Sticking out a boring contract

[TheFaQQer]

4. If reality intervenes and you finish earlier than expected, so putting you outside the 24 month rule, you can back claim the expenses, assuming of course your next gig doesn't fail the "same location" test.

Really? I thought you couldn't.

[Old Greg]

Really? I thought you couldn't.

+1

[TheFaQQer]

But London is a big place and I would not automatically consider "in London" to be all the same for the purposes of the 24 hour rule. If you can show that your overall journey or the cost is significantly different, then that is all you need.

I didn't think cost came into it?

If it does, then what prevents you catching a bus / tube to one contract, and getting a limo to the next one next door?

[eek]

I didn't think cost came into it?

If it does, then what prevents you catching a bus / tube to one contract, and getting a limo to the next one next door?

It doesn't. The question is what would HMRC regard as the same location. My inkling is that they go for broad areas, the broader the better...

[Old Greg]

I didn't think cost came into it?

If it does, then what prevents you catching a bus / tube to one contract, and getting a limo to the next one next door?

From memory, cost is a factor, but I think you'd have to demonstrate that you hadn't changed the cost for the purposes of getting round the rule.

I am claiming on a somewhat borderline basis at a separate London location (6 miles away) after 23 months at a previous one.

The second location requires an entirely different route and cheaper cost for a 100 mile journey to a destination 6 miles from the original workplace. We have been round the houses with this one.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

I didn't think cost came into it?

EIM32280 - Travel expenses: travel for necessary attendance: safeguards against abuse: changes to a workplace

Sometimes it may be difficult to decide whether a change of workplace should be recognised. The basic principle is that a change in the location or the boundaries of a workplace will be recognised as a change of workplace where the change has a substantial effect on:

the journey an employee has to make to get to work and, in particular,
the cost of that journey.

If it does, then what prevents you catching a bus / tube to one contract, and getting a limo to the next one next door?

Nothing but common sense and the fact that if investigated then no doubt HMRC would happily point out that its an artificial arrangement and reject your claim.

[eek]

From memory, cost is a factor, but I think you'd have to demonstrate that you hadn't changed the cost for the purposes of getting round the rule.

I am claiming on a somewhat borderline basis at a separate London location (6 miles away) after 23 months at a previous one.

The second location requires an entirely different route and cheaper cost for a 100 mile journey to a destination 6 miles from the original workplace. We have been round the houses with this one.

But in your case because of the hassle those 6 miles would cause I think we both agreed it was worth at least trying it on.

Arguing about getting from Southend via Fenchurch Street to Victoria rather than Barking would be rather harder....

[northernladuk]

We are missing a pretty salient point... They use the term 'substantially'. Obviously to some substantially means from £5 to £15 on a fare but some common has to be applied. Although a large percentage hike £10 is NOT a substantial amount of money...

I think Eek's comment was quite correct when thinking about the spirit of the rule so always have to take that in to account. Would you move for the gig. This then has a bearing on what HMRC would count as substantial miles and substantial cost. You would not move if your gig cost you £10 a day more.

[Old Greg]

We are missing a pretty salient point... They use the term 'substantially'. Obviously to some substantially means from £5 to £15 on a fare but some common has to be applied. Although a large percentage hike £10 is NOT a substantial amount of money...

I think Eek's comment was quite correct when thinking about the spirit of the rule so always have to take that in to account. Would you move for the gig. This then has a bearing on what HMRC would count as substantial miles and substantial cost. You would not move if your gig cost you £10 a day more.

Do you have a link to substantiate this position?

[eek]

Do you have a link to substantiate this position?

Which bit?