• 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!

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 "Recruitment Agencies Plugging IR35 Insurance"

Collapse

  • ladymuck
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post

    So why are you paying it if the agency is the company that benefits?
    It's a bit like mortgage indemnity insurance - paid for by you, paid to the lender if you default.

    Not a direct equivalent, of course, but the principle of being asked/required to take out insurance that you don't benefit from is not a new ruse.

    Leave a comment:


  • CheeseSlice
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post

    So why are you paying it if the agency is the company that benefits?
    Yeah arguably it should have been the agent paying as a cost of providing the service, but at the time it was an avenue to get an outside IR35 contract during a time when a lot of agents and clients were struggling to get to grips with the new process.

    Leave a comment:


  • jamesbrown
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post

    I will wait for jamesbrown to arrive and point out all the risks there but I wouldn't be accepting such a clause and I would be questioning if it's legal....
    Aye, avoid them like the plague. There's mixed opinion about whether they would stand up (even well-drafted ones), but there's a risk they might.

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by CheeseSlice View Post
    I've had a contract where the insurance is mandatory, but was arranged via the agent as part of the SDS tool. The product intention is to directly protect the client and/or agency. I had to pay for the SDS check/insurance and if the contract ran on for more than 6 months (which it didn't) I had to pay again to ensure the status was checked again. Seemed like a sensible and fair compromise to me.
    So why are you paying it if the agency is the company that benefits?

    Leave a comment:


  • CheeseSlice
    replied
    I've had a contract where the insurance is mandatory, but was arranged via the agent as part of the SDS tool. The product intention is to directly protect the client and/or agency. I had to pay for the SDS check/insurance and if the contract ran on for more than 6 months (which it didn't) I had to pay again to ensure the status was checked again. Seemed like a sensible and fair compromise to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by Tractor Trace View Post
    There's basically a clause written in my contract stating the contractor indemnifying the agency and client on demand from and against any costs, liabilities or expenses arising from HMRC challenging the client's status determination. No mention of a substitution clause either...
    I will wait for jamesbrown to arrive and point out all the risks there but I wouldn't be accepting such a clause and I would be questioning if it's legal....

    Leave a comment:


  • Tractor Trace
    replied
    There's basically a clause written in my contract stating the contractor indemnifying the agency and client on demand from and against any costs, liabilities or expenses arising from HMRC challenging the client's status determination. No mention of a substitution clause either...

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by cojak View Post
    No, but I’m not surprised. And I’ll bet that it won’t be worth the paper it’s written on.

    Ask for the insurance details and post them on here, give us all a laugh…
    Well the insurance the OP needs is one that provides legal advice and support if a clawback clause was triggered by the agency (and I don't think one exists for multiple reasons)..

    And I really don't think it's practical for them to profit from a selling a product that would only be used to sue them while protecting yourself.

    Now I could just about understand being asked to pay for an IR35 review to confirm the contract is outside on your side but beyond that I'm at a loss as to what is actually being insured and is insurable...

    Leave a comment:


  • cojak
    replied
    No, but I’m not surprised. And I’ll bet that it won’t be worth the paper it’s written on.

    Ask for the insurance details and post them on here, give us all a laugh…

    Leave a comment:


  • Tractor Trace
    started a topic Recruitment Agencies Plugging IR35 Insurance

    Recruitment Agencies Plugging IR35 Insurance

    Has anyone experienced recruitment consultants trying to push for IR35 insurance on a contract? Without naming any names I have been offered an Outside IR35 contract with an end client who is a medium- large sized company so technically I would not carry the liability.

    However, agent keeps asking whether I have "Outside IR35 insurance", stating that it is required and that they have a list of approved insurers to register with prior to processing a contract. They also keep dragging their heels with "building the contract" which is a novel way of explaining that it gets drafted and sent through. I have never come across this before.

Working...
X