Reply to: Time to ditch PCG/IPSE?

[ZebraSnake]

And willing to offer a potentially expensive insurance protection sum against an unknown risk. Hmmm...

Actually it is risk assessed before providing cover and up to me to ensure working practices are compliant for each contract I want covering under the policy. They also give free contract assessments, working practices reviews, can supply confirmation of arrangements and IR35 advice for free included with the cost of the policy. I also got a discount when I bought by business insurances through Qdos and it was the cheapest quote, that I could find anyway.

[tractor]

...

HMRC are more scared of case law and precedents being set than any contractor is.

Having an organisation on your side that is prepared to go all the way up against HMRC is a no brainer for any contractor.

Whether you like them or not is irrelevant.

Additionally, the IPSE+ benefits can be significant if ever you need them. Although some of the 'Employee' advantages are trash and arguably give you no discount at all, I saved over half the annual membership fee with a single purchase this year.

[TheFaQQer]

Apples: QDOS Freelancer Tax Protection vs. IPSE+.

Pears: QDOS TLC35 vs. IPSE+ with Survive35.

Better?

Not particularly - that assumes that the only thing IPSE does is provide tax cover.

[Contreras]

But you aren't comparing like with like when you compare Apples and Oranges.

Apples: QDOS Freelancer Tax Protection vs. IPSE+.

Pears: QDOS TLC35 vs. IPSE+ with Survive35.

Better?

[Archangel]

PDF of 'inside IR35' letter

The guy they interviewed at ClientCo had never met me, or spoke to anyone I knew there including the PM so had no idea of the actual working practices. I wasn't under control as I worked on my own most of the time on a different site and, in most cases, took decisions without consulting the PM as he was happy to leave the techie guys get on with it as long as the end product was delivered on time.

I wasn't allowed a substitute but that was explained in the document that ClientCo were particular about getting the right people in so wouldn't accept anyone coming in as a substitute. There are a few things in there where they contradicted themselves and those were the bits PCG picked up on when QDoS had given up on my case unless I paid £7k to take it to the commissioners.

There is a section that mentions they don't like their contractors working for anyone else but there was nothing in my contract to this effect. I showed I had another contract via an agency that I worked on at the same time and also had invoices going through the business for my plan B. They were only going after this contract because they had a pliable ClientCo to help them.

I could go on and on about it but I'll let those people interested read the letters and I'll answer any questions I can.

PDF of 'guilty but doubt' letter

your letters and the ones I received when i was investigated look remarkably similar

in my case QDOS represented me via PCG insurance and the "we're sure you are guilty but we can't prove it" letter came after around 18 months.

[malvolio]

Agreed. Ah good to know you dont need a review any more.
Thats what put me off a bit that you used to ahve to pay for a mini-review every extension as well.

Might look into this again. QDOS are a good bunch.

And willing to offer a potentially expensive insurance protection sum against an unknown risk. Hmmm...

[psychocandy]

IIRC, you don't need a contract review to get the Qdos TLC any more.

But you aren't comparing like with like when you compare IPSE and Qdos.

Agreed. Ah good to know you dont need a review any more.
Thats what put me off a bit that you used to ahve to pay for a mini-review every extension as well.

Might look into this again. QDOS are a good bunch.

[TheFaQQer]

Im with IPSE but I looked into QDOS too. (QDOS are a good bunch).

Slightly different approach if I remember correctly. IPSE cover you for any contracts whilst your still a member.

QDOS, assuming its still the same, cover you per contract so if you quit contracting you dont have to pay any more. BUT they used to make you pay for reviews for every extension. Not sure if its still the same.

In the end, IPSE was sligtly cheaper with all the other stuff as well.

IIRC, you don't need a contract review to get the Qdos TLC any more.

But you aren't comparing like with like when you compare IPSE and Qdos.

[psychocandy]

Im with IPSE but I looked into QDOS too. (QDOS are a good bunch).

Slightly different approach if I remember correctly. IPSE cover you for any contracts whilst your still a member.

QDOS, assuming its still the same, cover you per contract so if you quit contracting you dont have to pay any more. BUT they used to make you pay for reviews for every extension. Not sure if its still the same.

In the end, IPSE was sligtly cheaper with all the other stuff as well.

[Batcher]

A chilling read, thank you Batcher.

Was there any particular point that won the case for you or was it just the weight of reasons and several years? Feeling somewhat happier I plumped for membership!

HMRC didn't give a reason but the appeal was based on the contradictions within the letter. The PCG person I dealt with (who I think was Accountax really) had dealt previously with the person who wrote the letter from HMRC and knew how to attack their reasoning.

