Agency requiring use of the Number Mill prior to April for PS Client

[John Lane]

Agency have imposed use of number mill (without discussion) which offers Umbrella, Umbrella Lite, Accounting and new PROTECT service which says it takes liability off client, contractor and agent - seems to offer a set of questions (presumably to clarify working practices) before invoices are paid - defendant on answers, your company is able to continue as a PSC(their term) or must continue via umbrella. Extra cost is at least £25/week whichever route.

A quick google does not give any negative reputation results for the company - indeed first impressions are good/IPSE listed.

I have a general awareness of IR35 in the public sector from this forum, IPSE membership, webinars. Some factors on the contract/working practices suggest outside IR35 - provision of equipment/software/insurance (all required), working location and prioritisation of deliverables is my/my company choice, task is a 'transformation' rather than BAU. Some are indeterminate as was the result of an IR35test.co.uk test e.g. Right of substitution - it is in the contract but security clearance/shortness of contract mean it has not been exercised.

Current contract does not extend beyond the end of march with weekly invoicing, up to now. Information from agency/numbermill leaves it unclear as to whether that has changed now.

Naturally I wish to continue to the end of the month in order to not let the client down. My intention had been not to invoice for the last week to avoid any change of a payment after April 5. Now I am having the 'standard reaction to change' and am unsure of what to do.

I've seen the 'get out now' advice a lot of times on this forum and recognise it is valid. Options I am considering are:

- don't complete time-sheets until the end of the month - take a loss but keep the client happy in hope of future contracts.
- get some feedback about the number mill - this forum.
- answer the number mill questions and accept the extra costs/what effects it may have on status.
- ask IPSE for advice.
- something else/your suggestion?

JL

[SouthernManc78]

Why would you work for free for several weeks to keep the client happy?? You should bill for the days you work, yes you could occasionally do extra hours when required and not bill for them but several weeks just seems silly to me and like throwing money away.

I don't anything about this Number Mill but if your currently working through a limited company surely switching to an umbrella mid contract is going to be a pain??

As they're a PS client I would be unfortunately telling them you are unable to complete the contract due to forced changes being imposed on you by the agency which you cannot abide with.

[John Lane]

Thanks Southern Manc78

I appreciate the quick reply at this time of the morning!

Initially I am looking for some feedback on Protect - NumberMillNumberMill which seems to be a new service which may offer some benefit to the contractor company, agency and public service client.

JL

[DaveB]

I appreciate the quick reply at this time of the morning!

Initially I am looking for some feedback on Protect - NumberMillNumberMill which seems to be a new service which may offer some benefit to the contractor company, agency and public service client.

JL

Reading that page they simply seem to be offering a PAYE payroll solution for agencies that don't want to have to run it for themselves. It doesn't appear to say anything about how it would benefit the contractor involved or provide any form of insurance or protection from IR35 beyond the fact that you;d be paying full PAYE and NI and thus treated as firmly inside IR35.

Personally, I'd walk away and tell the PS client it's because of the IR 35 changes and the forced use of this "service" by the agency.

[eek]

Reading that page they simply seem to be offering a PAYE payroll solution for agencies that don't want to have to run it for themselves. It doesn't appear to say anything about how it would benefit the contractor involved or provide any form of insurance or protection from IR35 beyond the fact that you;d be paying full PAYE and NI and thus treated as firmly inside IR35.

Personally, I'd walk away and tell the PS client it's because of the IR 35 changes and the forced use of this "service" by the agency.

+1 IR35 (in the public sector) is the agencies problem, any reassurance should be being paid for from their margin...

Could you also pass the information on to IPSE I would be very interested in seeing their reaction....

[Andy Hallett]

I've heard of a few agencies who have completely outsourced this out. Basically it takes all the risk from them and allows them just to focus on recruitment. I'd imagine that if I didn't have a big organisation behind me I might do similar.

Think Numbermill was setup by Louise Rayner, who is both ex-Spring, ex-JSA and very credible.

[John Lane]

-

Think Numbermill was setup by Louise Rayner, who is both ex-Spring, ex-JSA and very credible.

That was my impression as well - but implementation from agency could be described as 'just do it'. This may be a good choice - but I would have hoped for a measure of discussion and explanation - also..... there is no choice..... which might skirt competition law a bit?

I don't want to make a fuss - but not happy so far.

JL

[teapot418]

I can't see NumberMill in the IPSE supplier directory - might be worth giving them a call to check

https://www.ipse.co.uk/supplier-directory

[eek]

I can't see NumberMill in the IPSE supplier directory - might be worth giving them a call to check

https://www.ipse.co.uk/supplier-directory

They appear on https://www.ipse.co.uk/supplier-dire...6#searchanchor

[teapot418]

They appear on https://www.ipse.co.uk/supplier-dire...6#searchanchor

Ta. Not sure why my search didn't turn them up.