• 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.

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 "Work directly or through an agency?"

Collapse

  • rogerthedodger
    replied
    I've worked direct with clients many times and prefer it. You just need to do credit check on client and other checks and reassure yourself as best you can that client isn't going to go into liquidation anytime soon otherwise you might find it difficult to recover your invoiced money.

    Leave a comment:


  • FK1
    replied
    I do prefer work directly. An agency as an odd middle man between professionals is a corrupted idea from the beginning.

    Agencies restrict for their own sake with no value added for client and contractor.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrLoveBucket
    replied
    I did 9 months with my current client through an agency, then the project finished and I was contracted elsewhere for 6 months.
    I kept in touch with my contact at the client and was asked back for another project. By this time the handcuff with the agency had expired so I am now direct and was able to negotiate my rate up, partially because of the absence of the agency markup.
    Client is a reasonably large FS provider, haven't had any problem with 30 days payment terms so far (15 months in).

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    I've done both. I have had to chase both direct clients and agencies for payment. Personally if I had the choice I would go with the party who pays the quickest.

    Leave a comment:


  • Whorty
    replied
    done both and given the chance I'd go direct. Never had problems with not being paid - all clients have always paid to the terms of the contract. Last client I was direct with had vendor payment standard terms of 90 days, but for contractors they always changed this to 15 days (timesheets and invoice had to be in by end of month to meet the pay run mid following month).

    Leave a comment:


  • DeludedKitten
    replied
    Direct with the client.

    Even if there are worse payment terms, there's one less person to disappear with the money, and one less contract that you'll never have sight of. Plus you get the chance to explain clearer your right of substitution and other contractual clauses.

    It's a no brainer IMHO only.

    Leave a comment:


  • oliverson
    replied
    Originally posted by twickenkam View Post
    Hi all,

    If you had choice to work directly with a customer or via an agency, which option would you go for? Assume the rate is the same. I feel working directly makes communication easier as there are fewer parties involved. But then I was thinking whether involvement of the agency somehow helps with IR35, like adding extra layer assuring no mutuality of obligations ?

    Regards
    I've done both and for the same client, first time through agency and second time direct, after client bunged agent a few quid to 'go away'. The issue I had was that payment dates were known when through the agency but going direct I was constantly having to chase them up for payment. But if you have no choice, like I did, you have no choice and just have to live with it. Can't recall whether the rate was any different, which probably means it wasn't. Saving for the client then.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pat Phelan
    replied
    Stick with the agency then. They will most likely pay you quicker and you and the client will avoid any repercussions around bypassing the introducer for the role.

    Leave a comment:


  • twickenkam
    replied
    Originally posted by Pat Phelan View Post
    Which rate is the same?
    The rate the client is paying or the rate you are receiving?
    Also, did the agency find you the job or did you find the client directly?
    My rate would be the same. What would be the deal between agent and the company I do not know. I was approached by an agent and I from there on they got me the match. What is discussed though is which way is better and for who. To me the money would be the same in both scenarios.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    There could be up to 90 days payment terms direct. Agents do a decent job of factoring which many people don't realise.

    Are you asking because you are in that situation? It's very uncommon to have to make this decision so I don't really know as its unlikely to happen TBH.

    P. S. Read up on MoO....

    Leave a comment:


  • Pat Phelan
    replied
    Which rate is the same?
    The rate the client is paying or the rate you are receiving?
    Also, did the agency find you the job or did you find the client directly?

    Leave a comment:


  • twickenkam
    started a topic Work directly or through an agency?

    Work directly or through an agency?

    Hi all,

    If you had choice to work directly with a customer or via an agency, which option would you go for? Assume the rate is the same. I feel working directly makes communication easier as there are fewer parties involved. But then I was thinking whether involvement of the agency somehow helps with IR35, like adding extra layer assuring no mutuality of obligations ?

    Regards

Working...
X