Contract extension query - signed nothing?

[Scrag Meister]

I've never signed anything on an extension.

Usually just an email from the agent saying its been extended to...... 2010. which I politely reply to, accepting it, just to keep things tidy. Functionally the same as a sig I suppose.

[Svalbaard]

Agree with CheeseSlice. Definately get an extension document in place clearly stating the revised start and end dates, with the daily rate that you have agreed.

I have not worked for an agency that have refused to offer an extension document and would be wary of one that did.

[CheeseSlice]

I think it is important for you to get something in writing regarding the new end date of the contract, and if possible something saying that the existing contract conditions will apply until this date.
If you don't it may leave open opportunities for your agent or clientco to bend the rules, e.g. this could lead to you not being able to leave the contract when you expected to.

[BolshieBastard]

If they don't offer you an amended contract then I would write to them setting out the terms (dates, rate, notice period) of the new contract that you are offering them. If they continue to engage you then they have tacitly accepted the terms in the contract amendment you have offered and the contract becomes binding on both parties.

I've had contract extensions where they just send an amended "Schedule" stating the new start/end dates and modified terms (rate, notice etc). That's all they need to do, you should really insist that they issue a proper contract amendment as it's unprofessional (on both sides) not to do so.



Technically no, because a verbal agreement is legally binding. It's just that it's difficult to prove what was said so you have to follow it up in writing. In the real world, either party could use this to their advantage by casting doubt on what the verbal agreement was but it's certainly not a good way to do business.

I find that the friendliest way to do business is to be professional and put it down in writing so there are no unfortunate misunderstandings (on either side) later on.

Er, no. This would only work if the letter was sent before the new 'contract' period started and the OP hasnt stepped foot on site in the 'new' contract period.

If the OP steps on site after the old contract has ended, he's implicitly accepted the original T&C's stand going forward.

[northernladuk]

By turning up and continuing to work you have accepted the conditions of a contract by being there. The contract being the last one used so the terms will apply. Well that is the theory anyway. In practice you just get on and do business in a professional manner. The problem being when the proverbial hits the fan and you need to fall back on it. This implicit agreement starts to become a source of the problem rather than the answer the contract should provide.

I would say if you have turned up at work you are still bound by the terms of the previous contract, especially now you have been refered to the old one. I would say this means you can't just walk. Going back to the theory/practice you could argue that there is no contract etc but then I am sure you would be upset and refer to the countract if they shafted you if they tried the same trick the other way.

It is not a good situation to be in for sure but there is some form of contract in place in your position I would say

[Wanderer]

On checking the terminology it does say "Start date April 2010 for 6 months with possible extensions"
Has anyone else come across this way of working?

If they don't offer you an amended contract then I would write to them setting out the terms (dates, rate, notice period) of the new contract that you are offering them. If they continue to engage you then they have tacitly accepted the terms in the contract amendment you have offered and the contract becomes binding on both parties.

I've had contract extensions where they just send an amended "Schedule" stating the new start/end dates and modified terms (rate, notice etc). That's all they need to do, you should really insist that they issue a proper contract amendment as it's unprofessional (on both sides) not to do so.

Could I legitimately walk out at any point, not having signed anything if a better role came along?

Technically no, because a verbal agreement is legally binding. It's just that it's difficult to prove what was said so you have to follow it up in writing. In the real world, either party could use this to their advantage by casting doubt on what the verbal agreement was but it's certainly not a good way to do business.

I find that the friendliest way to do business is to be professional and put it down in writing so there are no unfortunate misunderstandings (on either side) later on.

[Sausage Surprise]

My current contract contract recently finished it's first 6 months and the client wished to extend for a further 6 - happy days!
Contacted the agent and asked for something to sign i.e. contract extension, follow on contract or whatever, as has always been the norm in my good few years of contracting.
Agent says my initial contract covers this as it mentions possible extensions.
On checking the terminology it does say "Start date April 2010 for 6 months with possible extensions"
Has anyone else come across this way of working?
Could I legitimately walk out at any point, not having signed anything if a better role came along?