Complicated Scenario!

[loubylou]

As some others have already stated you have no relationship with the sub therefore they do not have to pay you.

Generally the clientco should have a clause for default/non performace of the contract.

In this event the clientco should have invoked these clauses and followed the procedures potentially ending up in court if disputed by the primary contractor.

If everything went ok and sub effectively paid for the additional work done by you then it would be down to clientco to pay it to you.

In the event that they have not followed the contract procedures i.e. any remedies in the contract there is not much they can do.

If procedures have been followed then the clientco should have gotten several quotes for the work and ensured that they got best value for money to prove to a court that they tried to mitigate any losses.

Basically it boils down to the clientco putting it down to experience and paying you out of their own pocket or you don't get paid.

[Platypus]

Your "mate" has neatly transferred the problem of recovering money from the original contractor on to you. Not very nice of him

What's clear here is that if there's any money to be recovered from the original contractor, then it's down to your mate to recover it. Since he seems to feel that you should be paid for the work you've done, he can then pay you with that money.

I somehow don't have the impression that he'll be chasing the original contractor very hard.

[jmo21]

its up to client to recover any money back from the original contractor

that depends on what the contract between those two looks like.

did the original contractor get agreement to go off site? if they did, and the work then was done by you, why should they have to give money back?

[Ivor Bigun]

Hi Folks,

I have a scenario I'd like to run by some of m'learned friends here at CUK & see what sticks. I've been involved in a project recently which has been a bit of a rescue job & it's all getting complicated - here's the situation.

The primary contractor for the job & his staff left site on 20th Nov 2008 to do another job, never returned until January 2009. To give you an idea of the contractor here, this guy was walking around the client site pi**ed as a newt most of the time & could be found any time of day in the local pub...

Now, as the client involved here is a very good friend of mine, I offered to help out in the absense of primary contractor, on a 'mates who help mates' basis - which is fair enough - however....the primary contractor has now been told by the clientco that, as I have carried out the majority of the work, I must be paid for the work done.

Sounds fair enough really doesn't it?

I am just wondering where I now stand on recovery of monies owed should the primary contractor default...it's not happened yet as the job is ongoing & I have not invoiced yet, but just would like some views from you folks!!

I guess the motto is, never offer to help...but life's not that simple!!

Repeat after me.... There are no friends in business.
What you should be doing is saying to your mate is.....
"Get the P*sshead to pay me on these rates".

Oh, and by the way, you've been stitched up.
Chalk it down to experience.

[Scotchpie]

To be honest there is little to be confused about. You were hired by the client on a "mates who help mates" basis (free?). Therefore neither the original contractor or the client owes you anything.

Obviously you are doing a good job and the client wants you to complete the job rather than the original contractor.

The problem for you, if I've read correctly, is that you have verbally agreed to work for free - no wonder he wants you to stay and sack the other (despite his persistent drunkenness).

You have to go back and say that you were only helping out and if you are to stay on you need a contract and an hourly/daily rate.

As for work done, well you did agree to work for free (and as far as I know verbal contracts are legally binding in this situation), and you fulfilled your agreement. Write it off and learn that you NEVER work for free, not even for mates. In fact don't work one minute more for the client until he agrees with you a rate and terms of agreement.

This is your business. Would your mate risk his buisness for you? If he is your mate though he will understand perfectly where you're coming from.

[VectraMan]

Now I read it again, it sounds a lot like your "mate" is trying to screw you by claiming it's not his resposibility to pay you for the work you've done for him.

[d000hg]

If you previously had a decent relationship with the client, which seems to be the whole reason you helped out, then can't you have a friendly chat with your mate over a pint and sort it out?

It doesn't sound like the original contractor's situation is relevant here, but you haven't made it clear if you originally expected to be paid and simply didn't formalise it.

You might advise your client to see if they can boot him out under the contractor equivalent of "gross misconduct"... contractor contracts do have some standard clause to let the client say "get the hell out", right?

[Crossroads]

To reiterate what has already been said. Based upon the information supplied, you have no contract with the original contractor and he has no obiligation to pay you.

It sounds like you have been engaged by the original contractors end client. They are also your client, and it is they who need to pay you. What did you agree with them?

[cojak]

"Never confuse business and friendship" - Cojak.

[cojak]

What does your negotiated contract say?

Oh.....

[Turion]

It's very simple. Unless you have a contract to provide services to the primary contractor, he owes you nothing.

Next.

[ASB]

I'm not sure whats complicated.

You appear to have no relationship whatsoever with the original primary contractor. You have some realtionship with the end client. I'm sure you negotiated rates payment etc with them at the time.

The end client may have a slightly complicated situation, but they also have an easy whipping boy.

[chris79]

So basically client paid a contractor to do some work. Contractor didn't do the work and instead a friend of client did the work. Friend of client now wants the money from the original contractor...

I think the chances of getting the money are fairly small, if anything surely client should have refused to pay the money on the basis the contract was broken. At very least the contract should have been terminated.. I think a lot will rest on the terms of the original contract.. if you hired him in to do a job and didn't specify terms such as timeframes, absences, finish times, etc.. then I think you could find there is a problem.

Seems like a bit of a mis-managed situation by the client if anything.

[VectraMan]

So you agreed to do the work for free? Or you agreed to do the work and didn't bother sorting out who was meant to be paying you?

[TheVoice]

Hi Folks,

I have a scenario I'd like to run by some of m'learned friends here at CUK & see what sticks. I've been involved in a project recently which has been a bit of a rescue job & it's all getting complicated - here's the situation.

The primary contractor for the job & his staff left site on 20th Nov 2008 to do another job, never returned until January 2009. To give you an idea of the contractor here, this guy was walking around the client site pi**ed as a newt most of the time & could be found any time of day in the local pub...

Now, as the client involved here is a very good friend of mine, I offered to help out in the absense of primary contractor, on a 'mates who help mates' basis - which is fair enough - however....the primary contractor has now been told by the clientco that, as I have carried out the majority of the work, I must be paid for the work done.

Sounds fair enough really doesn't it?

I am just wondering where I now stand on recovery of monies owed should the primary contractor default...it's not happened yet as the job is ongoing & I have not invoiced yet, but just would like some views from you folks!!

I guess the motto is, never offer to help...but life's not that simple!!