Credit, Reference and CRB Checks - Who's Responsibility is It ?

[AussieDigger]

Recently I was in the fortunate position of being offerred 2 contracts on the same day, unfortunately, both subject to pre-employment screening. This left me with the dilema, do I accept one, but run the risk that I might fail the screening and end up jobless or do I accept both, knowing full well that 3 weeks down the road, having passed all the checks, I am going to let one of the Clients down.

In the end I had no choice, other than to accept both and see what transpired. This went very much against my usual levels of professionalism, but what choice did I have? Part of me feels that as a contractor, I should accept this as part and parcel of the job and have reject one of the offers from the outset. Another part of me thinks that if the Client wants to introduced these enhanced checks, that we've done perfectly well without for the last 25 years I've freelanced, then they should run the risk of losing a potential contractor to another offer that comes along in the interim.

I'm not sure there is a right answer, so I'd be interested to know how others feel about this situation.

Under those circumstances, I would do the same. Whoever gets to the finish post first, wins.

I always tell clients with roles subject to screening that until the contract is signed, i'm on the market so its in their interests to get it done quickly.

[TheVoiceOfReason]

Recently I was in the fortunate position of being offerred 2 contracts on the same day, unfortunately, both subject to pre-employment screening. This left me with the dilema, do I accept one, but run the risk that I might fail the screening and end up jobless or do I accept both, knowing full well that 3 weeks down the road, having passed all the checks, I am going to let one of the Clients down.

In the end I had no choice, other than to accept both and see what transpired. This went very much against my usual levels of professionalism, but what choice did I have? Part of me feels that as a contractor, I should accept this as part and parcel of the job and have reject one of the offers from the outset. Another part of me thinks that if the Client wants to introduced these enhanced checks, that we've done perfectly well without for the last 25 years I've freelanced, then they should run the risk of losing a potential contractor to another offer that comes along in the interim.

I'm not sure there is a right answer, so I'd be interested to know how others feel about this situation.

[NickNick]

At the end of the day, its not my responsibility to chase all this stuff down if I've given all the required data that is needed.

Whilst I agree it's not, isn't this all about going the extra mile to land a contract. When I've worked on RFQs for work, I've had to jump through some hoops and have always considered it part of getting the gig.

[Gentile]

Loose ends really. Just easier to look for something else and move on. 3 weeks is enough time to wait for a client to sort themselves out don't you think ?

No problem for the insights, HTH.

And yep, I think you're doing exactly the right thing here. No agent worth their salt is going to let filling in a few forms and paying a few quid stand between them and their commission. If that's really all there is preventing this contract from getting going, they should be happy to enter the details you've already given them into a few websites themselves, pay the fee, and get going. However, if that's not all there is standing in the way of the contract starting, then they'll try and get you to take any further risk and time investment upon yourself. It's typical of the low-balling psychology you unfortunately sometimes encounter from less-reputable agents: asking for something relatively simple in the first instance, in the hope that having invested some of your time and money initially, you wont be inclined to call a halt when they come asking for even more outlay on your part further down the line. I'm of the mind that people either stick to the agreements they've made, or they don't. Where they don't, for any reason, that's a big red flag and time to call a halt until and unless they keep up their end of the bargain.

[AussieDigger]

I've been asked to obtain my own Credit Reference check before (by an employer for a permie role, as part of the DV process, rather than by an agency for a contract role). On that occasion, I obtained the written CRA report by post, then subsequently handed the reference check to my interviewer at my first interview, and was reimbursed for same (it was only about £2 IIRC). I guess it was easier for them to have me request my own credit history, rather than for them to go through the hoops that CRAs often require of organisations that are registering to do checks on third parties (which gets into the territory of the entity requesting the report needing to prove to the CRA that they have your consent to perform such a check: which is doable, but can be an avoidable pain when you the subject don't actually have a financial relationship with the entity requesting the check).

I didn't mind doing the above, as I had a conditional offer on the table, the employer had said up front that they would reimburse me, and the outlay was negligible in any case. However, for contract work, I wouldn't recommend spending your own cash on any sort of background/credit check, merely because an agency or a ClientCo requests you to, whether or not an offer is on the table. Apart from anything else, it gets into the territory of their dealing with you as an individual, rather than with your Ltd company as a separate legal entity with whom they have a B2B relationship. Back in busier times, I occasionally had agencies asking me to obtain one sort of check or another "because it would make it easier to get me an interview". I always just told them that I didn't have any difficulty getting interviews, but thanks all the same.

