Reply to: Can anyone share their experiences in dealing with Xtra-IT as an agency?

[johnvolker]

Phoenix company - w ww.nicheitrecruitment.com/

[ConcernedContractor0]

So where are we with this?

Hi all,

I just joined this as I am yet another victim of Xtra-IT. I had a standing order and supposedly a court filing with them and I'm wondering at this point what needs to be done to recover fees, etc if it is at all possible. I'm looking at 5 digit number here so this may be worth the legal fees. Can someone tell me where we are with this? Thanks!

[AnonAgent]

If a agency is foolish enough to agree terms and conditions that result in them losing money on a contract more fool them.

And if they do it multiple times then they deserve the end result. I feel sorry for the contractors though.

Oh I dont sign these terms. I wouldnt. But many agents chase the revenue and not the profit. As a result when they realise how much debt they are racking up against massive payment terms, they go broke and as a result contractors lose out.

This also isnt the fault of the end client, its actually a fault of the big agencies that sell clients the dream of 5-10% margins across all contractors, which gets passed onto the smaller agencies who cant afford those terms. And surprisingly, the big agencies cant find the right people.

Its a big mess and dont be surprised if one day a few of the very big agencies fall through causing you all massive headaches with payments.

[wat007]

Seriously?

Yeah that would be why. With the % rates for agencies falling all the time some end up with hundreds of contractors at rates and payment terms (60 days in some cases) that they are actually losing money.

Hang on... Let me get this right. Some cheeky f'ing B Agent comes on a blog about an unscrupulous agency pissing off with thousands of pounds each from several contractors. The contractors having done all the work and the agent having down f all but spend the money. Said F'ing agent is looking for sympathy?

Bolt! Ya baw bag and don't ever darken my door.

[tractor]

...

Would tie-ins be valid if they breached the contract by not paying you?

(I must admit that I don't tend to worry about them as I tend to finish the contract and not bother staying with the client, I don't think of the agent going bust but I might need to change that attitude. )

Often they are, particularly if you don't pick up on and address the following (or similar clause). Most initial contracts that I have recieved have had similar provisions...

11.3 Severance.

(a) If any court or competent authority finds that any provision of the Contract (or part of any provision) is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, that provision or part-provision shall, to the extent required, be deemed to be deleted, and the validity and enforceability of the other provisions of the Contract shall not be affected.

(b) If any invalid, unenforceable or illegal provision of the Contract would be valid, enforceable and legal if some part of it were deleted, the provision shall apply with the minimum modification necessary to make it legal, valid and enforceable.

[cojak]

Little bit unfair i'd say. The bigger the client the worse they are at paying.

WMS.

And working directly for a big one, they do have to be regularly prodded for payment after payment date has passed.

[moggy]

If a agency is foolish enough to agree terms and conditions that result in them losing money on a contract more fool them.

And if they do it multiple times then they deserve the end result. I feel sorry for the contractors though.

Little bit unfair i'd say. The bigger the client the worse they are at paying.

[eek]

Yeah that would be why. With the % rates for agencies falling all the time some end up with hundreds of contractors at rates and payment terms (60 days in some cases) that they are actually losing money.

If a agency is foolish enough to agree terms and conditions that result in them losing money on a contract more fool them.

And if they do it multiple times then they deserve the end result. I feel sorry for the contractors though.

[captainham]

Yeah that would be why. With the % rates for agencies falling all the time some end up with hundreds of contractors at rates and payment terms (60 days in some cases) that they are actually losing money.

I've got a little tiny violin somewhere, I'll dust it off and play a sorrowful song for your kin

[AnonAgent]

Cash flow maybe - pay contractors weekly but get paid by client co 30+ days - oh, and sunning themselves in Barbados of course:-)

Yeah that would be why. With the % rates for agencies falling all the time some end up with hundreds of contractors at rates and payment terms (60 days in some cases) that they are actually losing money.

[wat007]

Would tie-ins be valid if they breached the contract by not paying you?

Probably not, but why take the risk?
I'm no big fish but I swim in a small pond where everyone knows everyone and your next contract is probably the place you worked the contract before last. So, in 7 years, I've never been 'introduced' to a client by an agency. I've usually found the gig myself and been told, "we use these guys this week, so I send them your CV and tell them when you can start". That's how I manage to get the tie-ins removed.

(I must admit that I don't tend to worry about them as I tend to finish the contract and not bother staying with the client, I don't think of the agent going bust but I might need to change that attitude. )

Definitely. Never let them get much more than a few weeks out in front and always take a single late payment as a warning sign. I also made the mistake of accepting a London-based agency. Nothing against London per-se (I see from your blog that you like it). It's just that I'm nowhere near London, which makes door-stepping them that much harder.

[cojak]

Would tie-ins be valid if they breached the contract by not paying you?

(I must admit that I don't tend to worry about them as I tend to finish the contract and not bother staying with the client, I don't think of the agent going bust but I might need to change that attitude. )

[wat007]

So the CVA thing never materialised and, instead, they have filed for voluntary liquidation (as expected). The creditors meeting is today, November 5th. It may well have been my suing them that pushed them over the edge (I hope so, best half-day-rate ever spent) or they may have been planning this all along. Losing 'Big Red DBs' contracts couldn't have helped.
In my case I was only owed a month and was able to walk to another agency as soon as it was clear they were in trouble. I rarely agree to the tie-ins and always have them removed if I can (as I did in this case). It was a good month, though, a 5-week'r with lots of standby, call-out and overtime meaning they have the better part of £20K of my (and the VAT man's) cash in their pockets.
Let's see what the liquidators have to say and how many pennies in the pound we might see. I'll be sure to look closely for asset disposal for the last two years, for sure.
I also want to look closely at the new company formation (DWR? or some such) to see if there's any suggestion of a simple fold and shift going on.

[BolshieBastard]

This is bad news for the people affected. They have my deepest sympathies and I hope they get their money owed.

But for heavens sake, why do people continue to work on a job where the agency is paying late or not at all? Are these the same people who start work without a contract and other such risky strategies?

I once knew a contractor who didnt submit a single timesheet for 13 weeks because he said 'you never hear of agencies going bust.' Maybe not then but you do now.

It's an honest question.

[ctdctd]

How the heck can an agency get into trouble ? They cream off 10 - 20% off a contractor by doing nothing else but sit on their arses all day. Surely some kind of irresponsible spending should be happening, like directors sunning themselves in Barbados every ohter month.

Cash flow maybe - pay contractors weekly but get paid by client co 30+ days - oh, and sunning themselves in Barbados of course:-)