Reply to: Aston Carter

[ash]

I've had a good experience with Aston Carter to be totally honest, but I blv that's because of the guy I'm directly dealing with, Dan Shaw, is good and always goes a bit beyond his call of duty. A colleague has had a bad experience with another one of their guys, who I also didn't like when I had dealt with him before getting my current contract.

Re the questions, I think they're just legally covering their own

I can't blame them for that

[marcosscriven]

I got the form too

I took the opinion that regardless of whether they had the right to ask for the details, it was nothing I felt in any way compromising.

As others here have said, I think it is all about the MSC issue, and I can understand why Aston Carter, and many other agencies, are doing this.

I also understand that it is frustrating filling out details like bank accounts etc, that they should already have. I just filled it out and handed it in - decided 5 minutes to fill in the form wasn't worth any sort of fight.

[tim123]

No it's not. Asking an existing contractor to provide bank and VAT registration details? Opt-out letter?

If they haven't got the data already for Section 1 it's their processes that are at fault, nobody else's. Or do they expect a different answer this time? Section 2 is asking about PSCs and they have no legal definition or status so cannot be answered anyway. Section 3 is also none of the contractor's concern, it's between AC and the Umbrella.

Anyway, the right thing is to answer NO to the first three questions quoted and ignore the rest.

Sorry,

Saying that they should get the data another way, is not the same thing as saying that "it is none of their business", which was your original claim.

tim

[Ledge]

Dealt with AC for over a year, not by choice as so often is the way.

Found them to be the most dishonest bunch I've dealt with w.r.t agencies (and that says a lot). I'd like to name names but that might get me in trouble. When I was with them they often told me my umbrella wasn't good enough and tried to force me into their own supplier. conveniently never mentioning about the referral fees.

Hays are my current pimp and theyre refusing to pay my 'PSC' until the Company Appointment Report shows me as the Director. Fair cop really.

Still a pain in the tits.

[BrilloPad]

I believe that AC have their own payment vehicle and are pushing all contractors towards that.

I have asked to be removed from the AC database. I am a very tolerant chap who will give most agents the benefit of the doubt - but AC go far beyond what I will put up with.

Plenty of decent agents out there - come on DA - give us a job...

[malvolio]

No it's not. Asking an existing contractor to provide bank and VAT registration details? Opt-out letter?

If they haven't got the data already for Section 1 it's their processes that are at fault, nobody else's. Or do they expect a different answer this time? Section 2 is asking about PSCs and they have no legal definition or status so cannot be answered anyway. Section 3 is also none of the contractor's concern, it's between AC and the Umbrella.

Anyway, the right thing is to answer NO to the first three questions quoted and ignore the rest.

[tim123]

I say again - it's none of their business, and you need to answer in that vein. For example, I trust you will be adding the £1 fee to your next invoice, since it is they who wanted the information and they should have paid to get it from CH themsleves

Of course it's their business. They are required to do necessary due diligence in order to avoid the risk of any tax debt incurred under the MSC legislation transferred to them.

This IS the necessary due diligance, though I admit some of the questions are unnecessary.

tim

[malvolio]

I've updated my original post to include all the questions etc...

..and they should already have answers to all those if you have a contract with them. If you haven't, tell them most of that will only be made available when there is one to agree. So stop pissing around and tell them to do their own legwork.

[turbo]

I've updated my original post to include all the questions etc...

[malvolio]

I don't think I would pass - I would have to answer no to the questions as my husband is a director as well, and I certainly intend to pay dividends - haven't done so yet. It's still my company though - not a MSC variant and never was!
Hays are asking for various bits of proof as well - but not those questions. I had to pay £1 for the Companies House report & send it to them! I think some of the agencies have got very very scared by the new legislation

I say again - it's none of their business, and you need to answer in that vein. For example, I trust you will be adding the £1 fee to your next invoice, since it is they who wanted the information and they should have paid to get it from CH themsleves

[Bluebird]

I think some of the agencies have got very very scared by the new legislation

Correct, exactly what HMRC wants...

[dmini]

I don't think I would pass - I would have to answer no to the questions as my husband is a director as well, and I certainly intend to pay dividends - haven't done so yet. It's still my company though - not a MSC variant and never was!
Hays are asking for various bits of proof as well - but not those questions. I had to pay £1 for the Companies House report & send it to them! I think some of the agencies have got very very scared by the new legislation

[Lewis]

I don't quite understand how asking these questions prevents them from being liable.

turbo

Asking the questions doesn't prevent them from being liable but I assume they are trying to work out if any contractors are caught, if you answer the questions in a manner which indicates you are working through a now banned MSC I wouldn't be surprised if they asked you to either change you working practices or go elsewhere. Just a guess but that's what it sounds like to me, they have to so something to protect themselves.

[turbo]

Was waiting for this. I reckon all agencies and end clients will be asking these questions soon. They need to ensure they cannot be held liable for taxes under the new MSC legislation.

Where did limited liability go!

I don't quite understand how asking these questions prevents them from being liable.

turbo

[Lewis]

Was waiting for this. I reckon all agencies and end clients will be asking these questions soon. They need to ensure they cannot be held liable for taxes under the new MSC legislation.

Where did limited liability go!