Contract for service / Contract of service

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

You still don't see this as a no-brainer.

Without the contract in front of me, I really don't know. Only you can answer the question as to how much you *need* to take this contract.

If you're not desperate for work and think you can secure a better contract, then by all means toss it. If you are desperate for work and don't want to be broke, then you can either a) take your chances and operate outside IR35 or b) cut your losses and work inside IR35, try and negotiate a slight rate increase.

You should still get a PCG+ membership regardless IMO.

[suityou01]

Without the contract in front of me, I really don't know. Only you can answer the question as to how much you *need* to take this contract.

If you're not desperate for work and think you can secure a better contract, then by all means toss it.

You should still get a PCG+ membership regardless IMO.

But you do know that QDos failed it, heavily. You do know that the agency won't budge. And you do know that this is in regard to one of the IR35 tests.

You know enough to know that irrespective of how much I may or may not need the contract, to accept the contract as is would be folly, and to hope that I can get insurance that would pay out is absolutely nuts.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

But you do know that QDos failed it, heavily. You do know that the agency won't budge. And you do know that this is in regard to one of the IR35 tests.

You know enough to know that irrespective of how much I may or may not need the contract, to accept the contract as is would be folly, and to hope that I can get insurance that would pay out is absolutely nuts.

So what do you want to hear? You appear to have enough information in front of you to decide what to do. I don't think the fact that QDOS failed it would preclude you from getting PCG+ cover. It might cause a problem getting cover from QDOS/AbbeyTax etc.

You still have the option to take the contract as is and treat yourself as IR35 caught, regardless. Then you have absolutely nothing to worry about.

[Qdos Contractor]

You may have done this already, but it would be worth having another chat with whichever consultant reviewed your contract. Remember we can speak to the agency directly and it might be that we've dealt with them in the past.

We can also check over any changes that have already been made; they might have pushed it over the line.

[d000hg]

Not that I've seen. I would expect the name of a designated representative to be mentioned in a schedule which is attached to the contract terms and conditions, but I don't think I've ever seen it in the contract itself.

YMMV.

Given the Schedule extends/overrides the Contract, does that really make a difference? You are still contracting a named individual.

Anyone know an official answer to this one?

[suityou01]

You may have done this already, but it would be worth having another chat with whichever consultant reviewed your contract. Remember we can speak to the agency directly and it might be that we've dealt with them in the past.

We can also check over any changes that have already been made; they might have pushed it over the line.

Hi,

I've not done this. The current roadblock is that the client is enforcing quite a few of the failed clauses and won't budge. In effect this means there are 1000s of contractors all sitting on an IR35 failed contract. If Hector cottens on, this could be pretty big.

Thanks

[suityou01]

Given the Schedule extends/overrides the Contract, does that really make a difference? You are still contracting a named individual.

Anyone know an official answer to this one?

Officially you are correct. IANAL, but it seems pretty clear to me when the main contract wording stipulates the schedule forms part of the contract, then it's part of the contract.

If it says representitive = Suity, then that explicitly names me.

[DirtyDog]

Hi,

I've not done this. The current roadblock is that the client is enforcing quite a few of the failed clauses and won't budge. In effect this means there are 1000s of contractors all sitting on an IR35 failed contract. If Hector cottens on, this could be pretty big.

Thanks

Look on the bright side - if you ever get an enquiry, see if you can point them to this shower where the potential for a decent gain is big

[MyUserName]

Officially you are correct. IANAL, but it seems pretty clear to me when the main contract wording stipulates the schedule forms part of the contract, then it's part of the contract.

If it says representitive = Suity, then that explicitly names me.

But I have seen business to business contracts with large consultancies that explicitly name people as expected representatives. It cannot be that cut and dried.

Surely the worst case scenario is to operated inside IR35 and count the (slightly reduced) money?

[d000hg]

Hi,

I've not done this. The current roadblock is that the client is enforcing quite a few of the failed clauses and won't budge. In effect this means there are 1000s of contractors all sitting on an IR35 failed contract. If Hector cottens on, this could be pretty big.

Thanks

Isn't the rate good enough that just paying IR35 would still leave a decent take-home? IIRC you said it was £50/day more than you were getting before, which was already a fairly healthy rate?