Reply to: IR35 Advice

[malvolio]

If you hold the view that someone who doesn't agree with your view is dim, there's very little anyone can do about that or you in general.

When I hear of PCG/IPSE defending "us" in Westminster and actually getting anywhere or obtaining anything of substantive benefit then I may modify my view, at this point I regard IPSE (PCG) as a total failure which has only succeeded in saddling us with an Opt Out that the agencies use for blackmail and misinformation. I don't believe your beloved organisation is representative either.

If it wasn't for the insurance that goes along with the membership I doubt that a significant proportion of the membership would stay.

Batcher has quite sensibly pointed out the membership insurance helped him out to the tune of quite a lot of cash so he's supportive of the organisation, but his is the only tale I recall seeing along those lines.

Mal I really can't believe you're just an IPSE footsoldier member, not with all the advertising, spin and defensive argument you put up for the organisation, it's long past time that you declare your involvement in the management.

Simple. There isn't one. HTH.

Actually, on that point, if you bother to look properly I only suggest people look at the IPSE website who are either new to the game or clearly don't know the level of resources they offer working contractors. I don't promote the political side, I one ever try to explain why they do what they do. As I've said before, don't listen if you don't want to, but let's let other people make their own decisions. Which they can't if they don't know IPSE are there.

[malvolio]

snip...

Mal I really can't believe you're just an IPSE footsoldier member, not with all the advertising, spin and defensive argument you put up for the organisation, it's long past time that you declare your involvement in the management.

Simple. There isn't one. HTH.

[TykeMerc]

Sorry but if you're too dim to work out why suggesting that a new contractor looks at why they should consider joining IPSE then there's no point arguing. When I see QDOS successfully and credibly defending us in Westminster then I'll recommend them equally.

If you hold the view that someone who doesn't agree with your view is dim, there's very little anyone can do about that or you in general.

When I hear of PCG/IPSE defending "us" in Westminster and actually getting anywhere or obtaining anything of substantive benefit then I may modify my view, at this point I regard IPSE (PCG) as a total failure which has only succeeded in saddling us with an Opt Out that the agencies use for blackmail and misinformation. I don't believe your beloved organisation is representative either.

If it wasn't for the insurance that goes along with the membership I doubt that a significant proportion of the membership would stay.

Batcher has quite sensibly pointed out the membership insurance helped him out to the tune of quite a lot of cash so he's supportive of the organisation, but his is the only tale I recall seeing along those lines.

Mal I really can't believe you're just an IPSE footsoldier member, not with all the advertising, spin and defensive argument you put up for the organisation, it's long past time that you declare your involvement in the management.

[Batcher]

Well if he's going to push membership enrolment at every possible opportunity then he's clearly got some axe to grind, if it's not direct financial reward then it's some credibility gain or maintenance, seen this type of behaviour from committee members of organisations.

Frankly his claims to just being an interested member don't ring true, what that does to the credibility of the organisation in some peoples eyes is up to you to work out for yourself.

Disclaimer: I don't have an axe to grind, or a financial reward for recommending IPSE to potential new members.

To the OP: QDOS are good but didn't quite help me enough when I had my IR35 investigation. IPSE (as the PCG at the time) helped enormously and saved me £52k (the amount HMRC asked me to pay up).

PS- I don't agree with the article in the IPSE magazine about Scottish Independence, especially getting a unionist like Hamish MacDonell to write it. The summary does not represent what happened and is happening in Scotland. You should really have had both sides represented if you had to have an article about it. I would have argued about it in the IPSE fora but I know it won't make any difference.

[malvolio]

Well if he's going to push membership enrolment at every possible opportunity then he's clearly got some axe to grind, if it's not direct financial reward then it's some credibility gain or maintenance, seen this type of behaviour from committee members of organisations.

Frankly his claims to just being an interested member don't ring true, what that does to the credibility of the organisation in some peoples eyes is up to you to work out for yourself.

Sorry but if you're too dim to work out why suggesting that a new contractor looks at why they should consider joining IPSE then there's no point arguing. When I see QDOS successfully and credibly defending us in Westminster then I'll recommend them equally.

