Invoice dispute - non payment - timesheet not authorised

[mavster07]

First thing, the lesson to take out of this is to always document the requirement the client is seeking to fulfil. Even if it's an email, anything written down is an agreement. It's always a good idea to document the scope of work in your deliverable document in any case so you are effectively depleting back to them your understanding of the scope.

The way I'd tackle this is to invoice them for the full amount along with a letter that formally advises them that they are 'estopped' from using your work product until invoice payment in full has been received. I would also put a clear payment timescale on the invoice of 7 days ( you can define what you want unless it has been agreed otherwise ) and then follow that up with a letter.

I'm with you, stick to your principles otherwise you get no respect,
.

[BolshieBastard]

Hi all,

I've contracted for several years as a LTD company through agencies. For the first time ever had an invoice disputed.

I was approached by an agency regarding a 3 month role. I attended interview with the end company. They asked me to complete an initial piece of work in between 1 and 5 days as a trial.

I was asked, both in writing by the agency and verbally by the director of the end company, to complete an IT due diligence report. Specifically to review a support proposal, further document a bespoke application and highlight any risks in the proposal. I completed this work in 3.5, submitted the draft doc and was asked to make some changes. This I did taking another half day.

On submitting my time-sheets the company has disputed my work. Specifically they have said my document lacks basic information such as server IP addresses, desktop OS versions, desktop software used, etc. It turns our they expected a build document detailing all the information needed to implement the support proposal - not a due diligence.

Subsequently they have not authorised my timesheets. They have offered to pay me for two days - stating that one of there perm consultants could have completed the same work in that time.

I have no idea where I stand on this one. I'd really appreciate any advice any one else can offer?

Kind Regards.

A bit, no sorry, very gullible, weren't we?

Hope you get it sorted but I'd be surprised. Sounds like they had no intention of paying from the outset and wanted someone to do the work for free.

[Wanderer]

A bit, no sorry, very gullible, weren't we?

Hope you get it sorted but I'd be surprised. Sounds like they had no intention of paying from the outset and wanted someone to do the work for free.

How to you figure that out? Or are you just being a troll?