When the client is not the client

[northernladuk]

Would that trump Agency regs though?

Erm, I'll probably get this wrong and I should have searched but I thought if you had the correct opt status then the clause is invalid, like the handcuff clause for example. I'd have to check that though.

EDIT : OK I folded and did a search.

“Should Andrew not opt out of the conduct regs before he is introduced to the end-client, then the conduct regs will apply, and will override anything inconsistent in the contract,” says Sinclair. “Under the terms of the legislation, Andrew’s friend may not delay paying him until the end client pays. If his friend fails to pay, the terms of the late payment act may also apply.

EDIT 2 : Agents are so bad at understanding the opt in/out situation it isn't a golden bullet. You are going to be in for a fight if they don't want to pay. I don't believe there is any case law over this yet. Hopefully that's because they are held bang to rights and it never goes that far. Leaving the term in and relying on your opt in status isn't ideal.

[eek]

Erm, I'll probably get this wrong and I should have searched but I thought if you had the correct opt status then the clause is invalid, like the handcuff clause for example. I'd have to check that though.

EDIT : OK I folded and did a search.



EDIT 2 : Agents are so bad at understanding the opt in/out situation it isn't a golden bullet. You are going to be in for a fight if they don't want to pay. I don't believe there is any case law over this yet. Hopefully that's because they are held bang to rights and it never goes that far. Leaving the term in and relying on your opt in status isn't ideal.

My guess is that a solicitor's letter stating that the clause was not been correctly implemented (prove otherwise) results in most agencies paying up....

I also suspect that not many people actually have problems that end up with the client not paying and those that do end up in that position are so bad that they don't bother chasing...

[northernladuk]

I'd agree with both of those.

[SimonMac]

My guess is that a solicitor's letter stating that the clause was not been correctly implemented (prove otherwise) results in most agencies paying up....

I also suspect that not many people actually have problems that end up with the client not paying and those that do end up in that position are so bad that they don't bother chasing...

If the end client was a multi billion pound constituent of the FTSE 100 I would say there is no problem too great that couldn't be sorted out, but seeing as its a 18 month old "consultancy" with more liabilities than assets I think I am right to be a little more cautious.

Just send an email back saying

Obviously this adds a small extra degree of risk given the relatively young age of the company, this means I will not be opting out of the The Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Business Regulations 2003

If it put's their hackles up I know it could be problematic and will continue the other irons in the fire still, if they brush it off as no worries I am happy to continue

[eek]

If the end client was a multi billion pound constituent of the FTSE 100 I would say there is no problem too great that couldn't be sorted out, but seeing as its a 18 month old "consultancy" with more liabilities than assets I think I am right to be a little more cautious.

Just send an email back saying



If it put's their hackles up I know it could be problematic and will continue the other irons in the fire still, if they brush it off as no worries I am happy to continue

You probably were not opted out anyway - I've never seen an agency do it correctly....

[SimonMac]

You probably were not opted out anyway - I've never seen an agency do it correctly....

I know I wasn't, just wanted to put it in an email that can be referred to later #JustInCase

[eek]

I know I wasn't, just wanted to put it in an email that can be referred to later #JustInCase

Nope I think now they will just bin you off... All you can do is wait and see....

[GB9]

From what I understand, you are inside the agency regs. You have been introduced, interviewed, offered. The only thing you haven't done is have a quickie with the CEO. Asking you to opt out now should be irrelevant.

[MrMarkyMark]

From what I understand, you are inside the agency regs. You have been introduced, interviewed, offered. The only thing you haven't done is have a quickie with the CEO. Asking you to opt out now should be irrelevant.

Hes just a bit shy

Agree on your other points, however.

[SimonMac]

Nope I think now they will just bin you off... All you can do is wait and see....

See my post earlier!