[Contreras]

QDOS also have model contracts for free download.

They also do contract reviews, as do B&C and others.

[TykeMerc]

Well if he's going to push membership enrolment at every possible opportunity then he's clearly got some axe to grind, if it's not direct financial reward then it's some credibility gain or maintenance, seen this type of behaviour from committee members of organisations.

Frankly his claims to just being an interested member don't ring true, what that does to the credibility of the organisation in some peoples eyes is up to you to work out for yourself.

[v8gaz]

Malvolio, quick question, do you get a commission for each person you induce to join your pet organisation from CUK? You advertise it often enough and push membership at every conceivable opportunity.

Maybe you should come out as having a commercial interest and get your user ID changed appropriately.

Incidentally to the OP, while ISPE does have a couple of arguable plus points in a contract blank (well a couple of them) and an insurance that comes with membership, not all of us feel as an organisation it's done any good for the contractor community and it certainly did a lot of harm with the Opt Out debacle.
There's more than a few expressing reservations about their current agenda and direction of travel since their re-branding too, don't get carried along by hype.

I can confirm that Mal could get paid* for intros via the member get member scheme, but doesn't.

*in amazon or apple vouchers

[TykeMerc]

Malvolio, quick question, do you get a commission for each person you induce to join your pet organisation from CUK? You advertise it often enough and push membership at every conceivable opportunity.

Maybe you should come out as having a commercial interest and get your user ID changed appropriately.

Incidentally to the OP, while ISPE does have a couple of arguable plus points in a contract blank (well a couple of them) and an insurance that comes with membership, not all of us feel as an organisation it's done any good for the contractor community and it certainly did a lot of harm with the Opt Out debacle.
There's more than a few expressing reservations about their current agenda and direction of travel since their re-branding too, don't get carried along by hype.

[malvolio]

Agreed, ignore the rest of IPSE

Not actually what I said, but never mind.

Also, I don't agree with you in terms of reviews, indeed for precisely the same reason that contract-only reviews are insufficient. The IPSE contract provides a shell only (especially w/r to lack of D&C). Stating something in a couple of sentences is rather different than understanding the implications.

The IPSE contract is sound, provide you back it up with a mutually agreed Real Arrangements letter confirming how the engagement will work on the ground: there's a template for that on there as well. There's also detailed checklist (sadly, members only,...) explaining everything to consider.

If you can use that contract you've already recovered the cost of your first year membership in drafting and review costs...

[jamesbrown]

And you can't buy the equivalent of IPSE Plus cover for anything even close to £240 a year. Ignore the rest of it, it makes perfect commercial sense.

Agreed, ignore the rest of IPSE

Also, I don't agree with you in terms of reviews, indeed for precisely the same reason that contract-only reviews are insufficient. The IPSE contract provides a shell only (especially w/r to lack of D&C). Stating something in a couple of sentences is rather different than understanding the implications.

[malvolio]

Reviews are for agency-provided contracts. The whole point of the IPSE contracts is that they don't need to be reviewed. They were drafted by Lawspeed to meet all the relevant criteria for both IR35 and, rather more importantly, commercial risks. The challenge is to ensure your working practices do actually align to the contract.

And you can't buy the equivalent of IPSE Plus cover for anything even close to £240 a year. Ignore the rest of it, it makes perfect commercial sense.

[chrisox]

Thanks for the advice guys, I think I am going to take it and will look into joining IPSE

[jamesbrown]

Ordinary rules apply, have the contract and working practices reviewed. On the face of it, I agree with malvolio that the prior engagement is irrelevant and you will have sufficient control over the contractual terms and working practices to ensure that you can get this right, i.e. a lack of D&C, a lack of MoO and an appropriate RoS.

[TykeMerc]

I'd say this sounds like it's on safe ground in IR35 terms, so long as the contract is worded sensibly and the working practices are in accordance with the sensible wording.

Malvolio may like to advertise IPSE (former PCG) membership at every opportunity and there's an argument that the IR35 insurance inherent to the membership is value for money, but make your own judgement on that.