Agencies CAN refuse to use opt-in contractors

[TheFaQQer]

Odd. I thought that was answered... Ho hum...

There were two responses from CC / BoD members, however the question remains unanswered.

Feel free to quote / post a link / PM me a link where the question was answered, though

[BlasterBates]

The regulations are intended for temporary employees. For a typical IT contractor operating outside IR35, he won't be under the control of the client and therefore the regs don't apply anyway. If you read the gov regs it clearly states this with a very clear example of an IT contractor, which I would say is good description of an IT contractor outside of IR35.

An individual has set up his own limited company through which he provides
IT services. He has a contract with a TWA and is supplied to work on a specific
project with an anticipated duration of 12 months. The individual has no fixed
working pattern and can determine how and when he performs the services; he
can also send a substitute to perform the services at any time or payment is
made on specific deliverable or on a fixed price and not simply on an hour, daily
or weekly rate. However, he is subject to the hirer’s reasonable and lawful
instructions. Given the absence of personal service and mutuality of obligation,
the company is a client or customer of the individual, therefore the individual is
out of scope. This must be a true reflection of the reality of the relationships 13
between the parties involved and not simply a reflection of the contractual terms

[mudskipper]

The regulations are intended for temporary employees. For a typical IT contractor operating outside IR35, he won't be under the control of the client and therefore the regs don't apply anyway. If you read the gov regs it clearly states this with a very clear example of an IT contractor, which I would say is good description of an IT contractor outside of IR35.

That's the AWR which does not apply to contractors. This thread is discussing agencies requiring opt out of the conduct regs.