• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Mutuality Of Obligation(MOO)"

Collapse

  • blacjac
    replied
    Very good for IR35.

    It clearly demonstrates that the client is not obliged to provide you with work.

    Leave a comment:


  • PhilAtBFCA
    replied
    Mr_Z

    Interesting one.

    I think its a good thing for a non-MOO pointer but I would be careful as as far as IR35 is concerned I would take a wider view of personal service and Control before making an IR35 decision based on this alone. Contractual terms need to be consistent with the practice ( as well as vice versa )

    Phil

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr_Z
    started a topic Mutuality Of Obligation(MOO)

    Mutuality Of Obligation(MOO)

    I've had an enforced break of 2 to 3 weeks twice in a current contract, where the client has written at short notice to say that no work will be offered and paid for during this period. Does anyone have any views on how this sits with regards to the IR35 MOO pointer?
Working...
X