Signed Contract - Project cancelled after startdate, any rights?

[northernladuk]

I understand the MOO clause (well sort of), however as the agency was, allegedly, aware that the contract was cancelled a month before the contractor found out about it, can't the contractor stipulate that the agency restricted the contractor's ability to trade by virtue that they held him to a contract that was effectively null and void?

But they didn't restrict the contractors ability to trade. We all know you shouldn't stop looking and it is the contractors choice not to. This is a mistake on the contractors side not the agent restricting trade. Granted it is an unfair thing of the agent to do but if you are talking voiding contracts you have to be black and white.

[pmeswani]

But they didn't restrict the contractors ability to trade. We all know you shouldn't stop looking and it is the contractors choice not to. This is a mistake on the contractors side not the agent restricting trade. Granted it is an unfair thing of the agent to do but if you are talking voiding contracts you have to be black and white.

I see your point, but if a contract has been signed between contractor and agent, doesn't that imply that until the contract has been terminated by either party, the contractor is committed to the given contract?

But on this occassion, can't it be argued that the agency effectively misled the contractor into believing that the project existed when it didn't?

[northernladuk]

I see your point, but if a contract has been signed between contractor and agent, doesn't that imply that until the contract has been terminated by either party, the contractor is committed to the given contract?

But on this occassion, can't it be argued that the agency effectively misled the contractor into believing that the project existed when it didn't?

That is true. I have no argument to that. Not so sure mislead is the right word as the agency loses out as well but that is arguable.

[pmeswani]

That is true. I have no argument to that. Not so sure mislead is the right word as the agency loses out as well but that is arguable.

I agree that intent has to be proven, but assuming that the agency knew a few weeks before the contractor knew, why would the agency imply to the contractor that the contract has been delayed by a number of weeks? Why not just tell the contractor that the current contract has been terminated and that they are working hard with the client to see what possibilities existed within clientco to see if the contractor could be placed elsewhere?

[northernladuk]

I agree that intent has to be proven, but assuming that the agency knew a few weeks before the contractor knew, why would the agency imply to the contractor that the contract has been delayed by a number of weeks? Why not just tell the contractor that the current contract has been terminated and that they are working hard with the client to see what possibilities existed within clientco to see if the contractor could be placed elsewhere?

If there is even a sniff that this might start up again and the agent will get paid I would expect them to string the poor bugger on until the last possible minute. There is no benefit (or fall out unfortuantely) to the agency to bin him early. If the project gets last minute approval the original contractor is gone and the agent loses work. There needs to be some risk placed on the agent for this kind of underhand game to stop it happening but I don't know what it is and it certainly won't happen.

None of this is fair to anyone but a cut throat agent.

[pmeswani]

If there is even a sniff that this might start up again and the agent will get paid I would expect them to string the poor bugger on until the last possible minute. There is no benefit (or fall out unfortuantely) to the agency to bin him early. If the project gets last minute approval the original contractor is gone and the agent loses work. There needs to be some risk placed on the agent for this kind of underhand game to stop it happening but I don't know what it is and it certainly won't happen.

None of this is fair to anyone but a cut throat agent.

Where's DA when you need him.

[psychocandy]

Bottom line is agencies are lying dogs who will only look after themselves.

NLUK is right. Dont ask them - if you're going to do it, do it. Dont worry about upsetting them either.

You could post pics on youtube of you spit roasting their grandmother in a 10-man gang bang one week but it'd be forgotten about if they could make some money out by getting you a contract the next week...

If it was me, I'd invoice and see what happens. Never know. Might take them court too if there was any worth in it just to wind them up.

[mos]

If there is even a sniff that this might start up again and the agent will get paid I would expect them to string the poor bugger on until the last possible minute. There needs to be some risk placed on the agent for this kind of underhand game to stop it happening but I don't know what it is and it certainly won't happen.

In the last year it is getting far more prevalent especially with younger agents (although these youngsters are probably only the puppets of their principals).

Btw. Can you imagine their rage if the candidate secured better job and dropped their precious contract?

[TestMangler]

I had a contract through McGregor Boyle a few years ago, that was delayed one week, then cancelled. I got one week's fees. MGB also got one week's fees. I'd guess if MGB hadn't got any notice payment, then neither would I.

Do not ask your agency if there's "any chance", all meek and mild. They'll just tell you "no". Invoice them for the notice period, and see what they say. Initially, they'll probably refuse, but then you can ask them to justify their refusal - and ask them if they've received notice payment, which is a possibility. Do read your contract carefully to see if it supports the idea that you'll get paid a notice period.

If you don't ask, you most certainly won't get. Chances are you won't get anyway, but it's worth a try. Be prepared to negotiate.

Wot he said. People on here continually tell contractors to act like a business and then advise them to roll over as 'thats contracting'. What a load of tulip advice. Try buying a new set of windows for your house then cancel them two days before installation and see how you get on.

A 'real' business would expect to be compensated based on the terms of the agreement.

[TestMangler]

There is a couple of freebies thrown in as well. Stress, time, effort, potential costs. Life isn't just about money.

Don't recall the OP asking if it would stress him out. Rolling over is not the solution. As someone else said, you don't politely ask the agent to compensate you. You demand it using the correct legal procedures. That's what a 'business' would do. You disguised employees should carry on rolling over.