Reply to: Moving Agency Mid Contract

[MrMarkyMark]

You think? I'd guess the majority of people don't even know the 24 month rule exists, let alone the technicalities of it

Funny, I understood it straight away.
It called knowing what you are doing...

[northernladuk]

You think? I'd guess the majority of people don't even know the 24 month rule exists, let alone the technicalities of it

Hmmm, sadly that is very true.. I was including everyone in the chain including accountants who should be capturing and correcting this but yes, you are likely right there.

[pr1]

That would be because a majority of people actually understand it.

You think? I'd guess the majority of people don't even know the 24 month rule exists, let alone the technicalities of it

[northernladuk]

New offence: disrespecting the right of others to bask in blissful ignorance.

Guess I'll be seeing you all in 7 days

[LondonManc]

That would be because a majority of people actually understand it.

Those that don't plod on in blissful ignorance. That's their choice.

Apparently I'm allowed to point out you are being thick now

New offence: disrespecting the right of others to bask in blissful ignorance.

[northernladuk]

happy to be shown any evidence where a contractor had to pay back the tax due on expenses (in 0-24m) due to the "expected" rule

That would be because a majority of people actually understand it.

Those that don't plod on in blissful ignorance. That's their choice.

Apparently I'm allowed to point out you are being thick now

[MrMarkyMark]

happy to be shown any evidence where a contractor had to pay back the tax due on expenses (in 0-24m) due to the "expected" rule

Which bit of the law, or "reasonable expectation", do you not understand?

As an individual, if you wish to take the risk that's completely up to you.

[pr1]

happy to be shown any evidence where a contractor had to pay back the tax due on expenses (in 0-24m) due to the "expected" rule

[MrMarkyMark]

my point was you don't know you'll be there 24months until you're within your notice period - so he doesn't have to stop straight away

Christ on a bike

[LondonManc]

Unless the client cease to trade with the agency, I don't see that you have a leg to stand on. That would allow you to switch agents because Agent A can no longer provide you with the service required (there have been threads on this).

You cannot simply switch agents because of bad service. You could threaten to go offsite (which you cannot bluff on, you must be prepared to do) if they don't resolve your issues. Most of all, gather evidence. If it's about money, boo-bloody-hoo.

[northernladuk]

my point was you don't know you'll be there 24months until you're within your notice period - so he doesn't have to stop straight away

Blimey.. I'd go back to bed and re-start Monday again in a couple of hours if I were you. With that argument the only thing anyone knows is death and taxes..... There has to be some level or reasonableness and the fact you are contracted means you will know by default unless some unseen and unknown event occurs. The HMRC examples all use the term reasonable expectation.

There is also an example which covers exactly this where the person expected to be there 24 months, the situation changed so they weren't but it's still counted as their permanent location.

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-man...anual/eim32083

[TheFaQQer]

my point was you don't know you'll be there 24months until you're within your notice period - so he doesn't have to stop straight away

That's an argument that has been had before in various places.

Imagine I have a ten year contract and there is no notice on either side and no right of substitution. Under those circumstances, would I have to stop claiming? Arguably yes - it's not a temporary location and I have to be there for the ten years.. BUT - I don't know whether I'll still be alive tomorrow, one could argue, and therefore I can keep claiming because I don't know that I'll be there for 24 months.

Is there a reasonable expectation that the location will cease to be temporary? Yes. And in that situation, you should stop claiming travel and subsistence to the temporary location.

[pr1]

Not too sure what the point of this is but you've got to be careful you don't mix up the obligation under a T&M contract and the obligation liked with MoO. One is inside the contract, the other is after the current piece of work has ended.

my point was you don't know you'll be there 24months until you're within your notice period - so he doesn't have to stop straight away

[northernladuk]

a 6 month contract with a 2 week notice, with no obligation to provide work on any particular day, presumably

Not too sure what the point of this is but you've got to be careful you don't mix up the obligation under a T&M contract and the obligation liked with MoO. One is inside the contract, the other is after the current piece of work has ended.

[pr1]

Good point but possibly not quite right. You have to stop when you know you will be there past 24 months. So if he's just signed a 6 month contract at 20 months he has to stop straight away.

a 6 month contract with a 2 week notice, with no obligation to provide work on any particular day, presumably