Reply to: Advice on outside IR35 but first payments have TAX&NI deducted

[cojak]

I feel sorry for the guy been here seven years and they have just appointed a team lead who he must report to. Pointless with only two of them in the office and he has been asking for a pay rise without success. Whole thing is messy...
This is more like a desktop role than a project one.

More fool him. He should have been out the door years ago.

[Antman]

Looks like you dodged a bullet there.

[jayjay69]

Still no response from Client or Agent! Even without the SDS and payment issues I would not be stopping. The whole project thing is a front IMO I most certainly will be on BAU and support stuff which is not what I signed up for. The permi has pointed out that out of six service desk staff ,four walked out over an eight week period and three 2nd/3rd line walked out in his office leaving just him for the last year struggling to support the site ,that is not good odds and I can see me being asked to provide support before any project work starts, that coupled with the fact the client wants floorwalkers has ensured my bags are well and truly packed. I feel sorry for the guy been here seven years and they have just appointed a team lead who he must report to. Pointless with only two of them in the office and he has been asking for a pay rise without success. Whole thing is messy...
This is more like a desktop role than a project one.

[northernladuk]

Um, no they should be paying the OP's company via deemed payments - the lack of an SDS isn't relevant there.

The point is they clearly don't know that and the threat of action may help resolve any outstanding issues he has.

[eek]

They've broken the law by paying you without an SDS let alone the possibility of fraud by deception or whatever. If you want to get this sorted quick and go would there not be a time you go for the nuclear option and advise you'll be reporting them to HMRC over the lack of SDS unless they pull their finger out and get this sorted? Worth a £100 solicitors letter to speed it up a bit?

Um, no they should be paying the OP's company via deemed payments - the lack of an SDS isn't relevant there.

[jayjay69]

They've broken the law by paying you without an SDS let alone the possibility of fraud by deception or whatever. If you want to get this sorted quick and go would there not be a time you go for the nuclear option and advise you'll be reporting them to HMRC over the lack of SDS unless they pull their finger out and get this sorted? Worth a £100 solicitors letter to speed it up a bit?

That is probably the only option left, burned bridges and all that...

[northernladuk]

An utter mess...only had three payments to date but last two payments in to business account with deductions , this weeks payment in to business account without deductions. I told payroll to keep deductions and place in to personal account for this week but that was obviously far too much to comprehend. I have already alerted my accountant so he can keeps tabs on it.
The final nail in the coffin is an email to the IT department received stating that all staff including contractors must floor-walk once a day to identify any problems! Um no!
I was doing that cr@p about 15 years back, and I am here for projects not BAU.
So all in all it seems the client and the agency have been economical with the truth.

They've broken the law by paying you without an SDS let alone the possibility of fraud by deception or whatever. If you want to get this sorted quick and go would there not be a time you go for the nuclear option and advise you'll be reporting them to HMRC over the lack of SDS unless they pull their finger out and get this sorted? Worth a £100 solicitors letter to speed it up a bit?

[jayjay69]

An utter mess...only had three payments to date but last two payments in to business account with deductions , this weeks payment in to business account without deductions. I told payroll to keep deductions and place in to personal account for this week but that was obviously far too much to comprehend. I have already alerted my accountant so he can keeps tabs on it.
The final nail in the coffin is an email to the IT department received stating that all staff including contractors must floor-walk once a day to identify any problems! Um no!
I was doing that cr@p about 15 years back, and I am here for projects not BAU.
So all in all it seems the client and the agency have been economical with the truth.

[d000hg]

Nope...agency is paying me direct.

OK thanks for clarifying. In that case it sounds more dodgy - a client can be excused cocking this up IMO but this is bread & butter for the agency. More than just a payment error, does this mean they have made RTI contributions and all that? Sounds a mess

[SimonMac]

Not wanting to rehash the whole thread, it sounds like outright dishonesty from the pimp (remember they work for the client and not for you so if its gone sour like you say the client will be giving their account manager grief, whether for the dishonesty or the fact they were caught is anyones guess).

Alas there has to be some personal naivety on your part, lots of red flags by the sounds of it my biggest question is where was the money going, into your personal bank account or company? If you have payments with tax taken off going into your company account that is a headache for you, if you have payments going into your personal account which are you companies as they outside (in your belief) that is a headache for you!

[jayjay69]

So the client is paying you directly, rather than the agency?
Sounds like simple incompetence on their part in that case, not knowing how to set things up. Wouldn't it be better you send them invoices instead of being on some sort of payroll system?

Nope...agency is paying me direct.

[d000hg]

So the client is paying you directly, rather than the agency?
Sounds like simple incompetence on their part in that case, not knowing how to set things up. Wouldn't it be better you send them invoices instead of being on some sort of payroll system?

[jayjay69]

In terms of the SDS I have had no response from the client on their side.

The agency deemed it inside from first contact with them which was fair enough, one week prior agency called to change status and still no proof of determination.
I should have picked it up then but got side-lined getting all my ID documentation together and emailing over and that was cocked up by them, I ended up sending all my documentation to them including paying for a DBS check and the client's HR came back to me later that same week to say they had no documentation and they would have paid for the DBS check. I had to bollock the agency to forward onwards to the client HR. Of course you suspect some initial teething problems but that should have been alarm bells.
This week I am missing a timesheet on portal so that will have to be chased up ,so I really lay the blame at the agency for this ,judging by the last few weeks on their behaviour it is just a shoddy run disjointed outfit.

[eek]

On that one I completely agree, what I want to understand is - was the agent knowingly lying about contract status or client haven't done their bit and there were no determination at all. This is just to understand where to look and what to expect from these nice folks in the next search.

Lying - if the status of a contract had gone from inside IR35 to outside IR35, anyone clueful would have insisted on the paperwork that confirmed the fact.

The lack of the paperwork tells me the agent is shall we say economical with the truth.

[Sub]

You may think you are being pedantic but the reality is that without a SDS determination in the agency's grubby hand, the agency had no basis on which it should have been able to say that the contract was outside IR35...

On that one I completely agree, what I want to understand is - was the agent knowingly lying about contract status or client haven't done their bit and there were no determination at all. This is just to understand where to look and what to expect from these nice folks in the next search.