I realise that you're in a slightly different boat on this occasion, having had a conditional offer on the table by the sound of things. I also realise that the economic climate is different now, which is leading to some fairly bizarre requests from ClientCos and agencies that are trying to keep their costs down. It sound like you've done the best you can with what you've got; you've provided an initial outlay from your own funds in good faith to smooth this contract into an active phase. What I'd recommend you do now, is go back to the conditional offer you hopefully had with the agency, and point out to them that you've now satisfied the requirements they initially said they were looking for to get things started, and say that you expect them to now uphold their side of the bargain. Don't fall for providing any further/duplicate checks under the auspices of some apparent miscommunication between ClientCo and the agency: that's for them to sort out between themselves. If there ever was a real contract on the table here, you can be sure that the agency will swallow the costs at this stage; they wont want to lose their 'sure-fire' commission for the sake of a small outlay on their part to cover their/ClientCo's oversight. Any further money you personally sink into repeating checks for bureaucracy's sake at this juncture isn't going to change a single thing: this opportunity is either dead in the water, or it's not, and if it is dead throwing good money after bad unfortunately isn't going to reanimate it at this juncture.

Thanks for your insights here.

Indeed it is very much along the lines you've mentioned. At the start of the process, the agency asked I provide specific details to do CRB, Credit and Reference checks and all that - one of which was (strangely) Disclosure Scotland, which I had to pay for. Hopefully I will get reimbursed on that one.

Anyways, I did all this, did the interviews (phone, face to face - more travel expenses - up to £300+ so far) and I got the gig. 2 days out from contract start date, Agency tells me the client wants to delay because they are not ready. I say fine, give them a week so they have their house in order and we can start on date xx with everything done. I tell the agency, make sure the client has completed all their checks etc and they are fine with everything. Turns out they hadn't even started. Ok, it happens. 1 week later, I go back to the Agency and say - if its all done lets sign the contract for start date xx but make sure they have done all their checks first so its all sorted. 'Yep, will do' says the agency. I front up, sign the contract, agency does same, get an email the next day saying these checks have to be done.... what ? Thought you said they were done....'ah well, no you see, seems the client isn't quite organised and have only just started.....so if you could just log on here and do this stuff, log on here and send us credit check stuff and log on here and do this stuff, that would be great...'. I say 'Err no I've given you what you need here so i'd suggest sorting it out with the client before the start date because we're not starting without it, as they could elect to nullify the contract without it or if its not to their liking. Best not to take the risk. Agency doesn't want to listen. At the end of the day, its not my responsibility to chase all this stuff down if I've given all the required data that is needed.

Loose ends really. Just easier to look for something else and move on. 3 weeks is enough time to wait for a client to sort themselves out don't you think ?

[Gentile]

So here's the thing.

Do interview with Client X. Client X wants to do the usual checks - no drama. You give them all the data and off they go.

...

So who's responsibility is it anyway to actually go and perform these checks and validate them ? Surely not yours as the candidate? You just supply the info required for them to do it right ?

I've been asked to obtain my own Credit Reference check before (by an employer for a permie role, as part of the DV process, rather than by an agency for a contract role). On that occasion, I obtained the written CRA report by post, then subsequently handed the reference check to my interviewer at my first interview, and was reimbursed for same (it was only about £2 IIRC). I guess it was easier for them to have me request my own credit history, rather than for them to go through the hoops that CRAs often require of organisations that are registering to do checks on third parties (which gets into the territory of the entity requesting the report needing to prove to the CRA that they have your consent to perform such a check: which is doable, but can be an avoidable pain when you the subject don't actually have a financial relationship with the entity requesting the check).

I didn't mind doing the above, as I had a conditional offer on the table, the employer had said up front that they would reimburse me, and the outlay was negligible in any case. However, for contract work, I wouldn't recommend spending your own cash on any sort of background/credit check, merely because an agency or a ClientCo requests you to, whether or not an offer is on the table. Apart from anything else, it gets into the territory of their dealing with you as an individual, rather than with your Ltd company as a separate legal entity with whom they have a B2B relationship. Back in busier times, I occasionally had agencies asking me to obtain one sort of check or another "because it would make it easier to get me an interview". I always just told them that I didn't have any difficulty getting interviews, but thanks all the same.

