Ltd Co. Growth Grant ~ 25K ~ Open Until Feb 2022 ~ Cheshire and Other Areas

[northernladuk]

If you can't figure out how to use money to grow your business (or offset a negative interruption), then you're really in no position to be running a business IMHO.

Says the guy that's been with umbrellas in the past
https://forums.contractoruk.com/busi...ml#post2633870

That has to rely on agencies to look for work for him
https://forums.contractoruk.com/busi...ur-behalf.html

And wants clauses to get paid when he's not working from clients
https://forums.contractoruk.com/busi...ing-covid.html

And are just a bum on seat contractor like the rest of us
https://forums.contractoruk.com/busi...ml#post2712955

I don't know what business you think you are running. You are just using the LTD loophole to put a bum on seat like the rest of us. If you are as vanilla as it comes as you state how can a grant help you expand your business?

[killingtime]

I'm sure you were but I'd love to see the business case. We are one man bums on seats. We can't meet any growth or employment critera unless the is a liberal dose of untruths in there.

I'm not going to hold your hand through a grant application. If you're running a business you should be able to do this.
You may be a bum on seat, but I'm not. I pivoted away from that just before IR35 hit.
You might feel the need to use liberal doses of untruths to achieve a positive outcome, but I don't. Nor did I.

You said yourself you found out the hard way so you got refused and then just applied again putting in what they told you and not what the reality is.

No I didn't. Please read what I actually wrote again. I said I found this out while in dialogue, as in I spoke to someone on the phone - before I made the application.

You've been inside for quite awhile I believe so that alone makes the whole process a mockery.

You're believing incorrectly.

So everytime someone posts one of these, we have a quick scan of the criteria, apply a bit of common sense and find out quickly it's not for us.

Yes, and you got that wrong as well. You quoted the acceptance criteria from the wrong grant in your post. For someone with a lot to say, you're making a lot of mistakes.

So what's your business plan for an inside contractor?

I'm not inside IR35.

Not that this actually matters for the grant I referred to in the 1st post. If you'd actually taken the time to read the acceptance criteria (you haven't) then you'd see IR35 isn't a factor. They don't care. You might think it matters, but the people who set the criteria think differently, and it's their opinion that matters.

[killingtime]

Says the guy that's been with umbrellas in the past
..
That has to rely on agencies to look for work for him
..
And wants clauses to get paid when he's not working from clients
..
And are just a bum on seat contractor like the rest of us
..
I don't know what business you think you are running. You are just using the LTD loophole to put a bum on seat like the rest of us. If you are as vanilla as it comes as you state how can a grant help you expand your business?

I don't see what the above has to do with making a grant application. You've obviously come on here to quarrel. If you don't like the grant then don't apply for it. It's your loss not mine.

Regards.

[malvolio]

So explain, if you've been operating a business unlike all us poor knowledge-based workers, for 22 years (i.e when IR35 hit) you now need a loan to grow your business and also explain how it will be feeding extra employment and hence income back into your community. Because that's what these grants are meant to provide.

As I said, because things are legal doesn't mean you can take advantage of them.

[northernladuk]

I don't see what the above has to do with making a grant application. You've obviously come on here to quarrel. If you don't like the grant then don't apply for it. It's your loss not mine.

Regards.

It's to do with the type of business you are that cannot make you eligible for a business growth, protection, improvement grant.

What exactly did you do with the money? It's pretty key we know what you do to help advise other readers if this is for them or not. If you are different to us and were truely eligible for this their shouldn't be any reason not to tell us... unless....

[jamesbrown]

I don’t see much difference between this and claiming JSA between contracts. It’s using public money that almost certainly isn’t intended for you and would most likely be better spent elsewhere. Also, it’s really an admission of failure (of your ability to secure funding from the private sector or to build sufficient funds from your contracting activities). Your OP alludes to your massaging the truth, if not outright lying, and none of that should be necessary (and you now seem to be walking that back). I’m sure you’re just trying to be helpful, but it’s not going to be appropriate for the vast majority of people here.

[killingtime]

So explain, if you've been operating a business unlike all us poor knowledge-based workers, for 22 years (i.e when IR35 hit) you now need a loan to grow your business and also explain how it will be feeding extra employment and hence income back into your community. Because that's what these grants are meant to provide.

As I said, because things are legal doesn't mean you can take advantage of them.

You're over thinking this malvolio. As I said further up this thread, all grants have qualifying criteria. You either meet the criteria or you don't. If you do then it entitles you to the money - legally. Anything else is a moral conundrum that only exists in your head. Nowhere else.

