• 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.

Previously on "Contractual liability"

Collapse

  • malvolio
    replied
    Agreed. Most contractors think like permies not businesses, and most of them only look at the rate on offer. That's why only 10% of them are in the PCG and probably another 10% have thought of a reason for not joining.

    Leave a comment:


  • LlareGgub
    replied
    Originally posted by malvolio View Post
    Well yes, but you would be better off asking the PCG forums, don't you think?

    You shouldn't just ignore such things. A lot of agency contacts these days seek to protect themselves against losses but are so badly drafted they make the contractor liable for everything up to and including the agency's bad debts and the bill for its paperclips. You should aim to get the maximum value limited to the agency's potetnial loss on the contract - so a 3 monther at £300 pd to you and £45 to them means their total exposure is no more than £2925 - so why do they want indemnifying for anything up to a million?
    I ask here because I expect there will be many contractors on this board dealing with similar agencies.

    I don't ignore the Ts & Cs, they are fundamental to contracting,
    and have received all the usual coercion attempts from the agents, "Everyone else is on these terms." and such like, when seeking to negotiate acceptable (regarding IR35, liability and indemnity) terms.

    I've had discussions with B&C about early contracts, who were in total agreement with the terms I was seeking to negotiate.

    I simply ask agents for a total limit of liability equal to the aggregate of fees received for the job, no liability on either party for indirect and consequential losses, and the usual force majeure exclusions.

    So far, several of the well-known agents have all refused to alter their terms to those that are commonly negotiated in genuine B2B agreements, and are embodied in the PCG contracts.

    I suspect numerous contractors must adopt an ostrich mentality when it comes to the small print, which just plays into the agents' hands.

    Leave a comment:


  • malvolio
    replied
    Originally posted by LlareGgub View Post
    That's hardly a sustainable business model though, is it?

    Has anyone successfully negotiated reasonable terms, based on the PCG draft contracts for example?
    Well yes, but you would be better off asking the PCG forums, don't you think?

    You shouldn't just ignore such things. A lot of agency contacts these days seek to protect themselves against losses but are so badly drafted they make the contractor liable for everything up to and including the agency's bad debts and the bill for its paperclips. You should aim to get the maximum value limited to the agency's potetnial loss on the contract - so a 3 monther at £300 pd to you and £45 to them means their total exposure is no more than £2925 - so why do they want indemnifying for anything up to a million?

    Leave a comment:


  • LlareGgub
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
    Your company can always cease trading.

    If your company is in administration and has no asserts then they can't get any money from you.
    That's hardly a sustainable business model though, is it?

    Has anyone successfully negotiated reasonable terms, based on the PCG draft contracts for example?

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Your company can always cease trading.

    If your company is in administration and has no asserts then they can't get any money from you.

    Leave a comment:


  • LlareGgub
    started a topic Contractual liability

    Contractual liability

    Please, prove me wrong.

    I've been contracting for two and a half years, a member of the PCG, and an avid reader of this board.

    Finding suitable contracts, and doing the work, is not that difficult.

    The main difficulty in my experience is that of negotiating reasonable contract terms with the agents, particularly with respect to contractual liability.

    Most contracts are written such that the contractor accepts liability for unlimited sums for consequential losses - loss of business, profits, revenues, goodwill etc. resulting from his or her acts or omissions in performing the services.

    As a contractor, I have insurances in place, should disaster strike and the client sue, which cover negligent acts and omissions, but only to the extent that such liability would attach in the absence of the contract.

    I can accept liability limited to the price paid for the services, excluding liability (on the contractor, client, and agent) for consequential losses
    (all of which are reasonably reflected in the PCG terms). I regularly seek to negotiate such modifications to agency terms - with little success.

    My question is, how many of you negotiate such terms, or do you ignore the small print?

    Incidentally, I am neither a lawyer nor a solicitor.

Working...
X