I realise that you're in a slightly different boat on this occasion, having had a conditional offer on the table by the sound of things. I also realise that the economic climate is different now, which is leading to some fairly bizarre requests from ClientCos and agencies that are trying to keep their costs down. It sound like you've done the best you can with what you've got; you've provided an initial outlay from your own funds in good faith to smooth this contract into an active phase. What I'd recommend you do now, is go back to the conditional offer you hopefully had with the agency, and point out to them that you've now satisfied the requirements they initially said they were looking for to get things started, and say that you expect them to now uphold their side of the bargain. Don't fall for providing any further/duplicate checks under the auspices of some apparent miscommunication between ClientCo and the agency: that's for them to sort out between themselves. If there ever was a real contract on the table here, you can be sure that the agency will swallow the costs at this stage; they wont want to lose their 'sure-fire' commission for the sake of a small outlay on their part to cover their/ClientCo's oversight. Any further money you personally sink into repeating checks for bureaucracy's sake at this juncture isn't going to change a single thing: this opportunity is either dead in the water, or it's not, and if it is dead throwing good money after bad unfortunately isn't going to reanimate it at this juncture.

[northernladuk]

No exceptional circumstances. Have no issue with parties covering their own backs - indeed, it protects me as well. But if the client starts the contract and then finds some problem they are not happy with they could use it to exit the contract. Given it s a fairly remote contract with lots of costs, its a risk. But the real issue is they have had loads of time to do this and left it way too late and now expect me to carry the can on time and cost. As I've expended some days on the role already in terms of interviews, contracts, checks etc etc its just getting a bit too much. Agency isn't doing their bit and ensuring the stuff all gets done by them or the client.

Never had this hassle before with any FS client.

It happens. This is why SC contracts (illegaly) say that only people with SC clearance will be considered due to the time and effort taken to put people through and then have them fail or the need for the work disappears before it comes through.

Wouldn't be the first time the client has left it too late and it most certainly won't be the last.

Just have to make a decision as to whether or not you progress. Make it known you are considering pulling out, that might grease the wheels a bit.

[AussieDigger]

Depends on what role you are going for surely. Also sounds like all parties are trying to cover their own backs. The client doesn't want to take the agents word for it and the agent wants to make sure he doesn't screw up by putting someone inappropriate in for the role.

Any exceptional circumstances with this role? Working with priviledged data, senstive financial info, offenders etc?

No exceptional circumstances. Have no issue with parties covering their own backs - indeed, it protects me as well. But if the client starts the contract and then finds some problem they are not happy with they could use it to exit the contract. Given it s a fairly remote contract with lots of costs, its a risk. But the real issue is they have had loads of time to do this and left it way too late and now expect me to carry the can on time and cost. As I've expended some days on the role already in terms of interviews, contracts, checks etc etc its just getting a bit too much. Agency isn't doing their bit and ensuring the stuff all gets done by them or the client.

Never had this hassle before with any FS client.

[BolshieBastard]

My take on this is to provide them with the info they require but, if they want checks doing, they do it and not try to palm the cost onto me.

For CRB checks, although I've had enhanced and standard checks done, the client paid for the enhanced check and I only agreed to pay for the standard on a guarantee to have the cost refunded to me.

Never been asked for an experian check (and I've worked the last 10 years in financials) but again, I'd tell them to do it.

[northernladuk]

Depends on what role you are going for surely. Also sounds like all parties are trying to cover their own backs. The client doesn't want to take the agents word for it and the agent wants to make sure he doesn't screw up by putting someone inappropriate in for the role.

Any exceptional circumstances with this role? Working with priviledged data, senstive financial info, offenders etc?

[Support Monkey]

when they told you to go to experion, i would have been long gone looking for the next contract, you could have had another contract in those 3 weeks they have been messing you about, their jwasting your time

[AussieDigger]

So here's the thing.

Do interview with Client X. Client X wants to do the usual checks - no drama. You give them all the data and off they go.

Agency then comes back and asks you to go to Website XYZ and fill that out to do the same checks. £25.00 - ok, some expense but lets do it anyway. Agency also says 'Go to Experian and get a credit check done and give that to us'. Err, shouldn't the client be doing that and do you know how much Experian costs ?

Then Client X comes back just prior to start date and says 'can you go get these checks done on this website'. Err, hang on - weren't you already doing that 2 weeks ago when I gave you all the necessary info for that bit ? What's happened in the meantime ?

So here we are. Client wants all these checks. You've sat on the bench for nearly 3 weeks and had a contract delayed start date as a result. Agency knows the client has stuffed up, its cost you money already, the agency won't sort it out and keeps arguing the toss over the fact it has be done but 'that you can start the contract anyway' (even though the contract says otherwise).

So who's responsibility is it anyway to actually go and perform these checks and validate them ? Surely not yours as the candidate? You just supply the info required for them to do it right ?


All too hard.....