>>because things are legal doesn't mean you can take advantage of them

I think you'll find that in the real world this just isn't true. Corporation take advantage of this fact every day. If you want to believe otherwise - fine - but that's on you.

It's to do with the type of business you are that cannot make you eligible for a business growth, protection, improvement grant.

No. The point you don't seem able to accept northernladuk, is that your opinion on the subject of eligibility is absolutely worthless. You're not the person in charge of assessing grant applications. My local council has appointed someone who does this for a living, and I'll take their opinion over that of some random bloke on the internet any day. It's their opinion that matters, not yours, so there's no point in convincing you one way or the other.

It's a harsh reality, but true.

What exactly did you do with the money? It's pretty key we know what you do to help advise other readers if this is for them or not. If you are different to us and were truely eligible for this their shouldn't be any reason not to tell us... unless....

No, it's not key that you know, you only want to know. There's a difference. Expenditure only has to be in line with the rules of the grant - which the assessor agreed with in my case rendering your opinion on this matter superfluous unfortunately. Again, if you'd read the conditions of the grant I linked to, you'd see what the grant can be spent on (and not spent on as well). It's stated quite clearly.... Within these rules you can spend as you like. No approval from northernladuk required.....(sorry!)

[northernladuk]

No. The point you don't seem able to accept northernladuk, is that your opinion on the subject of eligibility is absolutely worthless. You're not the person in charge of assessing grant applications. My local council has appointed someone who does this for a living, and I'll take their opinion over that of some random bloke on the internet any day. It's their opinion that matters, not yours, so there's no point in convincing you one way or the other.

It's a harsh reality, but true.

I'd have to disagree. My opinion on eligibilty is better than that of someone fudging a business plan to suit their needs and some drone sorting paperwork. The bloke appointed to ticking the box is far more random than me I can assure you. I've spent years working in the public sector. You seem to think the person at the other end is somehow a professional in what they do which couldn't be further from the truth. I know what we are and what we do so there is no doubt my opinion trumps his. The fact you got it proves that.

And you'll see up the thread it's not just my opinion. It's that of every single poster in this thread, and that of anyone with a hole in their arse that has half a clue about contracting.

No, it's not key that you know, you only want to know. There's a difference. Expenditure only has to be in line with the rules of the grant - which the assessor agreed with in my case rendering your opinion on this matter superfluous unfortunately. Again, if you'd read the conditions of the grant I linked to, you'd see what the grant can be spent on (and not spent on as well). It's stated quite clearly.... Within these rules you can spend as you like. No approval from northernladuk required.....(sorry!)

It's key because everyone else in this tread is calling you out. No one believes you so you need to provide further evidence to salvage any credibility. It could be that you explain it to us and we all look like absolute chumps and owe you an apology. The fact you are still skirting around the issue speaks volumes. If this was all above board you'd have quite happily explained your business plan and your spending just to make us look like idiots... and to actually help people make the decision when the thread is full of us nae sayers.

If you don't want to do that then just point us in the direction of the criteria you had to meet instead?

But this is exactly how every thread on these business loans, grants go. No detail, skirting issues, no evidence.

[killingtime]

....OP alludes to your massaging the truth, if not outright lying, and none of that should be necessary (and you now seem to be walking that back). I’m sure you’re just trying to be helpful, but it’s not going to be appropriate for the vast majority of people here.

I'd love to know at what point I massaged the truth, or told outright lies.... Please insert the quote. I've not modified any of my posts.

The issue here is that we're dealing with differing rules of morality (everyone is different), and those rules are getting in the way of deciding whether a claim is valid or not.

It's the appointed grant assessor that decides if a claim is valid or not, and I've got news for you all; morality doesn't come into it. You either qualify or you don't. You might not like this, and it may even prevent you from making a claim, but that's on you. Each to his own.

[jamesbrown]

I'd love to know at what point I massaged the truth, or told outright lies....

Perhaps re-read that sentence again. I am not accusing you of lying.

Regarding your sales pitch (which wouldn't really be necessary for the businesses this is intended to support):

Big ticket CAPEX items seemed to attract less attention than the smaller stuff. The guidance I received from the operator stressed the importance of phrases like 'new revenue streams', 'business growth' and 'efficiency' in any written responses.

The above is massaging the truth for 99% of the contractors here and probably for you too, since you wrote your OP as a suggestion to others here.

My basic point is this: you shouldn't need emergency public funding for a one-person contracting business and you should expect to be roundly laughed at for suggesting that you do, which seems to be the consensus so far, but perhaps others will take a different view in due course.

Regardless, best of luck to you.