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!
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.
Logging in...
Previously on "Is this a reasonable clause in a contract and would you accept it?"
6.3 Defective work by the Company, its directors, employees, Consultant(s) or substitute(s) will be corrected by the Company at its own cost and in its own time as required or as specified by the Agency or the Client.
6.3 needs a time limitation clause, eg "6.3 Defective...Client, provided that The Client notifies the Company withing a period of 1 month after delivery of the software or services"
Aside from the IR35 implications, being called back to deal with stuff is good for smoothing out cashflow.
No rational client wants an seriously unhappy contractor messing with source code or important system configs, so it is better for all that this is done in a friendly way. (yes I know not all clients are rational).
A bit of bug fixing can often be turned into maintenance contracts, you coming in every few months to kick or patch something, this increases your protection against IR35 since you're clearly doing work for multiple clients.
When I quit my last job as a CIO I left the contractors doing kicking and patching on a N days per year basis. That was in 2005, they've each had about a year's work that they slotted into gaps and it is the gaps between contracts that decide whether contracting is better or worse paid than permiehood.
My long experience is that there are very few bugs you'll need to fix.
I've never had more than about two and usually fixable within two or three hours and anything that isn't my bug is blindingly obvious i.e. in a section of code I didn't write.
Basically they want to cover themselves because the guy who developed it will be able to fix it in a jiffy whereas anyone else will sit there for days reverse engineering.
Even though I haven't had a contract with this in, fair enough in my view and as the others say puts you outside IR35, which is not to be sniffed at.
It's pretty standard for fixed price contracts, but obviously it means you have to factor all bugfixing time into how much you charge, unless you want to do it for free.
In reality how many clients enforce this, it's all good for IR35
6.3 Defective work by the Company, its directors, employees, Consultant(s) or substitute(s) will be corrected by the Company at its own cost and in its own time as required or as specified by the Agency or the Client.
It's pretty standard for fixed price contracts, but obviously it means you have to factor all bugfixing time into how much you charge, unless you want to do it for free.
6.3 and 6.4 are pretty standard. Fixing stuff in your own time is a good indication that you are outside IR35. If a business screws up it has to fix it at no cos, a permie doesn't.
Dunno about 6.2
You have had it checked by QDOS or B&C ?
6.2 is fairly standard - in simple terms, if you install hardware then the client gets to use the warranty on it if it breaks when you've buggered off. Same applies if you supply software that has a warranty / guarantee.
6.3 and 6.4 are pretty standard. Fixing stuff in your own time is a good indication that you are outside IR35. If a business screws up it has to fix it at no cos, a permie doesn't.
Is this a reasonable clause in a contract and would you accept it?
Hi All,
Is this a reasonable clause in a contract and would you accept it?
6 Warranty
6.1 The warranties given in this clause are additional to the warranties given by the Company elsewhere in this Agreement.
6.2 Where in connection with the provision of the Specified Services the Company supplies any goods supplied by a third party, the Company warrants and agrees that where possible it will assign to the Agency or the Client the benefit of any warranty, guarantee or indemnity given by the supplier of the goods to the Company.
6.3 Defective work by the Company, its directors, employees, Consultant(s) or substitute(s) will be corrected by the Company at its own cost and in its own time as required or as specified by the Agency or the Client.
6.4 In carrying out the Specified Services the Company warrants that it will, whether or not is using its own equipment, or intellectual property or that of the Client, ensure that it complies with all security requirements reasonably required by the Client.
Leave a comment: