Computer People

[Bluebird]

Could be in line with a gig with these guys, and have heard "mixed" opinions about whether they are good, bad or IR35 unfriendly.

Can anybody supply ggod points / bad points from recent experience ?

Are they happy to alter contracts or is it standard and thats it ?

[TheFaQQer]

Could be in line with a gig with these guys, and have heard "mixed" opinions about whether they are good, bad or IR35 unfriendly.

Can anybody supply ggod points / bad points from recent experience ?

Are they happy to alter contracts or is it standard and thats it ?

They have standard clause in their contracts that says that you aren't allowed to slag them off. If you do, and the client terminates their contract with them, then you are liable for their loss.

Think that sums them up...

I'm currently with Ajilon (same co) and they are pretty hopeless. Client won't deal with anyone else though. They gave me the most IR35 unfriendly contract ever, because I opted into the agency regulations, and would only offer a better one if I opted out. I spent ages explaining that I couldn't opt out since I'd already interviewed, but they don't understand. Eventually I rewrote the contract and we agreed on it - once I'd threatened to walk.

Standard contract is IR35 friendly though, and by all accounts they do pay (monthly) - I've only just sent in my times for last month so am waiting until next Friday before payment. They are fairly rubbish on more mundane things - the wouldn't accept the contract I sent them because it was printed on headed paper; won't send out a signed contract (you need to get one from them, sign it, send it back, wait for a copy back); not very flexible; even more full of crap than your average agency.

I won't be back, but this gig is a goody and they are the only way in through the door.

[malvolio]

Could be in line with a gig with these guys, and have heard "mixed" opinions about whether they are good, bad or IR35 unfriendly.

Can anybody supply ggod points / bad points from recent experience ?

Are they happy to alter contracts or is it standard and thats it ?

Personally I avoid like the plague; they have nothing to do with contractors and are merely a commodity-based body shop with some seriously crap contractual terms and a mandatory self-billing system. But that's just me...

If you do go with them, get B&C to do the contract negotiation and hope you get the CP office that will make changes: some would rather not fill a role than make even minor changes, which is why I won't use them. Be prepared for a struggle though, and do not think for a minute that the IR35 clauses in your contract bear any relationship to the ones between CP and the end client...

[Burdock]

and do not think for a minute that the IR35 clauses in your contract bear any relationship to the ones between CP and the end client...

Mal, I've often wondered how the contractor can be held responsible for making sure any negotiated changes are reflected between the agent and client as well.

Can it cause problems in an IR35 investigation, and if so, how can we get the agent to modify both contracts?

[Zorba]

Could be in line with a gig with these guys, and have heard "mixed" opinions about whether they are good, bad or IR35 unfriendly.

Can anybody supply ggod points / bad points from recent experience ?

Are they happy to alter contracts or is it standard and thats it ?

They're generic slave-traders. Next.

But seriously, several people who have the misfortune to be working with me have regularly commented that CP love 'losing' expenses and any non-timesheet based invoices. They don't actually tell you though, they just don't pay. YMMV.

[malvolio]

Mal, I've often wondered how the contractor can be held responsible for making sure any negotiated changes are reflected between the agent and client as well.

Can it cause problems in an IR35 investigation, and if so, how can we get the agent to modify both contracts?

You can't, that's the whole problem: you are in effect bound to a contractual arrangement you are not party to, have no right to see and cannot influence. One of the judges in an earlier IR35 appeal case stated that this was a nonsense, but there's not a hell of lot you can do about it.

Most agencies are actually quite straight but not all.

[Burdock]

You can't, that's the whole problem: you are in effect bound to a contractual arrangement you are not party to, have no right to see and cannot influence. One of the judges in an earlier IR35 appeal case stated that this was a nonsense, but there's not a hell of lot you can do about it.

Most agencies are actually quite straight but not all.

But it's the contract that you have seen and influenced (i.e. between service provider and agent) that counts when the chips are down?! er, I hope?!?

[malvolio]

But it's the contract that you have seen and influenced (i.e. between service provider and agent) that counts when the chips are down?! er, I hope?!?

No. It's the total arrangement that counts, the whole contractual chain and the actual working conditions. If you have a clear contract between YourCo and your agency, but they have a contract to the Client for the supply of YouPersonally (which happens quite often), it makes HMRC's job a lot easier and your defence a lot harder. HMRC will only look at the contract clauses that support his case anyway and ignore the rest.

But then, it's only fair that you pay the right amount of tax, isn't it...

[Bluebird]

They're generic slave-traders. Next.

But seriously, several people who have the misfortune to be working with me have regularly commented that CP love 'losing' expenses and any non-timesheet based invoices. They don't actually tell you though, they just don't pay. YMMV.

isn't that against the EB regs ?

[malvolio]

isn't that against the EB regs ?

It's actually against the law, full stop. As is removing the VAT element from entirely legitimate business expenses, as they have done to me (but only once...)

Why do you think I won't use them?