- 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.
Logging in...
Previously on "Contract clauses becoming more draconian?"
Collapse
-
Genuine contractors are controlled (sort of) by their agency though, and it is with them that the regulations hold.
-
If you are a "real contractor" the regulations don't apply anyway.
a limited company contractor accepting on paper that they are controlled by the client and wish to be covered by the regulations is sending a pretty negative message to HMRC about their employment status. Control by the client is a key factor in determining the employment status of a contractor, and can be part of a package of evidence that puts a contractor inside IR35.
But, as highlighted earlier, genuine contractors are not controlled by their client, and so technically the regulations do not apply anyway.Last edited by Contractor UK; 14 December 2019, 22:01.
Leave a comment:
-
We should compile a list of agencies where "No one's asked to opt in before" - eventually a duplicate will come up, and we can say, "yes this person did in 2017".
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by BlasterBates View PostIf an agent is insisting on opting out then it is because their legal dept has thought long and hard about it.
Originally posted by PerfectStorm View PostI got that too, and I reminded them of the law around not making it conditional... "which obviously isn't going to happen here, right?"
Funnily enough a template was produced from somewhere and the necessary 'opt in' version of the document created
As with all negotiations, you have to know what's worth fighting for (and I would personally agree that opting in is less important than getting the rest of the contract clauses to be acceptable).
If a contractor does want to push for an opt-in version, Perfect Storm's approach is worth considering, despite the statement not being true.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by fidot View PostAgree with all that. My point is that if a contractor wants the opt in version of a contract, for whatever reason, the claim of illegality isn't a bad tactic. Agents lie to contractors all the time to get signatures on contracts. Always useful to have a counter argument, even if based on FUD.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by fidot View PostAgree with all that. My point is that if a contractor wants the opt in version of a contract, for whatever reason, the claim of illegality isn't a bad tactic. Agents lie to contractors all the time to get signatures on contracts. Always useful to have a counter argument, even if based on FUD.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostIf it was created to give to a contractor that was complaining about Opt In the whole thing is a complete waste of time. It will be wrong for a start. I'll also bet they didn't then ask the contractor for passport and a copy of his qualifications and any other extra diligence they should be producing. It exists to do nothing more than appease the contractor in which case it's a total waste of time as it doesn't give you the protections you were opting in for anyway.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by fidot View PostExcept that, in this case, as PerfectStorm said "Funnily enough a template was produced from somewhere and the necessary 'opt in' version of the document created"
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostAnd they will not fall for the conditional rubbish because they'll just ask someone that does and you are back to square one.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by fidot View PostEven though the agency are allowed to say "opt in" or "f*** off", how many agents will actually know this? In which case, the 'I reminded them of the law around not making it conditional... "which obviously isn't going to happen here, right?"' seems like quite a good negotiating ploy
And they will not fall for the conditional rubbish because they'll just ask someone that does and you are back to square one.
Leave a comment:
-
Even though the agency are allowed to say "opt in" or "f*** off", how many agents will actually know this? In which case, the 'I reminded them of the law around not making it conditional... "which obviously isn't going to happen here, right?"' seems like quite a good negotiating ploy
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by PerfectStorm View PostI'd like to see that response if there is one available - mandating that someone 'opt' that an agency shouldn't be held to their own industry code of conduct doesn't quite pass the sniff test for me.
It's slack of them I agree but they are technically following the guidelines of the legislation.
That said I've yet to see an agency opting out properly so generally you are in by default, for what good it really does you.Last edited by northernladuk; 14 August 2019, 08:42.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostCojak wrote to BiS about this and confirmed agents are well within their rights to decide not to deal with Opt In contractors if they so wish. Its not about it being conditional it's just about their choice of engagement.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by PerfectStorm View PostI got that too, and I reminded them of the law around not making it conditional... "which obviously isn't going to happen here, right?"
Funnily enough a template was produced from somewhere and the necessary 'opt in' version of the document created
Crazy eh!
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: