Reply to: No Notice Period from Client, I can't give notice!

[Lost It]

That's all very well but I've had contracts that stated that a failure to fulfill the whole term would result the the agent making me liable for his lost commission.

I had one tried to pull that stunt with me once. Asked me to sign it in front of him, so I sat and started reading it... He got very agitated "Why are you reading it mate? It's a standard contract". No such thing I said. Then scribbled that line out, told him I was taking it home to study it, but I was sure it will be alright. "But you'll start Monday yes"?

Got a better offer on the Sunday, longer project, same money but 30 miles closer... So I'm really glad I didn't say yes to him.

[SueEllen]

That's all very well but I've had contracts that stated that a failure to fulfill the whole term would result the the agent making me liable for his lost commission.

Why are you accepting that term?

Contracts are there to be negotiated.

If you get a decent reviewer your contract will have terms altered to make either party go to court to recover loses if you can't make an agreement between yourselves on what is reasonable.

[northernladuk]

That's all very well but I've had contracts that stated that a failure to fulfill the whole term would result the the agent making me liable for his lost commission.

OMG and you signed it with that in?

Did you get them reviewed by someone who would negotiate it out on your behalf if you can't?

[bikeman]

I have a similar contract I cannot give notice. No problem, if I want to leave I will go to the client and/or agency and say please sack me.

That's all very well but I've had contracts that stated that a failure to fulfill the whole term would result the the agent making me liable for his lost commission.

[SlipTheJab]

It's more subtle then just not giving the contractor work as there is a requirement for both parties to honour a contract as both can resort to the courts to enforce the contract on the other party.

So while the client can say there is no more work for the contractor if the client doesn't have a genuine reason for the work being pulled them the contractor could go to court and get compensation. This is why there are cases of pregnant female contractors winning pay outs from clients, and also why clients cite performance issues to get rid of contractors quickly.

Thanks SE glad to hear its not just a one way street.

[SueEllen]

Most clients will tend to honour a notice period though even if there is no legal requirement for them to do so, and expect you to do the same. I've never bailed early on a contract so far, my option is that if you've signed up to X months then you have an obligation to do X months (unless something changes like a rate cut mid contract).

It's more subtle then just not giving the contractor work as there is a requirement for both parties to honour a contract as both can resort to the courts to enforce the contract on the other party.

So while the client can say there is no more work for the contractor if the client doesn't have a genuine reason for the work being pulled them the contractor could go to court and get compensation. This is why there are cases of pregnant female contractors winning pay outs from clients, and also why clients cite performance issues to get rid of contractors quickly.

[SlipTheJab]

It's becoming more and more popular. Barclays imposed the same quite a few years ago when people kept leaving them but then they did have a habit of cutting rates and heads so kind of their own daily.

IMO it's not a deal breaker. There is always the option to negotiate your way our and a client can effectively walk you on the spot whatever notice they've go. They just withdraw the work and you don't get paid another penny. Same as instant termination so don't think notice periods on their side mean anything.

Most clients will tend to honour a notice period though even if there is no legal requirement for them to do so, and expect you to do the same. I've never bailed early on a contract so far, my option is that if you've signed up to X months then you have an obligation to do X months (unless something changes like a rate cut mid contract).

[northernladuk]

It's becoming more and more popular. Barclays imposed the same quite a few years ago when people kept leaving them but then they did have a habit of cutting rates and heads so kind of their own daily.

IMO it's not a deal breaker. There is always the option to negotiate your way our and a client can effectively walk you on the spot whatever notice they've go. They just withdraw the work and you don't get paid another penny. Same as instant termination so don't think notice periods on their side mean anything.

[Dwainpipe]

It's a 12 month contract and very normal in all other senses. It's just the notice period that is strange and unacceptable to me.

IBM still have those terms (I turned them doing too)

I can see that the contractor not being able to give notice is an outside IR35 sign, but makes poor business sense.

It's the client giving no notice that's the red flag. The client doesn't care as there is no risk to them.

[Scruff]

For years, loads of the contractors @ IBM were in such a position. They couldn't give notice and were expected to fulfil the contract term.

Still the case I believe.

True. I've been able to negotiate an "out" on two occasions, however.

[adubya]

For years, loads of the contractors @ IBM were in such a position. They couldn't give notice and were expected to fulfil the contract term.

Still the case I believe.

[ChimpMaster]

Yes.

IR35 depends on more in the contract than not being able to give notice on the side of the company providing the services.

The reason people have been calling you out as your post seems nonsense.

Hence my initial though is there is information you are not telling us about the contract. For example is the contract open ended?

But also as I've always known it, the fact that you can't give notice implies that you are tied into the contract until completion. IPSE's advice is that this is a pointer outside of IR35.

[SueEllen]

I sure am a genuine person and I'm not here to lecture others. I wonder what others thought.

To clarify, the client not having to give notice is the IR35 red flag, not the contractor not being able to give notice (that is just unfortunate).

I also read the article confused initially. It would appear that the chap in question lost the first case and when reading the judgement a significant factor was that the client didn't have to give notice, so the contractor was seen as causal labour. Then the contractor appealed the judgement and won... many other factors were reviewed and the judgement was made in favour of the contractor, i.e. outside of IR35.

Again to answer some of the comments, my accountant and IPSE's IR35 advice line (run by AbbeyTax I believe) agreed that the client notice period is the problem that would have a significant negative impact if I would have to prove to be outside IR35. Of course I'm sure many people / limited companies would be fine with taking this risk and fighting any case that may come about, however I don't run my business that way so I've declined the contract.

So are we collectively saying this kind of notice periods (none from the client and unable to give notice from the contractor) is a normal thing?

Yes.

IR35 depends on more in the contract than not being able to give notice on the side of the company providing the services.

I get it shows very nicely that we are not employees but what business would accept a contract with no get out clause... it seems quite poor business judgement to me as take it to the worse position (like we should with all contracts) and we could be liable for the value of the contract for the remaining contract period if we were to default on the contract. An unlikely situation but it could happen, the same as the taxman could come knocking... it could happen.

The reason people have been calling you out as your post seems nonsense.

Hence my initial though is there is information you are not telling us about the contract. For example is the contract open ended?

[Dwainpipe]

I sure am a genuine person and I'm not here to lecture others. I wonder what others thought.

To clarify, the client not having to give notice is the IR35 red flag, not the contractor not being able to give notice (that is just unfortunate).

I also read the article confused initially. It would appear that the chap in question lost the first case and when reading the judgement a significant factor was that the client didn't have to give notice, so the contractor was seen as causal labour. Then the contractor appealed the judgement and won... many other factors were reviewed and the judgement was made in favour of the contractor, i.e. outside of IR35.

Again to answer some of the comments, my accountant and IPSE's IR35 advice line (run by AbbeyTax I believe) agreed that the client notice period is the problem that would have a significant negative impact if I would have to prove to be outside IR35. Of course I'm sure many people / limited companies would be fine with taking this risk and fighting any case that may come about, however I don't run my business that way so I've declined the contract.

So are we collectively saying this kind of notice periods (none from the client and unable to give notice from the contractor) is a normal thing?

I get it shows very nicely that we are not employees but what business would accept a contract with no get out clause... it seems quite poor business judgement to me as take it to the worse position (like we should with all contracts) and we could be liable for the value of the contract for the remaining contract period if we were to default on the contract. An unlikely situation but it could happen, the same as the taxman could come knocking... it could happen.

[NotAllThere]

Mr. Dwainpipe the OP with 1 post comes on here to educate us with FUD.

Join date: 25th April 2013... But I've done a few other checks and looks like a genuine person.