**termination with no notice - breach of contract**court case *help needed*

[jmo21]

I have now read! OMG emails from client are dated 7 months after the event? NOTHING before that? is that seriously going to stand up in court?

The agency have lied in emails saying there was no issue when I had allready escalated? The Agency is also stating I made no claim to be a victim of bullying - I was (its their culture?) & did, & it was true - but know it has nothing to do with this case .. or so I thought? why is that an issue - conractors having no rights & stuff, why would the bullying be an issue?the agency keep stating in all emails it will be dealt with then intenally? that they've had no corresponence from me - lies.

There are NO witness statements - in court last time they said there would be at least 2/3 from client - have produced nothing - not even from their own consultant.

Can someone tell me what happens when a business lies in court?

Can you try editing that so it makes some kind of sense, rather than the rambling incoherent nonsense it currently is.

[KittyCat]

Can you try editing that so it makes some kind of sense, rather than the rambling incoherent nonsense it currently is.

Too much wine!

Even I'm bored of being an armchair lawyer - sooner its at court & judge decides the better - I cant be bothered to think about it too much ..

..but I will post the result

[SueEllen]

Can someone tell me what happens when a business lies in court?

When a person lies in court the judge just reminds them to tell the truth.

As your case is being judged on the balance of probabilities the more things they make up, which if you can prove they are made up by your documentation, the better it is for your case.

[blacjac]

Well I guess thats the difference - I'm a business.

No, you're not.

You are a person who happens to own and run a business, but you are not a business.
Once you understand that then peoples responses may start to become clear...

[northernladuk]

Well I guess thats the difference - I'm a business.

No you are not. A business knows how it's accounts and finances are run properly.

[d000hg]

so you get paid a premium to be disposoble - not for your skills ? THATS why contractors are under valued

Oh, we're back on the "contractors are better than permies" thing again. Short-term use and not being tied-in are EXACTLY among the main benefits of using contractors. Of course skill too - but oddly enough employers like their employees to be skilled too, since they are going to be stuck with them for years and have to pay for training, etc.

[Wanderer]

When a person lies in court the judge just reminds them to tell the truth.

I know people who have gone to jail for perjury...

I don't think lying in court is a minor thing.

[Wanderer]

Does'nt any Agency win by default when either they or the client screw over a contract/contractor & the Ltd Co/contractor does nothing!

Wonder how many times notice in lieu is paid by client to agency & not passed on

Wonder how many people have been defamed/libelled with no redress

Wonder if the agency would still have sole agreement with the client if they objected to this behaviour?

I think they are good points.

If the client wants a contract they can terminate without notice then why doesn't the contract just say "notice of termination required by client: none - the client can terminate at any time without notice". I don't mind having a contract that the client could terminate at anytime - I'm a big boy so I can take it. What I do get angry about is this big charade about "4 weeks notice" required from the client when, by all accounts, this means nothing as the client can invoke the small print and dismiss without warning anyway!

It's easy to suspect that the agency likes to put in "4 weeks notice" in the contract because they may be able to demand that the client pays up but they then refuse to pass this on to the contractor. What a great scam. And it seems that so many people here are willing to bend over and get shafted like this too.

Likewise, if this MOO clause means either party could instantly terminate a contract by giving notice and then saying that that no work is [available|will be done] for the next X weeks so it's terminated instantly anyway. Again, why even have a notice period?

The whole notice period thing is a bit of a nonsense which needs to be clarified - the outcome of this court case will be very interesting.

[Old Greg]

I'm enjoying this thread and the OP is getting an unnecessarily hard time. It may be true that the rest of us couldn't be bothered with this kind of court case, but the OP has a grudge, which should be celebrated. This outpouring of outrage is a little spark of poetry in the dull prose of contracting.

[prozak]

I think they are good points.

If the client wants a contract they can terminate without notice then why doesn't the contract just say "notice of termination required by client: none - the client can terminate at any time without notice". I don't mind having a contract that the client could terminate at anytime - I'm a big boy so I can take it. What I do get angry about is this big charade about "4 weeks notice" required from the client when, by all accounts, this means nothing as the client can invoke the small print and dismiss without warning anyway!

It's easy to suspect that the agency likes to put in "4 weeks notice" in the contract because they may be able to demand that the client pays up but they then refuse to pass this on to the contractor. What a great scam. And it seems that so many people here are willing to bend over and get shafted like this too.

Likewise, if this MOO clause means either party could instantly terminate a contract by giving notice and then saying that that no work is [available|will be done] for the next X weeks so it's terminated instantly anyway. Again, why even have a notice period?

The whole notice period thing is a bit of a nonsense which needs to be clarified - the outcome of this court case will be very interesting.

I've always given notice.

I've never been terminated mid contract and only once not been renewed. At that time i got a clear indication that there was no renewal a few weeks prior.

I was given notice in my last role... but they gave notice and were going to pay the notice or so it seemed ...... a project came through that I picked up so it never got to the point where I could test whether I was going to be paid for doing nothing. I ended up leaving this role at a later date when they wouldn't change the notice period (on renewal) to 1 week.

So in my experience these are binding clauses in the contract.