- 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!
Reply to: contract question
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 question"
Collapse
-
My contract places a time limitation on this stuff rather than leaving it open ended.
-
Make sure there is a statement at the bottom of your time sheet stating that the signatory accepts all works provided in this time period are satisfactory.
that should cover it.
Leave a comment:
-
Thanks for the feedback and pointers.
I don't really care about ir35 because i'm going through a umbrella.
The testing is actually security testing, everything is documented.
thanks
Leave a comment:
-
I think its safe to say its a standard clause in any case.
Though as a tester you would be expected to cover items to test in a formal test plan (or at least contribute to a test plan of sorts) for auditing purposes, if these areas (test cases) are left out and bugs creep in after live date, there might be grounds for rework from a testing angle as well as a dev angle.
I assume everything you test is documented, if it isnt, make sure it is !
Leave a comment:
-
I think that this is a standard clause that makes the point that you will be required to fix any faults with the services that you have supplied at your own cost.
This is a good thing to have for IR35 purposes as it is another pointer that you (yourCo) is not an employee who would be paid for their time regardless.
My contracts have all had something similar. So far no clients have tried to invoke that clause - but then my work is always faultless.
Leave a comment:
-
As testing is part of the development process, it's a clause that I would ensure is not in any of my contracts. It's really only relevant when the supplier is responsible for the end-to-end service.
As a tester, if you've not tested properly, perhaps it could mean they could drag you in to retest after the bug you didn't catch is fixed.
Leave a comment:
-
Thanks for the feedback!
Thats exactly what I thought, but did consider that if any defects are identified later than according to this wording, I could be brought back to advise on how to fix them.
Its good to know that its fairly standard, but i'll push for a bit of qualification and see where it gets me.
cheers
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ft101 View PostHello forum
Is the following something that is fairly standard in a contract? I'm not sure I can live go ahead with it as is, and will suggest that it be reworked somewhat. Considering that I will be carrying out testing work, it seems a bit irrelevant anyway, but curious what others think.
Any insights appreciated!
Thanks
Brian
Leave a comment:
-
contract question
Hello forum
Is the following something that is fairly standard in a contract? I'm not sure I can live go ahead with it as is, and will suggest that it be reworked somewhat. Considering that I will be carrying out testing work, it seems a bit irrelevant anyway, but curious what others think.
[The Company will] remedy, without charge and with the minimum disruption to the Client, either any Services which the Client considers unsatisfactory or which contain any defects;
Thanks
BrianTags: None
- 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: