Reply to: Agency changing payment dates

[oldgeezer]

oh dear, having problems reading? The agency have backed down!!
that's the f@@king point I'm making

[ratewhore]

Apply late payment charges on a 14 day payment term? I don't think so...

[oldgeezer]

I, like the majority have rolled over and succumbed to the new 14 day payment period. My first invoice was then settled on day 15, great start but not enough to start a revolution.
One other contractor did an immediate switch to one of the other preferred agencies the client uses, and another gave the agency 3 basic choices:

1. revert to the 8-day payment terms as per the contract or
2. release him from his contract as the agency are in breach of contract (easily done transfer to another preferred agency with client's approval) or
3. pay invoices every 14-days but pay late payment charges on every invoice

The outcome for that contractor is he isn't allowed to say what the agency has decided but he is happy with their decision.! (confidentiality agreement)

So the lesson I've learned here is don't let an agency bulldoze a change to the terms of a contract through, just because they decide it suits them.

[oldgeezer]

Please fella's let's not fall out!
There are 3 or 4 preferred agencies used by the client, they all want to keep sweet with the client so they don't lose the business as the client is a very big name company. Every 3 or 4 years the client refreshes it's preferred agency list, some get dropped and new ones to come in. All contractors from the dropped agency just get transferred to the new agency of their or the clients choice.
There are no limitations in the contractor/agency contract to prevent changing agencies.
I'm going to give my agency a last chance and just see how this 14-day pay scheme works out. I will however reserve the right to charge interest on late payment as a small incentive for them to get it right.
ciao

[Mailman]

No he won't be happy that agreement couldn't be reached, but the effect here is tiny. The judge will be unhappy with both partíes, but he will be most unhappy with the person who started the action over a triviality.

And what do you base this on? Do you claim to know what the judges think these days like you seem to know what agents think

Mailman

[boredsenseless]

And before the flaming starts about how we need to stand up to agents and clients pushing us into a corner let me state:

I agree that they shouldn't have chnaged the contract terms.

I just don't believe complaining will get you anywhere and therefore why waste time worrying about it. Look at other ways to mitigate this happening again.

[boredsenseless]

Spot on tim...

The client and in this case the agent is your client (after all he's the one holding your cash) is always king.

If you don't like it you can always complain and send threatening letters, but seeing as how you generally have to give seven days from notice of impending action to actaul action being taken (to allow the forgetful company to realise their mistake and fix it) you'll find that you are now into their fourteen day period.

So go ahead and make yourself look like a tw@t if you wish but it really isn't worth it, surely you charge enough to be able to last 7 days longer for one month and then you be paid in monthly increments after that. If you're not then you really shou;d be charging more - what happens if they terminate tomorrow?

[tim123]

Why does it not surprise me you are on the side of the agents?

Where did I say that the agent was in the right?
I just said that, for all practical purposes, there was nothing you could do to stop it happening. Even if it were possible to use this breach to terminate the contract, that would be a stupid thing to do unless you already wanted to terminate and were looking for a legal reason

Another way to look at this would be to say the judge wont be too happy you have had to take the agent to court over an issue that should have been resolved before hand by the agent not changing the contract without agreement.

No he won't be happy that agreement couldn't be reached, but the effect here is tiny. The judge will be unhappy with both partíes, but he will be most unhappy with the person who started the action over a triviality.

As Ive said before Tim, you must be the ultimate employee...always doing as you are told and never asking questions
Mailman

I take the view that if I want to work, I work in a way that clients want. If I don't do that the alternative is sitting at home. Walking out on a client because of a minor dispute with the agent is silly.

tim

[Mailman]

If you try to go to a court to about the breach it will be rectified by the time you get there (and the judge will not be happy at you for wasting his time).

Why does it not surprise me you are on the side of the agents?

Another way to look at this would be to say the judge wont be too happy you have had to take the agent to court over an issue that should have been resolved before hand by the agent not changing the contract without agreement.

As Ive said before Tim, you must be the ultimate employee...always doing as you are told and never asking questions

Mailman

[Lucifer Box]

Agree with tim123 here. You won't get any sympathy complaining about having to wait 14 days to get your money. My largest client has strict 90 day payment terms and if you don't like it you can push off somewhere else.

Okay, so maybe it's a bit underhand but it's not really that bad and is hardly the end of the world. Relax and concentrate on making sure they pay when they say they will.

[tim123]

One of the contractors here has spoken to the supplier manager (who works for the client), he reckons that what the agency are doing is underhand.

Maybe it is, but I don't believe that you would have the sympathy of a judge if you took this matter to him.

Payment withing 14 days is much quicker than most creditors get and the actual quantifiable loss to you, for payment 7 days late, is about 10 quid per invoice.

If you don't accept this change the odds are that the agency are going to do it anyway, and what then?

If you try to go to a court to about the breach it will be rectified by the time you get there (and the judge will not be happy at you for wasting his time).

So all that you have is the interest. Are you going to go to court every month for your 10 quid?

tim

[oldgeezer]

One of the contractors here has spoken to the supplier manager (who works for the client), he reckons that what the agency are doing is underhand and that they're probably counting on everyone just going along with it as that will then be acceptance of the new terms. Another contractor has requested he's transferred to one of the other agencies and that's happening next Monday. I don't want to write any details as to what others are doing at this point in time as it's still up in the air. There's some good guidance on the payontime website.

[The Lone Gunman]

I would suggest a nice letter to the agent agreeing that if it will make payment easier for them then they should go ahead. Then add something along the lines of I am sure you will see no reason not to include a late payment penalty clause into the contract etc....

I am assuming you are opted out of the agents regs? If not there is a requirement on them to pay.

Prohibition on employment businesses withholding payment to work-seekers on certain grounds

12. -

An employment business shall not, in respect of a work-seeker whom it supplies to a hirer, withhold or threaten to withhold from the work-seeker (whether by means of the inclusion of a term in a contract with the work-seeker or otherwise) the whole or any part of any payment in respect of any work done by the work-seeker on any of the following grounds -

(a) non-receipt of payment from the hirer in respect of the supply of any service provided by the employment business to the hirer;

(b) the work-seeker’s failure to produce documentary evidence authenticated by the hirer of the fact that the work-seeker has worked during a particular period of time, provided that this provision shall not prevent the employment business from satisfying itself by other means that the work-seeker worked for the particular period in question;

(c) the work-seeker not having worked during any period other than that to which the payment relates; or

(d) any matter within the control of the employment business.

[boredsenseless]

but then you'll just look like a trouble-making whinger to the client who won't really see the difference between you waiting 7 days or 14 for your money since you are richer than he is anyway.

If you must complain keep the end-client out of it the issue is between you and the agency and the professional way to sort this is amicably between the two of you. If you get into a fight and drag the client in too they will undoubtedly fall on the side of the agency (since they provide so much od their resource they won't want to p@ss them off).

Given that it isn't a huge change I would write a letter to the agency stating your displeasure at the change. It won't change anything since their contract will reserve the right to change these conditions.

[oldgeezer]

cheers for that ratewhore. At the moment I feel like writing a letter of complaint to the agency , copying the client, then include the relevant wording on all future invoices.