Notice Period Dispute

[mavster07]

No relationship with the client?

How can that be ? The end beneficiary of the work is the client !!!! Irrespective of the contract, the end client can't use the work product without paying for it. If they pay the agency, then the agency is legally required to pass that payment on as per their contract with you as the supplier. if they don't then you are legally entitled to pursue it from the end beneficiary. Its common law !!!!

If your end client says 'not our problem' then you should immediately suspend services to avoid further commercial loss. The client will then have to get involved because it affects their business as they are losing a supplier.

I wouldn't waste time with small claims court stuff until you've rattled your sabre with the agency and put pressure on them to pay. Most agencies don't know the law as well as they claim - its just a matter of outsmarting them.

[BrowneIssue]

No relationship with the client?

Correct.

How can that be ? The end beneficiary of the work is the client !!!!

If that were the case then it still isn't. It's the client's customers' customers' customers' ... ad infinitum.

Irrespective of the contract

No, no, no, no, no. This is business. There is no 'irrespective of the contract'.

, the end client can't use the work product without paying for it.

Yes they can. I am using electricity I haven't paid for. In fact, since I can't believe there's a contractor on here being paid in advance, all our end clients are using stuff they haven't yet paid for. YET.

(I'm going to regret that statement. It'll turn out AlreadyPacked gets dosh up front or something like that.)

If they pay the agency, then the agency is legally required to pass that payment on as per their contract with you as the supplier.

Only if that is what the contract says. What you are describing is how temp agencies work, not Ltd Co contractors.

if they don't then you are legally entitled to pursue it from the end beneficiary. Its common law !!!!

Are you getting confused with consumer law? That isn't the same as contract law.

If your end client says 'not our problem' then you should immediately suspend services to avoid further commercial loss.

WRONG. BAD ADVICE. You will then be in breach of contract and can be sued for damages. You can do that if, and only if, your contract says "if the money has not arrived in my account by this day, I will stop turning up".

The client will then have to get involved because it affects their business as they are losing a supplier.

No they are not losing a supplier. Their supplier has a supplier problem - you - and they will fix it by finding another supplier.

I wouldn't waste time with small claims court stuff

NOT starting the small claims pocess is wasting time.

until you've rattled your sabre with the agency and put pressure on them to pay.

You do that at the same time.

Most agencies don't know the law as well as they claim

They neither know, nor care, nor need to know while people like you are giving out wrong advice.

- its just a matter of outsmarting them.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. It's not about outsmarting them, stupid. Just use the law.

Are you a recruitment agent, by any chance?

[mavster07]

Correct.

If that were the case then it still isn't. It's the client's customers' customers' customers' ... ad infinitum.

No, no, no, no, no. This is business. There is no 'irrespective of the contract'.

Yes they can. I am using electricity I haven't paid for. In fact, since I can't believe there's a contractor on here being paid in advance, all our end clients are using stuff they haven't yet paid for. YET.

(I'm going to regret that statement. It'll turn out AlreadyPacked gets dosh up front or something like that.)

Only if that is what the contract says. What you are describing is how temp agencies work, not Ltd Co contractors.

Are you getting confused with consumer law? That isn't the same as contract law.

WRONG. BAD ADVICE. You will then be in breach of contract and can be sued for damages. You can do that if, and only if, your contract says "if the money has not arrived in my account by this day, I will stop turning up".

No they are not losing a supplier. Their supplier has a supplier problem - you - and they will fix it by finding another supplier.

NOT starting the small claims pocess is wasting time.

You do that at the same time.

They neither know, nor care, nor need to know while people like you are giving out wrong advice.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. It's not about outsmarting them, stupid. Just use the law.

Are you a recruitment agent, by any chance?

With respect to all of that, I'm a contractor who has applied all those situations and proven them to be correct. They are all legally sound if you have, like me, a legal qualification. Contract law is a great thing......

By the way, under contract law if one party commits a breach (i.e. in this case not paying) the other party has the right to void the contract. Witholding services is a perfectly acceptable - and legal - means of doing so. It goes on day in day out in the commercial world and Ltd Co contracts are no different, unless you've not been smart enough to ensure your contract is worded as a supplier type contract that is.

and don't call me stupid. Just because you don't agree doesn't make you right. Respect other's points of view but don't make it personal, okay?

[ASB]

WRONG. BAD ADVICE. You will then be in breach of contract and can be sued for damages. You can do that if, and only if, your contract says "if the money has not arrived in my account by this day, I will stop turning up".

There are a number of points at which this may not be the case. A director has a fiducary duty. There is a certainly a point at which services **should** be withdrawn in order to minimise further loss. Otherwise the director is potentially exposed to actions from the shareholder.

As an example I had a seriously outstanding invoice with a client and I was providing services to their client, in the process of sorting out the invoice I was advised very strongly to withdraw labour otherwise there were potentially serious consequences under company law.

[BrowneIssue]

By the way, under contract law if one party commits a breach (i.e. in this case not paying) the other party has the right to void the contract. Witholding services is a perfectly acceptable

I'm not letting this one go.

It is only a breach if the contract states when payment will be made. If you stop turning up because you don't think they are paying quickly enough, and haven't shown you have really tried to get the money, you are in breach of contract, not them. Hence, start the Small Claims procedure but keep turning up.

There are a number of points at which this may not be the case. A director has a fiducary duty.

Absolutely. Every effort must be made to get that money. But failure to fulfil one's own side of the contract must be the last resort.

So start the Smaill Claims procedure but keep turning up.