Agency Percentage. Does it matter or not?

[craig1]

Solicitors provide a valuable service. When your client tries to screw you over or someone claims they own your house, it's pretty necessary. Poor example IMO.

As a law graduate (who had enough of an ethical sense to realise it was a shocking choice of career by the end of my 2nd year) I can tell you that the legal framework was written by lawyers in such a complicated way that you need lawyers to enforce it. Every new law is drafted by lawyers in such a loosely written way (you didn't think they were just incompetent did you?) that expensive lawyers can keep charging outrageous fees to "interpret" how you can work for/against the loophole that make top-billing contractors seem like minimum wage workers. Why do you think there is such resistance to changing the legal system to a plain English system where possible rather than antiquated latin or 100 word sentences?

Have a look through your last contract, if done by a lawyer somewhere along the line, and see how needlessly wordy it is. Then think how simple you could make it if you were in charge of the legal system rather than one that penalises based on who has the cheapest lawyer. The "legal notices" section of my website is just so pedantic and pathetic but it's needed in case I inadvertently cause some brain-dead idiot damage because they were too thick to actually read it properly.

In the real world, someone is clumsy and trips they're often sniggered at and will shuffle off embarrassed at being so clumsy. In the legal world, there must be a fault somewhere that allows someone to sue for damages. If that doesn't indicate a parasite legal society then nothing will.

[The Agents View]

Moi?

This is not a competition that you are not trying to "win". And baiting contractors on contractors boards about "lack of intelligence" is really not likely to help your cause - if you had an nano-ounce of intelligence maybe you'd understand that.

Oh I KNOW that you're not suggesting that I'm the one that does the baiting, when you created a thread specifically aimed at baiting me.

[DodgyAgent]

Oh I KNOW that you're not suggesting that I'm the one that does the baiting, when you created a thread specifically aimed at baiting me.

We are parasites and proud of it

[Spacecadet]

baiting contractors on contractors boards about "lack of intelligence" .

He only seemed to be baiting you, the rest of us contractors have just been watching on with mild amusement

[d000hg]

As a law graduate (who had enough of an ethical sense to realise it was a shocking choice of career by the end of my 2nd year) I can tell you that the legal framework was written by lawyers in such a complicated way that you need lawyers to enforce it. Every new law is drafted by lawyers in such a loosely written way (you didn't think they were just incompetent did you?) that expensive lawyers can keep charging outrageous fees to "interpret" how you can work for/against the loophole that make top-billing contractors seem like minimum wage workers. Why do you think there is such resistance to changing the legal system to a plain English system where possible rather than antiquated latin or 100 word sentences?

Maybe, but thinking without them everything would be simple enough we'd figure it all out using common sense and decency is very naive.
You make a simple law based on these things... someone finds a loophole. You fix it, they find another. And so on.

[craig1]

Maybe, but thinking without them everything would be simple enough we'd figure it all out using common sense and decency is very naive.
You make a simple law based on these things... someone finds a loophole. You fix it, they find another. And so on.

Oh I get what you're saying but the courts have interpreted things recently (last 20 years or so) in such a way that it actively encourages law suits. This then encourages lawyers to persuade clients to sue. This then creates a whole extra industry of lawyers to defend. Regardless of what clients gain in damages, the lawyers on both sides will often gain far more.

Last winter, our local GP surgery didn't grit their pathways because of legal advice given out that they ran the risk of being sued by someone if they slipped and the ice wasn't 100% cleared properly. There was one serious slip there that caused a broken hip. I believe they're now being sued by that woman for not gritting. Either way, the lawyers win. Grit and be sued, don't grit and be sued.

One change that would make the system far more robust: Change the civil burden of proof from "balance of probabilities" to the criminal "beyond reasonable doubt". In the example above, such a system would mean that if I make a good effort at gritting or clearing ice and someone still slips then that's their problem, they should have been more careful.

Look at the small claims court, I've used that a few times to recover debts, it's damnably simple and if the other side brings along a lawyer then they have to pay themselves meaning most don't bother. Judge decides on facts with very little of the dodgy case law coming into it. If I had to get a lawyer to look into the minutiae of a deal to claim a couple of thousand pounds then I'd think twice, especially if I had to pay a substantial amount just to get the lawyer to turn up in court. If they increased this system to debts up to £50,000 then I'd be far happier and it would mean that contractors could get satisfaction from dodgy agents delaying payment within a month if it finally ends up in court.

[d000hg]

Not disagreeing that it's over complex, disagreeing with the notion that solicitors as a professional are unnecessary even in an ideal setup.

[monobrow]

Oh I KNOW that you're not suggesting that I'm the one that does the baiting, when you created a thread specifically aimed at baiting me.

Yeah, well, not *this* thread though..........

my suggestion to you is not to take things so personally. So you work in an industry that feeds off the effort of others, so you have no transferrable skills apart from perhaps selling watches on the streets in bangkok. So what?, rejoice in the fact that you have been making 6 figures for the last 8/9 years and when it does stop - which it will, you will have loads of good memories and an outstanding HP agreement on your sportscar to remind you of the good old days!

A lot of intelligent, educated and highly skilled IT contractors were sold down the river years ago and we've adapated. your turn next.

[The Agents View]

Yeah, well, not *this* thread though..........

my suggestion to you is not to take things so personally. So you work in an industry that feeds off the effort of others, so you have no transferrable skills apart from perhaps selling watches on the streets in bangkok. So what?, rejoice in the fact that you have been making 6 figures for the last 8/9 years and when it does stop - which it will, you will have loads of good memories and an outstanding HP agreement on your sportscar to remind you of the good old days!

A lot of intelligent, educated and highly skilled IT contractors were sold down the river years ago and we've adapated. your turn next.

No transferrable skills? You're deluded.
HP on the sports car? Again - deluded - 6 figures = no outstanding HP.
When it stops? Is that the same day hell freezes over? or the day that the world stops spinning. Whilst there are mugs like you around, there will always be people who can find a way to make money out of it. We're coming out of recession - at the point that skills become more in demand, we will make money. I hope that when that happens, your agent bends you over and takes a 70% margin out of your rate.

[d000hg]

I hope that when that happens, your agent bends you over and takes a 70% margin out of your rate.

Based on his postings here, any agent who can get him a job deserves it.