Legal Query

[JustKeepSwimming]

You aren't a slave and can't be forced to work against your will.

Contractual terms are just noise 99% of the time.

You know your client better than us. You know how they manage contractors. That's all that matters really. Explain you are looking to leave and how much notice would they like and take it from there. Get something in writing 'Give us 4 weeks notice' and then you're golden, offer to over run your notice if it's beneficial to both of you, ie they haven't got a replacement yet and you haven't started the new role yet. I've given notice before and then went on to an effectively at-will contract as my vetting was delayed.

[Protagoras]

Contractual terms are just noise 99% of the time.

I'd not describe a contact as noise at all. It's the backstop for the parties should their relationship breakdown and is really needed when things go wrong.

Mostly it should be a case of agree terms, sign the contract, put it in the drawer and get on with the assignment / project.

[northernladuk]

Contractual terms are just noise 99% of the time.

Utter crap. Where do you come up with this rubbish. You and woody1 need to meet up for a drink and chat bollux to you hears content.

[northernladuk]

Utter crap. Where do you come up with this rubbish. You and woody1 need to meet up for a drink and chat bollux to you hears content.

You aren't a slave and can't be forced to work against your will.

He can't but he can be liable for the clients and agents losses because of his actions.

[JustKeepSwimming]

You can be liable for the inordinate amount of defamation you spread on here...

Just because something could happen doesn't mean it will happen. Ironically your sanctimonious attitude as to what is and isn't a 'real contractor' just shows you ain't it, chief.

Businesses routinely breach contracts as an intentional and astute business decision. Doing another 6 months in a contract that is detrimental to your interests, business or personal, is not good business.

[northernladuk]

Just because something could happen doesn't mean it will happen.

No but we can advise on what the possible outcomes can be so the OP can make their own decision. Making glib statements that it's fine isn't advice.

Ironically your sanctimonious attitude as to what is and isn't a 'real contractor' just shows you ain't it, chief.

Maybe but I called it right didn't I.

Businesses routinely breach contracts as an intentional and astute business decision. Doing another 6 months in a contract that is detrimental to your interests, business or personal, is not good business.

They do but they know what they are doing and can assess the risk. Advising someone that doesn't really know what's going on that 99% of contract terms is just noise is just awful.

[Protagoras]

Businesses routinely breach contracts as an intentional and astute business decision.

I would agree with this, noting that when businesses do so, they typically understand the risk and liability, including reputational impact.

This discussion is not about B2B contracts. In this case OP has a contract of employment with an umbrella company. If the OP breaches that contract, it's true to say that there's a risk that the umbrella company may seek to recover losses.

The key takeaway should be that no one wants to get there. The OP should speak to the client and come to an agreement that's mutually satisfactory. Hopefully the client will recognise the OPs predicament and everyone can move on.

[JustKeepSwimming]

No but we can advise on what the possible outcomes can be so the OP can make their own decision. Making glib statements that it's fine isn't advice.

Saying the sun will rise tomorrow is not a glib statement.

They do but they know what they are doing and can assess the risk. Advising someone that doesn't really know what's going on that 99% of contract terms is just noise is just awful.

99% of contract terms are just poorly written noise, it's fact. That's before you even get into the crux of OPs circumstances.

Trying to scare OP into sticking with a contract they want out of because they might get hit by a bus tomorrow is just awful.

As an aside. I am fascinated as to what mechanism you believe the agency to recover anything from an umbrella employee.

[JustKeepSwimming]

I would agree with this, noting that when businesses do so, they typically understand the risk and liability, including reputational impact.

This discussion is not about B2B contracts. In this case OP has a contract of employment with an umbrella company. If the OP breaches that contract, it's true to say that there's a risk that the umbrella company may seek to recover losses.

The key takeaway should be that no one wants to get there. The OP should speak to the client and come to an agreement that's mutually satisfactory. Hopefully the client will recognise the OPs predicament and everyone can move on.

I agree overall, especially the last paragraph.

There appears to be lot of people thinking the legality of termination clauses of an Employer-Employee/worker relationship, ie Umbrella, is the same as Client-Contractor. It's not.

[northernladuk]

Saying the sun will rise tomorrow is not a glib statement.

No but that's not what you said. Saying 99% of contract terms is.

99% of contract terms are just poorly written noise, it's fact. That's before you even get into the crux of OPs circumstances.

Not so. Our types of contracts have usually been properly assessed as they generally protect the agents and then there is the IR35 checks if applicable. We know this as many of us use companies like QDOS to check them and the best they can pick up on is the odd unfettered ROS so again, 99% of contracts is poorly written is just totally wrong when you are talking us. The bigger world maybe but that's not the point in question.

Trying to scare OP into sticking with a contract they want out of because they might get hit by a bus tomorrow is just awful.

Again, why are you changing what we said to make an argument? We never said he will get hit by a bus. We said he's likely to not get his last invoice paid which has happened many times to posters on here. Even if he doesn't get it paid the agent is going to kick up a right stink with threats to sue and if we don't advise the OP of the situation he'll not have a clue how to deal with that and he'll be back on asking questions. The evidence is there in black and white if you want to search for it. If a contractor breaches his T&C's the agent is going to want their monies worth. They should sue but they won't, they are more likely to withold pay. It's a fact, not scaring him. By advising him this is what happens in the real world he can be properly prepared. If it doesn't happen then happy days, but it can and certainly has in the past.

As an aside. I am fascinated as to what mechanism you believe the agency to recover anything from an umbrella employee.

They don't pay the last invoice. To be honest I'd be interested to know this as well as the contract is with the brolly therefore the brolly should be on the hook on behalf of its employee. But whatever the answer is, if a contract has been breached there is a potential for action, just how that works with a brolly I'd be interested to know.