "This is clearly not representative of my contract, but I am aware that there is nothing I could tell you that would cause you to give me an accurate determination"?
Many thanks for your thoughts
Comment