Hi there,
First of all let me say hello, I just joined up today.
I have a problem with a client that is not paying my agency.
I have read a couple of threads on here which do address some of my questions, so I'll provide this information first.
My issue is that I think my agency failed to protect me by carrying out adequate checks on the client and also failed to communicate some vital information. Had they acted differently I would not have completed a full month of work and therefore been far less exposed.
Here's a brief summary:
Because the client is a new business they imposed a weekly invoice cycle to avoid exposure to the risk of unpaid work over a protracted length of time.
The problem here is they never informed of this in any written or spoken communications, in fact they sent me a welcome pack with a monthly time sheet.
Client has at least one court ruling (maybe even two) against him in an action bought by another recruitment agency for unpaid work
When establishing a relationship with a new client should the agency not conduct some type of legal search?
Client provided fake address
Turns out the address provided by the client is a cafe, he also provided another address to another developer he didn't pay and this one was a concrete wall. I'm assuming they didn't ask for a proof of address.
He may have provided a fake name
There's a possibility that he didn't provide his real name. If so no proof of ID was requested.
I'd just like to get an idea of where I might stand if I were to argue negligence by the agency when conducting their initial screening of the client.
Obviously I will try to resolve the matter with them first and then look at getting legal advice. I will be joining the PCG later to get initial advice.
Thanks in advance!
First of all let me say hello, I just joined up today.
I have a problem with a client that is not paying my agency.
I have read a couple of threads on here which do address some of my questions, so I'll provide this information first.
- I did sign the opt-out form
- My contract does state the agency will only pay if the client does
My issue is that I think my agency failed to protect me by carrying out adequate checks on the client and also failed to communicate some vital information. Had they acted differently I would not have completed a full month of work and therefore been far less exposed.
Here's a brief summary:
Because the client is a new business they imposed a weekly invoice cycle to avoid exposure to the risk of unpaid work over a protracted length of time.
The problem here is they never informed of this in any written or spoken communications, in fact they sent me a welcome pack with a monthly time sheet.
Client has at least one court ruling (maybe even two) against him in an action bought by another recruitment agency for unpaid work
When establishing a relationship with a new client should the agency not conduct some type of legal search?
Client provided fake address
Turns out the address provided by the client is a cafe, he also provided another address to another developer he didn't pay and this one was a concrete wall. I'm assuming they didn't ask for a proof of address.
He may have provided a fake name
There's a possibility that he didn't provide his real name. If so no proof of ID was requested.
I'd just like to get an idea of where I might stand if I were to argue negligence by the agency when conducting their initial screening of the client.
Obviously I will try to resolve the matter with them first and then look at getting legal advice. I will be joining the PCG later to get initial advice.
Thanks in advance!




Comment