Originally posted by russell
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!
Thanks
Collapse
X
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by Scoobos View PostI have to add, whoever the forum poster is - I totally agree with this statement.WitchSockie,burnban him!Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
-
I would agree too, but the point is that the accountancy firm in question, NW, did not post private confidential information relating to one of its clients, in fact they went out of their way to help their client and only when their client started throwing toys out the pram threatening legal action based upon what was commonly seen as the idiots own fault did they then describe basic accounting practices that the client failed to understand even though they had emailed them in an idiots guide, nothing personal was posted simply defending their reputation from a trolling idiot.Originally posted by Scoobos View PostI have to add, whoever the forum poster is - I totally agree with this statement.The proud owner of 125 Xeno Geek PointsComment
-
+1. And most confidentiality clauses contain a twat exception sub-clause.Originally posted by chef View PostI would agree too, but the point is that the accountancy firm in question, NW, did not post private confidential information relating to one of its clients, in fact they went out of their way to help their client and only when their client started throwing toys out the pram threatening legal action based upon what was commonly seen as the idiots own fault did they then describe basic accounting practices that the client failed to understand even though they had emailed them in an idiots guide, nothing personal was posted simply defending their reputation from a trolling idiot.Comment
-
I expect we will see your name and address posted here soon then?Originally posted by Old Greg View Post+1. And most confidentiality clauses contain a twat exception sub-clause.Comment
-
Touchy!Originally posted by louie View PostI expect we will see your name and address posted here soon then?Comment
-
-
Comment
-
What issues? I got 99 problems and a sockie ain't one.Originally posted by Old Greg View PostAs a child? Is this where your issues stem from?Comment
-
How many of those 99 are are accountancy related?Originally posted by louie View PostWhat issues? I got 99 problems and a sockie ain't one.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
- Why contractors keep putting off their pension (and why I'm one of them) Aug 4 02:43
- HMRC loan charge settlement offer: 3 things to check before you sign Today 07:41
- HMRC standstill agreements extended to 72 months: why the term's doubled, and what to check before signing Jul 31 05:53
- Who owns the loans? Inside the mystery of the loan charge recall scandal Jul 30 06:20
- Umbrella company winding-up petitions in 2026: the practical guide for contractors Jul 29 05:29
- Payments on Account deadline: what contractors must do before July 31st — maybe for the final few times Jul 28 08:01
- Andy Burnham's first 100 days: five things contractors need from the new PM Jul 27 00:53
- Starmer vs Burnham on housing: What their rival plans mean for your contractor mortgage Jul 22 00:59
- Burnham's housing vision vs. Starmer's home-buying reforms: what it means for your contractor mortgage Jul 22 00:59
- In Khalil v Innovate Transport, a limited company contractor wasn’t a worker and was on £2.30 — not £230 Jul 21 07:58


Comment