Reply to: Terminating Contract Early

[icemancomeths]

I really do appreciate the time you all have spent offer advice, hopefully the sleepless nights wont continue.

[GillsMan]

I can't help thinking this is going to end badly for the OP. Flailing about not knowing how to do something when you are messing around with contractual obligations with a difficult client is not for the faint hearted.

Totally this. Unfortunately I think the best course of action for the OP is to suck it up and stay to the end of the contract.

[northernladuk]

Tell them that they have no right to refuse the substitute, but they are free to terminate the contract in line with the terms outlined therein.

If they continue to refuse the substitute, then leave and when they try to claim you breached it, you point out that they have materially breached the contract by refusing the substitute.

Make sure you document the offer of a substitute and their unreasonable refusal of the substitute in writing, so they will lose any legal action, and then leave with your head held high.

I can't help thinking this is going to end badly for the OP. Flailing about not knowing how to do something when you are messing around with contractual obligations with a difficult client is not for the faint hearted.

[Taita]

Before you walk out check the dispute resolution clauses in your contract. Some say that you have to give time e.g. 7 days so both parties can sort out the dispute. This means it's very important that you follow up anything you say verbally with a short email to the client repeating what you see as each parties position is making sure you mention the dispute clause.

Correct and while you are going to all this trouble (let's face it -- contractual legal wrangling is not the average contractor's remit) ---- reconsider whether the perceived gain of the new contract is worth the hassle.

[SueEllen]

Tell them that they have no right to refuse the substitute, but they are free to terminate the contract in line with the terms outlined therein.

If they continue to refuse the substitute, then leave and when they try to claim you breached it, you point out that they have materially breached the contract by refusing the substitute.

Make sure you document the offer of a substitute and their unreasonable refusal of the substitute in writing, so they will lose any legal action, and then leave with your head held high.

Before you walk out check the dispute resolution clauses in your contract. Some say that you have to give time e.g. 7 days so both parties can sort out the dispute. This means it's very important that you follow up anything you say verbally with a short email to the client repeating what you see as each parties position is making sure you mention the dispute clause.

[TheFaQQer]

They are not willing to accept a sub, they are saying " We have given you the contract, for your skills etc..."

I have offered a seamless handover at no cost to them but they still refuse.

Tell them that they have no right to refuse the substitute, but they are free to terminate the contract in line with the terms outlined therein.

If they continue to refuse the substitute, then leave and when they try to claim you breached it, you point out that they have materially breached the contract by refusing the substitute.

Make sure you document the offer of a substitute and their unreasonable refusal of the substitute in writing, so they will lose any legal action, and then leave with your head held high.

[GillsMan]

I do find this quite amazing. They would have been the last people I would have expected to accept but way to go!

Yeah, wait until you hear how I also managed to get almost total autonomy and WFH such that I came into the office twice during a two month period at one stage.

I don't think I was especially popular with the other contractors tbh.

[northernladuk]

I managed to get Barclays to accept my sub.

I do find this quite amazing. They would have been the last people I would have expected to accept but way to go!

[GillsMan]

Never met a client yet who will accept a sub. Like someone said they interview the PERSON not the COMPANY. MAybe its not how it should be but thats how it is.

Its not like when they sign a contract with a big consultancy and then dont mind who they send in.

I managed to get Barclays to accept my sub.

[GillsMan]

They are not willing to accept a sub, they are saying " We have given you the contract, for your skills etc..."

I have offered a seamless handover at no cost to them but they still refuse.

It does look like you're going to have to see that contract out I'm afraid. Even though they know you want to leave, they still want you to stay. Little weird, but I can see a dozen scenarios where they would still want to keep someone one, even though they want to leave. I think you're going to need to stay IMO.

[icemancomeths]

They are not willing to accept a sub, they are saying " We have given you the contract, for your skills etc..."

I have offered a seamless handover at no cost to them but they still refuse.

[TheFaQQer]

I've met clients who accept subs and having worked in places with large consultancy, some clients definitely care who is sent in.

This.

As I've said in this thread, I've subbed work out to a friend of mine when I wasn't available.

And when I was permie, I used to get resource requests that said "Key skills: Must be called <my name>". At one stage, Churchill insurance were threatening to walk away from the contract because they had been told that they could get me in as a named resource and were then told that I wasn't available. It went to the UK MD to resolve and schmooze it.

[SueEllen]

Never met a client yet who will accept a sub. Like someone said they interview the PERSON not the COMPANY. MAybe its not how it should be but thats how it is.

Its not like when they sign a contract with a big consultancy and then dont mind who they send in.

I've met clients who accept subs and having worked in places with large consultancy, some clients definitely care who is sent in.

[psychocandy]

Never met a client yet who will accept a sub. Like someone said they interview the PERSON not the COMPANY. MAybe its not how it should be but thats how it is.

Its not like when they sign a contract with a big consultancy and then dont mind who they send in.

[TheFaQQer]

Client is more likely to rip the contract up and go find someone else surely.

Which in this case is exactly what the OP wants...