Not attempting to incurr the wrath of TM but....
Working Practice > Contract. It could be written in blood. If the client won't accept it it doesn't matter what contract it is in.
- 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 "Knowledge of the agency - client contract terms"
Collapse
-
This is a particular favourite of mine
During an IR35 enquiry that i know of, HMRC branded a sub clause in a standard Hays contract (HIT/25 for anyone who knows what that means) as it didn't match the agency/client contract. However, a contractor invoked that substitution clause and used it in the correct manner. i.e. sub came in to replace the contractor, sub invoiced contractor, contractor invoiced agency in the normal manner and even turned a small profit. HMRC were pissed off to say the least ?
Their contention that my sub clause was a sham, was proven to be a sham.
Leave a comment:
-
Knowledge of the agency - client contract terms
I found the dragonfly case interesting in that the fact the contractor had a substitution clause which was meaningless as this did not match the terms the agency had with the client
Has anyone asked the agency themselves for a copy of their terms with the client. Is this typical and do they normally permit that?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
- How to run a limited company — efficiently: smarter profit strategies Yesterday 07:13
- IR35 & Mutuality of Obligation in 2026/27: Explainer for Contractors Feb 26 07:32
- Post Office hit with ‘crazy’ £104million HMRC bill for IR35 failings Feb 25 07:03
- IR35 & Right of Substitution in 2026/27: Explainer for Contractors Feb 24 06:59
- Why Rupert Lowe MP’s Restore Britain has it wrong on IR35 Feb 23 07:21
- IR35 & Control in 2026/27: Explainer for Contractors Feb 20 07:13
- How key for IR35 will Control be in 2026/27? Feb 20 07:13
- Changes to non-compete clauses in employment contracts require ministers to tread carefully Feb 19 07:59
- What does the non-compete clause consultation mean for contractors? Feb 19 07:59
- To escalate or wait? With late payment, even month two is too late Feb 18 07:26

Leave a comment: