Identity Check

[cbr1000]

I presume you have rung the Home Office to check if some sort of communication on this matter is needed to avoid the loss of the contract?

What was the outcome of that call?

Or can they not confirm anything until there full process is complete.

She tried yesterday and was on hold for over an hour, then got disconnected because it was after 5.30. Well that is what we assumed why the call got disconnect.

She will try again today.

[NotAllThere]

Assuming your wife has actually been offered the contract and these checks are not prior to being submitted for possible selection, and assuming it's not just a bum-on-seat type of role... if it falls through you might want to contact the client directly. Thank them for the opportunity, and express your regrets that it fell through, find a nice way of explaining that it was all due to the intransigency of the agency, and tell them that you'd be interested in any futher opportunities.

Informing the client of the true reason for issues often has a magical effect on agencies. Usually hiring managers have as much love for agencies as contractors.

From the sound of it, the agent isn't particularly bothered whether your wife takes the contract or not. If he were, he'd find a way round it.

If you've any contacts in the civil service (not necessarily the Home Office even), you might want to have a quiet chat with them. When I had problems, I managed to have a nice conversation with the secretary of the department responsible for my issue - a couple of days later all was resolved.

[stek]

The OP has already said the passport is with the Home Office for an EEA2 application I think!

The issue is with these EEA permits is that they derive from EEA rights of the EEA national, and so COULD be construed as being unreliable, sine the if the OP left the country permanently, the non-EU national has to too.

Also the EEA2 permit is a separate card, not a vignette in the passport, and most employers look at in with disdain and you can't blame them it doesn't look right and employers expect to see a sticker with WORK IS OK on it.

It's a while since I dabbled in the visa/permit world, things may have changed but there was always a big fuss about not being able to prove a non-EEA nationals right to work since it's purely derived from the EEA National and no need for any proof under the EU Directive.

[tractor]

...

Sure I know checks need to be made, she can/has provided all and more documentation they have asked. But they won't budge on the passport, pity those people that don't have a passport!

Also I can't believe that this agency considers contractors of LTD's as employees.

With respect to the first part, anyone in her position without a passport would be here illegally, that is the point of the check. Whether the check is actually required by law or by this particular contract is, as has already been pointed out, moot.

To the second point, many agents are easily confused and take the path of least risk, even though what they require or demand is sometimes overboard or even absurd. You will not change this.

Also, it is not the agents fault that the passport is unavailable for other reasons.

[northernladuk]

To the second point, many agents are easily confused and take the path of least risk, even though what they require or demand is sometimes overboard or even absurd. You will not change this..

I think this is a tad strong. With the influx of foreign workers you could argue going the extra step above and beyond their requirements is being diligent. It only takes one slip up and a client ends up with an illegal worker on their site and it is curtains for that agency. Agents seem to get a bad rap for this kind of carry on but can't blame them. For the sake of my entire company I think it is right and proper they do this if there is any risk what-so-ever. How much work will an agency get that is known to put illegals on client site??

[tractor]

...

I think this is a tad strong. With the influx of foreign workers you could argue going the extra step above and beyond their requirements is being diligent. It only takes one slip up and a client ends up with an illegal worker on their site and it is curtains for that agency. Agents seem to get a bad rap for this kind of carry on but can't blame them. For the sake of my entire company I think it is right and proper they do this if there is any risk what-so-ever. How much work will an agency get that is known to put illegals on client site??

Possibly as much business as a bank retains even though it is known to be mis-selling products for decades and rigs inter bank lending rates? The answer is that clients will go to the cheapest regardless. Until it starts affecting their own rep or levels of business.

[northernladuk]

Possibly as much business as a bank retains even though it is known to be mis-selling products for decades and rigs inter bank lending rates? The answer is that clients will go to the cheapest regardless. Until it starts affecting their own rep or levels of business.

You mean like putting them at risk of £10k fine for having illegals on site?

[tractor]

You mean like putting them at risk of £10k fine for having illegals on site?

"Until it starts affecting their own rep or levels of business."

[eek]

You mean like putting them at risk of £10k fine for having illegals on site?

A £10k fine is only a risk if you are saving less than £10k by having that illegal on site.

[northernladuk]

A £10k fine is only a risk if you are saving less than £10k by having that illegal on site.

That is very true but I can't believe a decent sized company uses this as a valid approach to their business.