Opt In/Out again !!!!!!!

[rootsnall]

If you can prove that you were introduced to the client before you signed the opt out notice, then you would win the argument.

Might be worth making sure you keep the emails / communications from the EB that indicate when you were introduced to the client, and when you were asked to opt out, just in case.

I doubt you would but !?

Just about to ring and back down One of these days !

[TheFaQQer]

I doubt you would but !?

Just about to ring and back down One of these days !

I guess it depends on how much you want / need the gig.

I started a thread about it last year - I opted in and insisted on opting in, and it nearly cost me the gig. Which would have been at least 12 months work.

Sometimes, it's just not worth it - your case is even better, though. The agency will think that you are opted out, so give you a better contract etc. whereas in reality you are opted in (no matter what you do or say!) so if need be you have the protection there and can go direct after 8 weeks from end of contract....

[Turion]

Yes I am trying to 'use the law', it is in my interest to do so, or should I say it is in my Ltd Co's interest. I'm a real business you know !

You're acting like an employee. A crooked one at that. You think that you can fool another business by trying to con them and giving the 'psst - but, what if I pretend to opt out, but am really opted in cos they introduced me first' lark.

If you want the job and this protection, get on their payrole like a good employee should. Otherwise you don't gain anything - only increased IR35 risk. No agency will pay you without timesheets. As for using this to go direct later, dream on mate. The quicker the PCG closes this loophole the better.

[SueEllen]

You're acting like an employee. A crooked one at that. You think that you can fool another business by trying to con them and giving the 'psst - but, what if I pretend to opt out, but am really opted in cos they introduced me first' lark.

He's not conning anyone.

The agency is actually at fault for not understanding the law.

If the agency acts properly it doesn't matter whether the contractor is opted in or out.

If you want the job and this protection, get on their payrole like a good employee should. Otherwise you don't gain anything - only increased IR35 risk. No agency will pay you without timesheets. As for using this to go direct later, dream on mate. The quicker the PCG closes this loophole the better.

This is different from being an employee. I suggest you read up on the law and the issues around it yourself.

[oracleslave]

He's not conning anyone.

The agency is actually at fault for not understanding the law.

If the agency acts properly it doesn't matter whether the contractor is opted in or out.



This is different from being an employee. I suggest you read up on the law and the issues around it yourself.

WSS.

Your opinions/advice is wrong.

[TheFaQQer]

You're acting like an employee. A crooked one at that. You think that you can fool another business by trying to con them and giving the 'psst - but, what if I pretend to opt out, but am really opted in cos they introduced me first' lark.

If you want the job and this protection, get on their payrole like a good employee should. Otherwise you don't gain anything - only increased IR35 risk. No agency will pay you without timesheets. As for using this to go direct later, dream on mate. The quicker the PCG closes this loophole the better.

How on Earth do you conclude that rootsnall is acting like a crooked employee??

The EB don't understand the law, and are trying to pressurize him into accepting something that he cannot do, even if you wants to!

I'll repeat that last bit for the hard of braincells - EVEN IF ROOTSNALL WANTS TO OPT OUT, HE CANNOT DO SO NOW THAT HE HAS MET THE CLIENT!!!!!!!!

Second point - why do you think that he won't be able to go direct? I'm intrigued about how you come to this conclusion. I've done it before (or maybe I was dreaming that role) based on waiting 8 weeks after the contract finished, so I'll be interested to find out why you think that he is dreaming.

Thirdly - it's not for the PCG to close loopholes. That would be the job of the legislature, not a lobbying organization.

Finally, payroll

[The Lone Gunman]

Roots: You are in no position to opt out and you should point that out to the EB.
Turion: Please shut up. Your advice/opinion is wrong. This is not the place to debate your opinion.

According to the PCG and others in or out is a marginal pointer to your IR35 status.
We have argued it to death here.
Opted in means the EB has to pay whether client has paid or not and you can go direct 8 weeks after the end of contract or 12 weeks after start depending which is shorter (working from memory there, you check the figures).

My opinion: This bit is IR35 significant.
The EB is required to state whether the contract is "of service" or "for services.

Down side is the EB will kick up a fuss about proving your ID (it is not that bad).

DONT CAVE IN ROOTS. Send them an email pointing out that they are too late even if you opt out now.

[Ardesco]

The only way Opting in can be an IR35 pointer is if the agency refuses to provide you with an IR35 compliant contract if you don't opt out (which many do).

This is border line legal IMHO, they are not refusing you the role because that would be breaking the law, but they are making it a much less profitable option unless you opt out.

The regulations have been written to try and prevent this sort of behaviour (hence why they are not allowed to refuse you the job if you opt in) but Nu Liemore bungling means that the IR35 issues turns it into an area where bargaining occurs and many people are forced into not taking a contract unless they opt out because it is not profitable for them to do so.

This is clearly against the intentions of the regulations and I would like to see PCG taking some agencies to court in a test case, but I think it is unlikely to happen.

As for Turion, stop talking out of your ass. You clearly have no idea about the law surrounding the legislation.

[Turion]

No I won't shut up Mr Employee Rights Seeker

I've been in the game 9 years. You lot just quote some fuzzy employment law no-one except you disguised permies believe in. The PCG tried and partially succeeded in rolling back this legislation that would have destroyed our industry as we know it. We all would be on restrictive (worse than IR35) Payroll contracts now. That's why they objected, and you lot are f%cking things up by being dishonest, and trying to pick holes in the rules. Any judge in court will see right through you.

You have no more chance of going direct now than you did. Agencies have T & C 's with the client you know. If you chose to be opted in you will get your employment rights as needed by agency employees. Don't spread your contagion to real contractors. No agency will pay you unless it is authorised by the client ie timesheets.

[The Lone Gunman]

No I won't shut up Mr Employee Rights Seeker
<snip> timesheets.

Go away Denny, you are not fooling anyone.
It is not us that is trying to twist the legislation here pal, we have to work to whatever it says.
As a responsible business man it is my duty to understand and work within the law. Even when it is an utter shambles I have to do my best to apply it.
To that end I have read it and read it and read. I have then had my legal rep read it and explain it back to me.

I think I have an idea and I am working to that, and that is what I will explain should I get IR35ed.

If I am opted in because some agent didnt do his job properly then I am opted in and you can spout and pontificate all you like, I am still opted in.
I will then do my damnedest to operate as I see fit and will require the agent to confirm the situation. Should the agent lie to me then they will face legal action should any be required.

Now as an expert could you explain which section and para og said legislation puts me inside IR35 or makes me an employee of my client or agent? (note: The legislation recognises the ltd company as a legal entity).
Keep it short.