Reply to: Lower paid contractor discussion

[jamesbrown]

According to extensive investigations this has never happened... apparently...

Cue Homer Simpson's typing bird...

[northernladuk]

Especially gricer and lpm1 sockies in the professional forums.

According to extensive investigations this has never happened... apparently...

[northernladuk]

Aren't we all?

Not if you bring chocolate!!

[jamesbrown]

Aren't we all?

Especially gricer and lpm1 sockies in the professional forums.

[NotAllThere]

It's still a waste of Internet space.

Aren't we all?

[Old Greg]

Duly moved out of original thread.

It's still a waste of Internet space.

[cojak]

Duly moved out of original thread.

[eek]

[NowPermOutsideUK]

NLUK poses a good questions as follows:

"If she is outside and manages to argue she's an employee won't she be liable for all the backtax, interest and penalties for the three years. Surely proving she's an employee is possibly the worst move she can make surely?"

This is basically what the next step will depend on - I do wonder that is she wins and is an employee whether HMRC will be notified and recalculate her tax to her disadvantage

[cojak]

I get that and that's a fair assumption. Don't understand why that means I can't post on the thread anymore.. Point taken anyway.
Doesn't seem to take a lot to do that nowadays to be fair but I'll bet it will. FTCs do that and they are a common and accepted method of engagement.

No, I didn't say that, did I?

I asked you to read and consider that possibility before your next post and modify accordingly.

I had to write a post explaining why you are rude to newbies, that should tell you something.

[NowPermOutsideUK]

Absolute nonsense. Getting the lawyers in on the company, who at this point have done everything by the book, have no idea of her pregnancy is going to result in only one thing. If it is a medium sized company, they will have the services of some strong lawyers themselves.

The OP claims she cannot do the job after the baby arrives since this is a role that involves travel, what do you want the lawyers to do, argue that the OP sits in the office with the baby all day and get paid ?

Just so that I am clear - You should only do this IF they decide to terminate you obviously... How you can think anything else is beyond me

If the contract continues and the OP is happy then of course no lawyers but if they do terminate and boot her out what would it cost the OP ...

[northernladuk]

You should totally see an employment lawyer and ask them for their opinion - Some of the lawyers even work for no win no fee and there are charities that do help with real legal advice

If HMRC can move the goalposts and claim contractors are hidden employees then employees are perfectly entitled to try their luck and see if they were really employees with all the rights attached to it. It will cost the employee nothing if they find a no win no fee and they would lose nothing. The client might well settle to avoid the fight

I have a lot of respect for Eeeks answer which is the same as mine basically

No win no fee are the bottom scrapers of that world and no way they would take on a large and complex case like this. It's too much risk and even if she does win and can claim maternity pay the 25% they will make on it is likely to not cover the costs.

You bolded comments aren't right or at best very grey. 'Trying their luck' to see is a very expensive process which has further reaching fallout than just winning or losing. Look how much it's costing HMRC and how difficult it is. Those costs and complexity will also affect the contractor. It's only been done once or twice so far and it's been expensive so that speaks volumes. I don't think the've been cases against a client either, only vs HMRC.

If she is outside and manages to argue she's an employee won't she be liable for all the backtax, interest and penalties for the three years. Surely proving she's an employee is possibly the worst move she can make surely?

So not the same as Eeks.

[fullyautomatix]

Oh, I think you were posting here with username LondonPM before you got banned, I see that you are back with more nonsense now.

[fullyautomatix]

You should totally see an employment lawyer and ask them for their opinion - Some of the lawyers even work for no win no fee and there are charities that do help with real legal advice

If HMRC can move the goalposts and claim contractors are hidden employees then employees are perfectly entitled to try their luck and see if they were really employees with all the rights attached to it. It will cost the employee nothing if they find a no win no fee and they would lose nothing. The client might well settle to avoid the fight

I have a lot of respect for Eeeks answer which is the same as mine basically

Absolute nonsense. Getting the lawyers in on the company, who at this point have done everything by the book, have no idea of her pregnancy is going to result in only one thing. If it is a medium sized company, they will have the services of some strong lawyers themselves.

The OP claims she cannot do the job after the baby arrives since this is a role that involves travel, what do you want the lawyers to do, argue that the OP sits in the office with the baby all day and get paid ?

[NowPermOutsideUK]

You should totally see an employment lawyer and ask them for their opinion - Some of the lawyers even work for no win no fee and there are charities that do help with real legal advice

If HMRC can move the goalposts and claim contractors are hidden employees then employees are perfectly entitled to try their luck and see if they were really employees with all the rights attached to it. It will cost the employee nothing if they find a no win no fee and they would lose nothing. The client might well settle to avoid the fight

I have a lot of respect for Eeeks answer which is the same as mine basically