Reply to: Bailing on contract early - payment with no signed timesheet

[tractor]

...

But in practice will you get it? i.e. will they just try it on but as soon as you start being serious they'll cough up?

In practice? All situations and circumstances are slightly different, including the amount and level of evidence of completion that you collate.

You have all the permutations, just make a decision and deal with the consequences.

At the end of the day, your OP indicates that you will have one week at risk. In the big scheme of things that might hurt but it doesn't seem hugely significant.

[paulinefowlersgrowler]

But in practice will you get it? i.e. will they just try it on but as soon as you start being serious they'll cough up?

[kal]

Of course the agency should pay you if you've done the work and then pursue you through the legal system for redress if you breaching your contractual obligations has caused them financial loss but in practice they will just withhold (illegally I might add) your final payment as compensation and invite you to take them to court to get it. The two are quite distinct but until we have punitive measures in place (say the agency having to pay 200% of the final invoice if they withhold it in error) they will continue to do this.

[Andy Hallett]

Sorry to sound dumb, but how does that work exactly?

How can agency regulations apply when there is no agency?

I am the dumb one, I meant to write they do not apply.

[sal]

Already under active discussion in http://forums.contractoruk.com/busin...ce-period.html

Basically if you breach your contract by not giving the agreed notice, why do you expect the agency will act any differently and not withhold payment?

[kingcook]

The Agency Regulations do apply if your are direct.

Sorry to sound dumb, but how does that work exactly?

How can agency regulations apply when there is no agency?

[Wanderer]

If you bail out earlier they are entitled to damages.

Typically what the agency will try to do is to not pay you what they owe, claiming that their damages (co-incidentally) amount to the exact amount that they owe you.

However, if you don't opt out then they are legally obliged to pay you what they owe for time worked (even if the client refuses to sign timesheets or pay them) and they must pay this regardless of what they claim that you owe them in damages.

They can then demand that your company pays them back for damages incurred but they won't get anywhere because the contractor company can just refuse to pay, drag the case out with arguments and then close the company so the agency will get nothing (just as the agency did to ASB).

[ASB]

In the absence of any specific remedy in the contract they have to be able to quantify what those damages may be.

strictly they cannot withhold outstanding invoices as a lien against those potential damages. However if they do, what then.? The only way forward is for the op to launch their own action. This may cause a counter claim or a seperate action.

I would expect the op claim to have a decent chance of sucess. But whether it would be worth the effort and costs and risks is a different matter.

The problem with all these disputes is it boils down to:-

"You cant do that"
"We just did, your move"

In 1987 I left a contract in belgium due to a convoluted argument between the belgian subsidurary and the uk subsiduary which had large elements of control over it.

none of the invoices got paid so I went legal. So did they. But I knew they were on stick ground with their claim.

eventually a few thousand and 2 years later it ended up in court. I won my case completely, they lost theirs completely.

I never got a penny though since the agency immediately ceased trading. The paid most of their other debts though.

even winning can become pyrrhic.

[BlasterBates]

If you bail out earlier they are entitled to damages.

This means if you were to immediately leave site you could be sued. If you stay a week then the damages will be less.

Whatever you decide they will be obliged to pay you, but they will be entitled to damages for breach of contract.

In the end you could end up in some messy dispute, where they withhold payment.

Personally I would advise seeing the contract through, and look for something a renewal time, as it wouldn't be worth the hassle. The new contract might look good, but could equally turn out to be a disappointment. They often do.

[ASB]

Fair point. But trying not to antagonise anyone....

Few weeks left now and Im being chased for something else. No intention of renewing where I am so dont want to miss out on this new one.

In an ideal world you would be able to negotiate a mutually agreeable change to manage your exit. In the absence of this all you can really do is hope for the best and run the risk of having to cope with the negative consequences - should they arise.

[paulinefowlersgrowler]

Fair point. But trying not to antagonise anyone....

Few weeks left now and Im being chased for something else. No intention of renewing where I am so dont want to miss out on this new one.

[ASB]

My situation is via agency and not opted out. But surely no timesheet means, in effect, I have no proof I was there.

I understand that if I breach contract by leaving early they would have an issue. But surely this does not mean they can automatically withhold payment? Its two separate issues - pay me as per contract, and if you see fit, take me to court for leaving early

You are right. Strictly is is two seperate issues.

All you are evidencing is that the client may choose to behave in exactly the same way as you - I.e. ignore the contract and say "sue me".

You are simply bleating "foul".

You have made the choice to breach; yet you expect the client to behave with total honour.

[Contreras]

My situation is via agency and not opted out. But surely no timesheet means, in effect, I have no proof I was there.

I understand that if I breach contract by leaving early they would have an issue. But surely this does not mean they can automatically withhold payment? Its two separate issues - pay me as per contract, and if you see fit, take me to court for leaving early

It seems that you are planning to deliberately antagonise the local manager or other people you have "issues" with.

Suggestion: keep a cool head, avoid conflicts in the last week, and effect a useful *documented* handover of any work.

As to the question - If via agency and not opted out then yes it is two separate issues (although the agency might like to think otherwise).

Starting position can be simply that you *were* on site and that it's up to the agent to establish that with the client. Saying "oh but there's no timesheet" is not good enough. Here's the invoice, pay up now, or pay up later with costs + interest.

Proof? Will the client deny, or have no knowledge, that you attended on-site? I somehow doubt it, when push comes to shove.

* see how the bolded bits tie up nicely?

[paulinefowlersgrowler]

Take a selfie at the client site every day for the last week to prove that you were in there at 09:00 and 17:00 every day? Ahh, there must be 101 ways to prove that you worked that week. In any case, just do it and try to get your timesheet signed off.

As Contreras says, if you don't opt out they they are legally obliged to pay you even if you can't produce a timesheet though they may delay payment while they verify that you worked those days.

My situation is via agency and not opted out. But surely no timesheet means, in effect, I have no proof I was there.

I understand that if I breach contract by leaving early they would have an issue. But surely this does not mean they can automatically withhold payment? Its two separate issues - pay me as per contract, and if you see fit, take me to court for leaving early

[paulinefowlersgrowler]

Bailing early and giving the required notice or bailing early and leaving without serving notice as set out in your contract?

Early and not giving the entire notice.