HMRC went back over all contracts and expense claims I made the previous 6 years and challenged lots of them. One contract was previous to the one on the letter which was in the same area but 4.5 miles away. I finished with ClientCo and had a 3 month break before joining the one above and HMRC kept quoting the Square Mile rule at me. I pointed out that it was outwith a square mile away but they didn't explain at any time that they meant the direction of travel, the 40% rule and that 3 months wasn't a long enough break.

I understand QDoS might have changed now but back then I was really gutted that they wanted to throw me to the wolves rather than pay the £7k to take it to the commissioners. I thought that's why I had the IR35 insurance with them. I'm sure if I had paid the fee myself and won, QDoS would have claimed the success as their own. If they had challenged the letter properly as I had asked them to do, it didn't need to go to the commisioners anyway as it proved when PCG got involved.

ETA: Lots of the expense claims they said were wrong and I should pay back, I accepted their decision but after I received the appeal letter I didn't pay anything back. One was when I paid for a group meal for contractors and put it through as entertainment. We all took turns to pay so it was normal. HMRC asked me several times for the names of the people at the meal but I refused knowing that it would kick off IR35 investigations into them. I said I would rather just treat it as a director's loan and pay it back.

[malvolio]

Also QDOS's offer, though more expensive at £360, seems to actually cover you for the backpaid tax if you lose IR35 Insurance - IR35 - Contractor Insurance - Contractors - Qdos Consulting

The theory behind IPSE being "you won't have to pay it as we'll make sure you win"?

To be fair, QDOS haven't had to pay out yet and you can get the same assurance through IPSE using Abbey Tax's Survive35 policy. But in both cases, you are insuring yourself against a risk that the insurers are pretty much certain isn't going to arise. If you think that's good use of money then fine - after all, £300 isn't much against the value of the average contract - but I'm not convinced.

[PerfectStorm]

Also QDOS's offer, though more expensive at £360, seems to actually cover you for the backpaid tax if you lose IR35 Insurance - IR35 - Contractor Insurance - Contractors - Qdos Consulting

The theory behind IPSE being "you won't have to pay it as we'll make sure you win"?

[PerfectStorm]

A chilling read, thank you Batcher.

Was there any particular point that won the case for you or was it just the weight of reasons and several years? Feeling somewhat happier I plumped for membership!

[Batcher]

PDF of 'inside IR35' letter

The guy they interviewed at ClientCo had never met me, or spoke to anyone I knew there including the PM so had no idea of the actual working practices. I wasn't under control as I worked on my own most of the time on a different site and, in most cases, took decisions without consulting the PM as he was happy to leave the techie guys get on with it as long as the end product was delivered on time.

I wasn't allowed a substitute but that was explained in the document that ClientCo were particular about getting the right people in so wouldn't accept anyone coming in as a substitute. There are a few things in there where they contradicted themselves and those were the bits PCG picked up on when QDoS had given up on my case unless I paid £7k to take it to the commissioners.

There is a section that mentions they don't like their contractors working for anyone else but there was nothing in my contract to this effect. I showed I had another contract via an agency that I worked on at the same time and also had invoices going through the business for my plan B. They were only going after this contract because they had a pliable ClientCo to help them.

I could go on and on about it but I'll let those people interested read the letters and I'll answer any questions I can.

PDF of 'guilty but doubt' letter

[SueEllen]

Actually I don't currently. I'm probably wrong here but am sure last time I was contracting (only just back from a stint in permiedom) I read somewhere that it's not a requirement. However I do claim business mileage to get from home to client site, so I guess this isn't true and I need to change my policy?

Same with home insurance - as a rule I don't work from home and my registered company address is my accountant's business premises, but it's possible that I could work from home on occasion if I had need to. In that case does the policy still need changing?

Business use in your car insurance is needed unless you are claiming your permanent work address is your client's office. If you are claiming your client's office is your permanent work address than you can't claim business milage.

The cost of adding to a new policy is £0. To do a change mid-way will cost the amendment fee plus maybe a few quid. IT professionals without loads of equipment aren't a massive additional risk.

It's worth doing it asap as if you have a non-fault accident you don't want to find yourself in the sh*t. Insurers do cancel policies when they find out and this will screw up your chances of getting any other insurance for ever.

While your registered office may be at your accountant's address, your trading address is where you live e.g. where you start your mileage claims. Lots of home insurers do cover office equipment for clerical work as standard. However some don't cover other computer work so read your present policy and see what is covered.

To cover office equipment outside the home e.g. your company phone, your company laptop, you will need either an add on to an existing policy or an additional policy. Someone posted in general that Direct Line do a cheap policy with public liability and employers liability insurance for £86. Some clients' require you to have public liability insurance as well as professional indemnity insurance.