Reply to: Recourse to claim payment

[Lance]

Out of interest, is 'they' both the Agency and the Client, or did you only claim against the Agency?

It's a reminder of the value of having the client sign paper timesheets for one's own records.

Or just take copies/screenshots of the signed timesheets for evidence.

[Protagoras]

They settled out of court not the full invoice amount but happy to get most of it paid plus the small claims fee.

Out of interest, is 'they' both the Agency and the Client, or did you only claim against the Agency?

It's a reminder of the value of having the client sign paper timesheets for one's own records.

[Cookielove]

Good you got some of your money.
Shocking the agency told them to cancel your timesheet!
Lot of them are shady like that one who drained me for references etc and job flopped…
I raised a point re payment terms recently as agency told me we only pay you monthly …i said I want weekly pay, I’m used to weekly payments…I try to get weekly as in cases like yours less money at stake if anything goes wrong.
Losing a week’s money is bad but losing a month’s money is hard to swallow

[WTFH]

Now that it's settled, care to name the agent? (Or did you sign anything as part of the settlement preventing you from doing so)

[mudskipper]

Just following up for the benefit of other ill-fated folk, I did manage to get my timesheet signed by the director he acknowledged the agency had told him not to approve it originally.

Scummy agency

[ladymuck]

Glad to hear you had a good outcome, and thanks for the update

[ukltdcon]

Just following up for the benefit of other ill-fated folk, I did manage to get my timesheet signed by the director he acknowledged the agency had told him not to approve it originally. Then sent a letter before court before finally filling a small claims court.

They settled out of court not the full invoice amount but happy to get most of it paid plus the small claims fee.

[eek]

don't be ridiculous.
You seem to suggest that if you think someone deliberately doesn't pay the first step is a sueball. It's not.

IANAL but you clearly aren't either.

and this is not helpful for the OP who needs to get paperwork and evidence ready, then send the dunning letters. The agency will likely pay if he has a claim but only after many many months. The process also gives the agency the opportunity to explain, with evidence, why think they don't owe the money. The exchanges in this process form part of the evidence pack for a court if it ever does get there so it can't just be ignored.

Especially given the time frames - Given the OPs first post I suspect the money may not even be due until the end of July.

So the first thing is get the evidence ready (including everything that says you've worked the hours you claim to have done)
Then chase up payment.
Then chase up payment again

Finally when the money is 30+ days overdue then start legal proceedings but you need to show that all other methods were used first.

[Lance]

Dunning isn't a legal process, it's at most a best practice for collecting debts by filtering out those who forgot or can't pay and those who are wilfully refusing to pay. It actually saves the creditor money by only suing the latter.


<snip the noise>

don't be ridiculous.
You seem to suggest that if you think someone deliberately doesn't pay the first step is a sueball. It's not.

IANAL but you clearly aren't either.

and this is not helpful for the OP who needs to get paperwork and evidence ready, then send the dunning letters. The agency will likely pay if he has a claim but only after many many months. The process also gives the agency the opportunity to explain, with evidence, why think they don't owe the money. The exchanges in this process form part of the evidence pack for a court if it ever does get there so it can't just be ignored.

[JustKeepSwimming]

not without evidence.....

anyway. The OP needs to hear about dunning, which for some reason has yet to be mentioned.
Dunning (process) - Wikipedia

Until that has been done it's ridiculous to take it any further. It would, in fact, likely be considered vexatious not go to court having not attempted to resolve amicably.
If the OP does have a case, then it will get paid before going to court as the agency won't want to waste time/money losing a case.

Dunning isn't a legal process, it's at most a best practice for collecting debts by filtering out those who forgot or can't pay and those who are wilfully refusing to pay. It actually saves the creditor money by only suing the latter.

An LBA is best practice but not a legal requirement and a claim can not be struck out for a lack of one. The CPR is annoyingly comprehensive and the court has next to no latitude to deviate.

Provided what OP has said is broadly true then it is not vexatious, scurrilous or obviously ill-founded, so can not be struck out on those grounds.

It's absolutely shocking that so many people think a client can just refuse to sign a timesheet at the end of the month and get out of paying. It is a breach of contract. All contracts have an implied term of good faith. Refusing to sign an accurate timesheet in order to prevent payment is bad faith.

First month was approved and paid. Communication between the OP and agent shows no issues with performance or accuracy of the month 2 timesheet. If it includes any commentary from the agent as to why the client has refused even better.

The evidence is more than enough to put the ball in the client's court. To show why they didn't approve. After all, if the timesheet is inaccurate then they would have correspondence 'OP, why haven't you been in at all this month?' or evidence that shows OP did not perform at the contractual standard.

Most importantly, really. It would cost OP 800ish for a £10k claim, and you can claim it as an expense.

The biggest risk is in how much financial trouble they are in, a claim unless settled is looking at about 18 months.

[Lance]

It does happen, it's now called a statement of truth (E&W).

OP has a strong case, depending on the sums involved, if it's less than £10k I wouldn't even think twice.

not without evidence.....

anyway. The OP needs to hear about dunning, which for some reason has yet to be mentioned.
Dunning (process) - Wikipedia

Until that has been done it's ridiculous to take it any further. It would, in fact, likely be considered vexatious not go to court having not attempted to resolve amicably.
If the OP does have a case, then it will get paid before going to court as the agency won't want to waste time/money losing a case.

[JustKeepSwimming]

This doesn't happen in a civil court. Except on TV.
And if you have a dispute a dispute about evidence, or lack thereof, then it is a whole different matter and well beyond a simple claim of missing payments.

Hence why, if they've removed evidence, or otherwise altered paperwork to gain a financial advantage, it's a police matter.

IANAL.....

It does happen, it's now called a statement of truth (E&W).

OP has a strong case, depending on the sums involved, if it's less than £10k I wouldn't even think twice.

[Lance]

There is an argument that they have verbally acknowledged the work has been done but to get to the stage where they have to say that under oath might not be worth the effort.

This doesn't happen in a civil court. Except on TV.
And if you have a dispute a dispute about evidence, or lack thereof, then it is a whole different matter and well beyond a simple claim of missing payments.

Hence why, if they've removed evidence, or otherwise altered paperwork to gain a financial advantage, it's a police matter.

IANAL.....

[SussexSeagull]

There is an argument that they have verbally acknowledged the work has been done but to get to the stage where they have to say that under oath might not be worth the effort.

[Lance]

Fair point and I should know the basics, although contracts differ from client to client you’d need legal review to interpret it properly is there a service for this? Id usually put it through qdos but that’s only ir35 aspect

I was quick to accept this one, as many will know hard enough to get any contract at the moment for some

regardless in this situation they have basically intentionally removed the paper trail although is a first in 10 or more years of freelancing and contracting

do you have evidence of this? If so then you have them for fraud as well. That is a criminal matter and I would not hesitate to involve the police.