Opt in or out

[TykeMerc]

I have been working for the client for 1 month, now the first one months payment is due the agent has refused to pay unless I sign an opt out form. At no time until this point have I been asked to opt out, therefore I am opted in unless I agree otherwise. The contract was signed with me opted in by default.

Quite apart from the fact that they're acting illegally as an opt out is entirely voluntary refusal to pay invoices is a material breach of contract.
Disgraceful.

[Wanderer]

My agent has just refused to pay because I am opted in by default, I had the agent send an email stating that payment will be made in full once I signed the declaration to opt out. This is a month into the contract and because I am being held to ransom know if it comes to the crunch I am still opted in by default. It really shows the naievity of agency staff.

Utterly, utterly disgraceful, name and shame these idiots. More than a breach of contract, the agency are acting illegally by trying to bully you to into opting out. And escalate it straight away because the muppet you are dealing with obviously has no clue what they are doing.

Isn't it odd that the agencies always plead that they didn't understand the regulations. The regs seem pretty simple to us, if I were cynical I'd say that the agencies don't want to understand them so they don't have to abide by them.

[Boo]

If you're introduced to a client (e.g. they send your CV)

The word "introduced" in the regs means "introduced into the workforce" not "made aquainted with".

Boo

[Boo]

The contract was signed with me opted in by default.

Does the contract itself mention the opt-in/out status ?

Boo

[SueEllen]

The word "introduced" in the regs means "introduced into the workforce" not "made aquainted with".

Boo

Can you provide proof of that?

The regulations do not explain what "introduced" means and unless you provide a link to a high or supreme court case with a ruling showing exactly what they mean, then they can be interpreted to mean "made acquainted with".

[configman]

Does the contract itself mention the opt-in/out status ?

Boo

No mention of opt in or opt out in the contract.

[v8gaz]

This behaviour is illegal - name and shame. Are you a PCG member? If so, call Iain at the office and he will call them.

[Wanderer]

The word "introduced" in the regs means "introduced into the workforce" not "made aquainted with".

Does the contract itself mention the opt-in/out status ?

Boo, can you please have a read of the regulations. If you don't want to read it all then at least search for the bits which mention the opt out.

In particular,

1. There is no definition of the word "introduced" in the regulations and as such would have to be determined in court.
2. You cannot have an opt out included in your contract, the opt out must be done separately.

[configman]

This behaviour is illegal - name and shame. Are you a PCG member? If so, call Iain at the office and he will call them.

I know it is illegal but I am wise enough to get a paper trail to prove I was forced to opt out as a condition of payment long after the contract was agreed. Even if I opt out now I can prove it was forced on me therefore invalid. In the event I have payment problems from the agent ie the client doesn't pay them so they don't pay me I can legally force the agent to pay. As this is my last contract in the UK I am just making sure I get paid so I can close down the company and emigrate.

No I'm not a PCG member, I was and contributed a large sum to further appeal against IR35 which they didn't do and I lost that contribution.

[v8gaz]

No I'm not a PCG member, I was and contributed a large sum to further appeal against IR35 which they didn't do and I lost that contribution.

When was that then? How much is a 'large sum'? If you contributed cash on the expectation that PCG would p!ss it up the wall on an appeal that they had been advised that they would never win, then they did the right thing. It's different with things like S660 and Arctic, where we were advices that we had a chance as it was an incorrect application of an existing law - we happily spent half a million fighting that, and won. But there is no point spending hundreds of thousands of pounds of member's money to argue that you don't like a particular law. It will never work. Best to beef up the lobbying work, explain to individual politicians why it's wring and get them to commit to change the law by reasoned discussion, not student rants. PCG have become very good at getting the ears of those who matter over the last 2-3 years,a nd now it's beginning to pay off. It's not the shouty in-yer-face campaigns of yesteryear, but its a method that gets results. It's how the system works, like it or not.

So, given that it's your last contract and all, have you got the balls to name and shame them?