Originally posted by Wanderer
View Post
- 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.
Logging in...
Previously on "No notice specified, but not forbidden either."
Collapse
-
I am already in the contract, so I rather think they wouldn't do that. I would say that my contract has no notice period from my side precisely because the previous guy did have that clause and used it.
-
So IR35 is probably not relevant then. Just get them to insert a line into the contract saying that either party can terminate the contract by giving X days notice. Sorted.Originally posted by Ignis Fatuus View PostNo. It's not in the UK and not in English. But basically substitution is not allowed.
Leave a comment:
-
No. It's not in the UK and not in English. But basically substitution is not allowed.Originally posted by northernladuk View PostWhat about subtitution?? Did you get this one reviewed?
Leave a comment:
-
There isn't a specific section.Originally posted by northernladuk View PostWhat does the MOO section of the contract say?
Main contract:
The contractor provides IT services, which are specified in Appendix A in more detail
Appendix A has:
Job Description: Development in the xxx environment using PL / SQL
Rate: xxx / day. The daily rate is based on 8 working hours. Only hours actually provided to be billed.
other paragraphs include:
Freedom from direction:
The contractor is not subject to direction in the execution of its activities. The planning of the task is determined by the contractor. Project-related time constraints are observed, however, as are technical specifications, provided these are necessary for the proper execution of the contract.
The Contractor shall not claim a fee if he is prevented due to illness or other absence from work from performing the services.
The Contractor receives for his services a compensation, which is defined in Appendix A. The compensation is paid only for work actually performed.
The duration of the project (man-days) in Appendix A is only indicative. Should the project be shortened for any reason, the Contractor has no right to remuneration for the entire duration of the project nor to compensation for early termination of the project.
Leave a comment:
-
Neither would I normally but I let that one slip by. I must design a workflow that does not lead me to signing things I don't want.Originally posted by pmeswani View PostPersonally, I wouldn't accept a contract that stipulates that I have to pay an agent for leaving a contract. Nor would I accept a contract which doesn't have a notice period of no more than 4 weeks (ideally 1 to 2 weeks, but with an upper limit of 4 weeks, anything more than that, or no notice period is a straight rejection).
Anyway, contrary to the idea that I might be due for the entire rest of the agent's lost fees, the contract actually says:
All costs incurred by early exit from the project by the contractor shall be borne by the contractor. In this case, an adjustment shall be made at the last monthly bill.
So if they're talking money that could be covered by 1 month's billing, it must mean incidental costs.
Though of course the ideal way is to come to a mutual agreement. I'm sure they could be persuaded that a notice period and a handover is the best option for them too.
Leave a comment:
-
Personally, I wouldn't accept a contract that stipulates that I have to pay an agent for leaving a contract. Nor would I accept a contract which doesn't have a notice period of no more than 4 weeks (ideally 1 to 2 weeks, but with an upper limit of 4 weeks, anything more than that, or no notice period is a straight rejection).Originally posted by Ignis Fatuus View PostYes, I suppose that is what it means. Not just any incidental costs of finding a replacement, but the possible cost of not finding a replacement.
Clear as day but I couldn't see it. Thanks for pointing me at it. For sure that would be at least their starting position.
Leave a comment:
-
Yes, I suppose that is what it means. Not just any incidental costs of finding a replacement, but the possible cost of not finding a replacement.Originally posted by pmeswani View PostSo if you terminate your contract 5 weeks into a 6 month contract, are you liable to pay the agent for the remaining 4 months and 3 weeks of the project? The way you have worded the 2nd paragraph, I have deduced that you are financially liable for the remainder of the project. Have I assumed some facts? Quite possibly.
Clear as day but I couldn't see it. Thanks for pointing me at it. For sure that would be at least their starting position.
Leave a comment:
-
So if you terminate your contract 5 weeks into a 6 month contract, are you liable to pay the agent for the remaining 4 months and 3 weeks of the project? The way you have worded the 2nd paragraph, I have deduced that you are financially liable for the remainder of the project. Have I assumed some facts? Quite possibly.Originally posted by Ignis Fatuus View PostMy contract does not have a notice period on my side, but neither does it say that I may not give notice.
It does say that I may only terminate in such a way as to allow the agency to continue to meet the project requirements, and it says that I will bear all costs incurred by early exit from the project.
Has anyone had experience of clauses like this?
IANAL but it seems to me that if I terminate in accordance with the first requirement, this is not an early exit, it is a modified termination date - exit still takes place at the (new) termination date. And the first requirement would surely be satisfied by e.g. 1 month's notice. (The technical requirements are nothing special).
I know, I know, don't jump: vada a bordo, cazzo.
Leave a comment:
-
No notice specified, but not forbidden either.
My contract does not have a notice period on my side, but neither does it say that I may not give notice.
It does say that I may only terminate in such a way as to allow the agency to continue to meet the project requirements, and it says that I will bear all costs incurred by early exit from the project.
Has anyone had experience of clauses like this?
IANAL but it seems to me that if I terminate in accordance with the first requirement, this is not an early exit, it is a modified termination date - exit still takes place at the (new) termination date. And the first requirement would surely be satisfied by e.g. 1 month's notice. (The technical requirements are nothing special).
I know, I know, don't jump: vada a bordo, cazzo.Tags: 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
- What does the non-compete clause consultation mean for contractors? Today 07:59
- To escalate or wait? With late payment, even month two is too late Yesterday 07:26
- Signs of IT contractor jobs uplift softened in January 2026 Feb 17 07:37
- ‘Make Work Pay…’ heralds a new era for umbrella company compliance Feb 16 08:23
- Should a new limited company not making much money pay a salary/dividend? Feb 13 08:43
- Blocking the 2025 Loan Charge settlement opportunity from being a genuine opportunity is… HMRC Feb 12 07:41
- How a buyer’s market in UK property for 2026 is contractors’ double-edge sword Feb 11 07:12
- Why PAYE overcharging by HMRC is every contractor’s problem Feb 10 06:26
- Government unveils ‘Umbrella Company Regulations consultation’ Feb 9 05:55
- JSL rules ‘are HMRC’s way to make contractor umbrella company clients give a sh*t where their money goes’ Feb 8 07:42

Leave a comment: