Originally posted by d000hg
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Contract for service / Contract of service
Collapse
X
-
I think you're missing the point. This is a business to business contract between my business and the agency. The end client has no business enforcing clauses in a contract that doesn't concern them. Their contract is with the agency, not MyCo.Knock first as I might be balancing my chakras. -
Perhaps they are enforcing that contract thus forcing the agency to enforce certain clauses in theirs?Originally posted by suityou01 View PostI think you're missing the point. This is a business to business contract between my business and the agency. The end client has no business enforcing clauses in a contract that doesn't concern them. Their contract is with the agency, not MyCo.While you're waiting, read the free novel we sent you. It's a Spanish story about a guy named 'Manual.'Comment
-
It's entirely normal in the business world for a company to stipulate in a contract with a supplier that the supplier must abide by certain rules when contracting suppliers of its own.Originally posted by suityou01 View PostI think you're missing the point. This is a business to business contract between my business and the agency. The end client has no business enforcing clauses in a contract that doesn't concern them. Their contract is with the agency, not MyCo.
I don't see how this is missing the point. The point is that you have a contract on the table which fails IR35. Whose fault that is seems rather besides the point.Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
-
I'm all for risk mitigation in contracts, but there has to be negotiation.Originally posted by doodab View PostPerhaps they are enforcing that contract thus forcing the agency to enforce certain clauses in theirs?
They can give 2 weeks notice, I have to give 4. Why? It smacks of big company with big ego throwing their weight around.
It comes back to the plumber argument.
Dear City Plumbers,
Congratulations on Dave securing the role of chief radiator bleeder at Leviathon Egotrip and son.
Please could Dave report to his line manager at 9:30 on his first day.
Lunch is at 12 sharp, he has one hour.
Core hours are 9-5:30. Overtime must be agreed in writing by his line manager.
Dave must adhere to our strict plumbing practices, and we will monitor his work closely. We will supply all of his tools even if they are inferior.
Dave must bleed at least 5 radiators per day.
We will micro manage Dave as much as possible.
Btw he's not entitled to any sick pay, or holiday pay or any rights whatsoever. It's our policy to only hire the most accomodating of fawning lickspittles that do whatever we tell them to do. This way we get all the benefits of obedient temporary staff without any of the responsibility.
Yours faithfully
Sloping shouldered HR bod.Knock first as I might be balancing my chakras.Comment
-
Why are you still going back and forth on this? Even if you could convince the agency to change the terms in the contract, if they aren't reflected in the contract between agency/client then the changes are worthless.Originally posted by suityou01 View PostI think you're missing the point. This is a business to business contract between my business and the agency. The end client has no business enforcing clauses in a contract that doesn't concern them. Their contract is with the agency, not MyCo.
If the client has an expectation of personal service, then fine. That in itself is not an IR35 failure however if as you say the rest of the contract is poor and is probably a reflection of working practices that would put you inside, then work inside IR35 or toss the contract.
Edit: and I wouldn't worry about notice periods; they can effectively drop you at any time by simply telling you there is no more work for you to do. This is a good thing as far as IR35 is concerned as it means you have an element of business risk that an employee would not have.Comment
-
WTCPSOriginally posted by TheCyclingProgrammer View PostWhy are you still going back and forth on this? Even if you could convince the agency to change the terms in the contract, if they aren't reflected in the contract between agency/client then the changes are worthless.
If the client has an expectation of personal service, then fine. That in itself is not an IR35 failure however if as you say the rest of the contract is poor and is probably a reflection of working practices that would put you inside, then work inside IR35 or toss the contract.Knock first as I might be balancing my chakras.Comment
-
If they are large then IR35 doesn't come into play.Originally posted by MyUserName View PostBut I have seen business to business contracts with large consultancies that explicitly name people as expected representatives. It cannot be that cut and dried.
I'd question that the reduction is "slight"Originally posted by MyUserName View PostSurely the worst case scenario is to operated inside IR35 and count the (slightly reduced) money?Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI hadn't really understood this 'pwned' expression until I read DirtyDog's post.Comment
-
Quite. Certain wannabees on here just don't seem to get this extraordinarily simple premise though.Originally posted by DirtyDog View PostIf they are large then IR35 doesn't come into play.
I'd question that the reduction is "slight"Knock first as I might be balancing my chakras.Comment
-
More than the nothing you'll get on the bench.Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
-
I can only dream of eventually becoming a wannabee ...Originally posted by suityou01 View PostQuite. Certain wannabees on here just don't seem to get this extraordinarily simple premise though.Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Andrew Griffith MP says Tories would reform IR35 Oct 7 00:41
- New umbrella company JSL rules: a 2026 guide for contractors Oct 5 22:50
- Top 5 contractor compliance challenges, as 2025-26 nears Oct 3 08:53
- Joint and Several Liability ‘won’t retire HMRC's naughty list’ Oct 2 05:28
- What contractors can take from the Industria Umbrella Ltd case Sep 30 23:05
- Is ‘Open To Work’ on LinkedIn due an IR35 dropdown menu? Sep 30 05:57
- IR35: Control — updated for 2025-26 Sep 28 21:28
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 20:17
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 08:17
- ‘Subdued’ IT contractor jobs market took third tumble in a row in August Sep 25 08:07

Comment