Pushed to Agency

[FatLazyContractor]

Do you have any other option?

Personally I would take the contract and keep looking.

Have you forgotten the password for 'psychocandy' ?

[Eirikur]

Yes I have had this with a major IT company

Not a problem at all as rate and conditions were all agreed with end client before agency came in. It helped also a lot to get paid within a week after invoicing in stead of waiting the 90 days that they normally use

[fool]

Like others have said, assuming they're reputable, I'd probably prefer dealing with the agency as they'll agree to resonable payment terms. Bare in mind you've already agreed the rate, so it's not like the middle man is costing you anything.

[expat]

Like others have said, assuming they're reputable, I'd probably prefer dealing with the agency as they'll agree to resonable payment terms. Bare in mind you've already agreed the rate, so it's not like the middle man is costing you anything.

Just make sure there aren't any stupid handcuff clauses in the contract. You brought the business to the agency, not the other way round.

That goes double if the client is a large multinational: you may well get another contract with another branch of the client and there is no reason to be tied to that agency for the future.

[LondonManc]

Have they pushed you to a particular agency or do they have a PSL for you to choose from?

[Boo]

Why would you want to contract direct on ludicrous payment terms?

One reason would be that the client will most likely (IME anyway) not have a suitable contract to use so you will be able to put forward your own terms based on the PCG or QDOS's contracts. The payment terms don't matter so much if the warchest is up to scratch and there is an overall reduced risk due to the better contract and fewer parties in the chain who could go bust.

Boo

[MrMarkyMark]

Just did mine on Purchase Orders rather than contracts when I did it.

[Boo]

Just did mine on Purchase Orders rather than contracts when I did it.

Those are not mutually exclusive as it is commong for a PO to reference a contract number.

I personally would rather have a few things spelled out so would not accept a bare PO, expecially as it will have the client's standard terms and conditions on the back which will be a) extremely disadvantageous to YourCo and b) almost entirely irrelevant to contract roles.

Boo

[MrMarkyMark]

Those are not mutually exclusive as it is commong for a PO to reference a contract number.

I personally would rather have a few things spelled out so would not accept a bare PO, expecially as it will have the client's standard terms and conditions on the back which will be a) extremely disadvantageous to YourCo and b) almost entirely irrelevant to contract roles.

Boo

Totally agree.
I was a little naive at that time, however had worked extensively with the client before, so didn't forsee any issues (late payment withstanding).