• 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!

Reply to: FAO Dodgy Agent

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.

Previously on "FAO Dodgy Agent"

Collapse

  • LondonManc
    replied
    Touch wood, never had a problem.

    My payment agreement is with my agency, not the end client. There's a payment schedule that is adhered to, I get my timesheet and invoice to them by a certain time and they pay me. Whether that's monthly or weekly is a negotiation with the agency. How they are paid by ClientCo is of no concern to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Halo Jones
    replied
    True, also the existence of a dedicated Act & court makes it easier to react to the needs of the day

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by Halo Jones View Post
    Odd, in construction legislation (The Construction Act) has made it illegal to use “pay when paid” clauses, specifically to protect the smaller companies.

    Exert from the 2011 CA Amendments

    "Conditional payment clauses

    The previous law: provisions which make payment conditional upon receipt of payment from a third party ('pay when paid' clauses) are ineffective, unless that third party is insolvent. The Construction Act does not prohibit clauses which make payment conditional on other events, such as 'pay when certified' clauses - where payment is conditional on a certificate being issued under another contract.

    The amendment: a clause will be invalid if it makes payment conditional on:

    •performance of obligations under another contract; or
    •a decision by any person as to whether obligations under another contract have been performed.

    This is to prevent a party up the line from relying on circumstances relating to its own contract to delay payment under a separate contract - for example, the fact that an employer has not complied with its certification obligations to a main contractor cannot be used by the main contractor to deny payment to a subcontractor."

    I guess with you all being loaded contractors you don’t need protection
    Construction is an older industry.

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    sorry.
    I did not keep a log a diary or any notes. So it's anecdotal rather than forensic.

    I used a clientco email account and endless landline phonecalls. (so no audit trail)

    I do recall talking to DA at the time, and he talked about not doing business with a 'Greek agent', who was a known bandit.

    plus, I did get paid in the end (unlike others.)

    but I never got paid for the sleepless nights and the gut-wrenching stress
    Still going I believe Software Development | IT Recruitment | Testing | Support & Maintenance | RDF Group

    Leave a comment:


  • Halo Jones
    replied
    Odd, in construction legislation (The Construction Act) has made it illegal to use “pay when paid” clauses, specifically to protect the smaller companies.

    Exert from the 2011 CA Amendments

    "Conditional payment clauses

    The previous law: provisions which make payment conditional upon receipt of payment from a third party ('pay when paid' clauses) are ineffective, unless that third party is insolvent. The Construction Act does not prohibit clauses which make payment conditional on other events, such as 'pay when certified' clauses - where payment is conditional on a certificate being issued under another contract.

    The amendment: a clause will be invalid if it makes payment conditional on:

    • performance of obligations under another contract; or
    • a decision by any person as to whether obligations under another contract have been performed.

    This is to prevent a party up the line from relying on circumstances relating to its own contract to delay payment under a separate contract - for example, the fact that an employer has not complied with its certification obligations to a main contractor cannot be used by the main contractor to deny payment to a subcontractor."

    I guess with you all being loaded contractors you don’t need protection

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post
    Can you pm those examples to me. We need examples for HMRC
    No one else has asked for this in their evidence collecting for the consultations.

    I've spoken to many contractors now who have had to threaten clients or agents with debt collection procedures.

    Leave a comment:


  • browntractor
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    That's double my worst experience. I was strung along for a month

    a month of sleepless nights. the last thing I want to hear is some balloon telling me to 'read the contract carefully'
    Yes, and another half a dozen contractors on my site had the same issue at the same time.
    Last edited by browntractor; 24 July 2015, 05:54. Reason: Too long

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post
    Can you pm those examples to me. We need examples for HMRC
    sorry.
    I did not keep a log a diary or any notes. So it's anecdotal rather than forensic.

    I used a clientco email account and endless landline phonecalls. (so no audit trail)

    I do recall talking to DA at the time, and he talked about not doing business with a 'Greek agent', who was a known bandit.

    plus, I did get paid in the end (unlike others.)

    but I never got paid for the sleepless nights and the gut-wrenching stress

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    It doesn't matter what the contract says.
    All that does is provide you with ammo for possible redress.

    The fact is, some agencies operate in a fly-by-night way, and that can leave contractors dangling. The agencies have the whip hand and I have had two very bad experiences.
    Although others have had worse


    It's another factor that the legislators ignore as well
    no holidays, no sick, no training and no security
    Can you pm those examples to me. We need examples for HMRC

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by browntractor View Post
    Believe it or not, in my worst case I had 50k exposure to the agency. I was in a monthly pay cycle ,on two months arrears, and they were a month late paying. That was a bit stressy.
    That's double my worst experience. I was strung along for a month

    a month of sleepless nights. the last thing I want to hear is some balloon telling me to 'read the contract carefully'

    Leave a comment:


  • browntractor
    replied
    Believe it or not, in my worst case I had 50k exposure to the agency. I was in a monthly pay cycle ,on two months arrears, and they were a month late paying. That was a bit stressy.
    Last edited by browntractor; 23 July 2015, 22:47.

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    It doesn't matter what the contract says.
    All that does is provide you with ammo for possible redress.

    The fact is, some agencies operate in a fly-by-night way, and that can leave contractors dangling. The agencies have the whip hand and I have had two very bad experiences.
    Although others have had worse


    It's another factor that the legislators ignore as well
    no holidays, no sick, no training and no security

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by TykeMerc View Post
    I pay reasonably close attention to the contracts I sign, I've only seen that clause once that I can recall and I got it removed before I'd sign.
    Quite.

    But then again all jobs in McDonalds are like that.

    Leave a comment:


  • TykeMerc
    replied
    Originally posted by SimonMac View Post
    Contracts are usually worded that you only get payment when the agents do
    I pay reasonably close attention to the contracts I sign, I've only seen that clause once that I can recall and I got it removed before I'd sign.

    Leave a comment:


  • DimPrawn
    replied
    Originally posted by SimonMac View Post
    Contracts are usually worded that you only get payment when the agents do
    ^ This.

    Agent phoned me a few months ago, saying client co payment had not arrived, don't expect to get any invoices paid, tought titties. And we are employees are we HMR&C? ^ 1000

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X