Liable for agency's profit

[CiderEagle]

I have only once had an agent refuse a request to delete or change a line in a contract.

I reckon when they get to that stage they are already mentally spending their commission so aren't likely to rock the boat.

The exception in my case was Computer People. Luckily I had another contract offer so I went for the other one and told them to go forth and multiply.

[centurian]

Surely that side is covered by your PI insurance??

I don't think I've seen that clause used before though!

Doubt it will get that far though. Sounds like a clause designed to keep hold of a contractor's last timesheet pay.

Also remember that if you have a notice period on the contractors side, then the most any agent can claim for is the amount they would make on the notice period - not the remainder of the contract.

[The Agents View]

Surely that side is covered by your PI insurance??

I don't think I've seen that clause used before though!

[rootsnall]

clause dropped at my request.

Well done. They often do bend rather than risk losing the work.

[suityou01]

clause dropped at my request.

[rootsnall]

My sentiments exactly. A big part of contracting is reading and tweaking the contract. I wonder how many CUKers just sign away without scrutinising the finer print. None I hope.

In this climate I reckon pimps are just trying it on hoping people are desperate enough just to sign whatever is put in front of them.

Plenty don't read them at all. I recently signed a dodgy contract and am living to regret it already. I had read it but it was a take it or leave it option and with little on the table I took it. Sometimes you just have to grin and bear it, 90% of the time you'll be OK, it's a gamble. If anything in the contract is plainly unreasonable then it wouldn't hold up in court, or so I've been lead to believe. The one you are referring to I've seen a few times, I'd say it's pretty useless for them, but in there to apply pressure if a scrap begins.

[suityou01]

Tell them to get ****ed. They can't sell the cake then eat it...

My sentiments exactly. A big part of contracting is reading and tweaking the contract. I wonder how many CUKers just sign away without scrutinising the finer print. None I hope.

In this climate I reckon pimps are just trying it on hoping people are desperate enough just to sign whatever is put in front of them.

[Moscow Mule]

This clause in a new contract seems like a try on



To be in material breach, you just need to be deemed by clientco to be under skilled or unprofessional. So if your face doesn't fit, you get shafted and owe the pimp six months commission.

No thanks.

Tell them to get ****ed. They can't sell the cake then eat it...

[suityou01]

This clause in a new contract seems like a try on

If the contractor and/or consultant is in material breach of this agreement, the contractor shall without prejudice to any other remedy of "Pimps name", indemnify "Pimps name" for any loss of profit it may suffer as a consequence of that breach.

To be in material breach, you just need to be deemed by clientco to be under skilled or unprofessional. So if your face doesn't fit, you get shafted and owe the pimp six months commission.

No thanks.