Originally posted by Paralytic
View Post
- 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!
Misrepresentation in "selling" a contract?
Collapse
X
Collapse
-
-
Yawn.....
Neither of his cases are valid as you've said yourself multiple times. Nothing he put mentions misselling so you are now in the realms of suing every client that terminates early and that's just rubbish. The guy has an overarching contract for 6 month with agreed termination clauses and paid when work clauses. All absolutely standard and have been there since the dawn of contracting.Last edited by northernladuk; 22 July 2019, 16:33.'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!Comment
-
Whumpie. What would contracting look like if you actually had a case here? Clients will be sued if they get their estimates wrong, agents daren't say a word in case they get it wrong? Where would we be?'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!Comment
-
Originally posted by Whumpie View PostYou may have had a clear case, then - it hinges on whether you would have taken the contract anyway, whether you had an alternative (and therefore lost out financially) and whether the 12 month claim was based on reasonable a expectation of that duration. The length of the contract is irrelevant; it is illegal to use false information (deliberately or otherwise) to entice a signature on a contract of any sort, and if by doing so you cause a loss of any sort, then you are liable for damages. It's a very basic principle of law.Comment
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostWhumpie. What would contracting look like if you actually had a case here? Clients will be sued if they get their estimates wrong, agents daren't say a word in case they get it wrong? Where would we be?
Any talk of the contents of the contract is a red-herring here; its not what Whumpie's complaint is about.
I still don't rate his chances of a successful claim, however.Comment
-
Originally posted by Paralytic View PostWhumpie is not saying that the contract would be any different, but that the client should not have told the agency that the engagement would likely be 6 months in length when they later admitted (verbally) that it was only ever going to be 3 months in length.
Any talk of the contents of the contract is a red-herring here; its not what Whumpie's complaint is about.
I still don't rate his chances of a successful claim, however.
My agent told me this gig was going to be 3 months with no renewals. I've been here 16 months. The lying bastard misrepresented the gig.
That said, I took a 3 month gig and assure the agent I would be there for that and more. Left after 6 weeks. I guess I should expect a court summons from the agent soon.'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!Comment
-
I don't get the impression from the description that the client intentionally wanted to keep the contract to only 3 months. I interpret it as they only had the funding for 3 months but were expecting to get a further funding approval for the final 3 months as they'd done in the past.
The point is though the agency would have had a contract for 6 months, and they probably had 6 month contracts in the past without them being cancelled, so therefore it will be difficult to argue misrepresentation.
Rolling 3 month contracts are perfectly normal and they would have found someone else if they'd advertised 3 months, so I don't see that as the reason.Last edited by BlasterBates; 23 July 2019, 11:37.I'm alright JackComment
-
Originally posted by BlasterBates View PostI don't get the impression from the description that the client intentionally wanted to keep the contract to only 3 months. I interpret it as they only had the funding for 3 months but were expecting to get a further funding approval for the final 3 months as they'd done in the past.
The point is though the agency would have had a contract for 6 months, and they probably had 6 month contracts in the past without them being cancelled, so therefore it will be difficult to argue misrepresentation.'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!Comment
-
Update from people who actually know stuff
Ok all - the limit of my free legal advice has been reached, and finding out more will cost about £500 - so until I know whether I need to pursue it I'll leave it at this point.
I've sent the original ad, offer, correspondence and notice given to a specialist contract/employment lawyer, and the verdict is:
"It appears that you may have a claim against the ************ for negligent misrepresentation however you will appreciate that I am unable to provide you with advice on the merits of your case until I have undertaken a thorough review of the documentation."
Not exactly a glowing endorsement of the strength of the case but a clear statement that the principle of my argument is correct:
If you are misled (deliberately or otherwise) into making a choice that is detrimental to you compared to what you would have done had you not been mislead, you are entitled to damages under UK law. That is the Misrepresentation Act 1967 in a nutshell.
This does not mean that you can sue someone just for giving you notice. You must have been misled into signing the contract and you must be able to show that had you not been mislead you are likely to have been better off, e.g. having another offer that you turned down but which would have been a better choice.
These are pretty rare circumstances, but it happens.
These laws are hard-fought and they are there for our protection. We have to hold people to account - we are not here to be screwed over just because we earn a lot.
So those (NLUK - ahem) who say this is ridiculous go and take a look in the mirror and realise that perhaps it's just as well you don't work as lawyers. It strikes me that your attempts to ridicule this stem from the need to validate your own recessive behaviour when someone screws you over. You need to MTFU, frankly. Perhaps spend less time willy-waving on forums and more time sticking up for yourselves and your profession. Just a suggestion.Last edited by Whumpie; 23 July 2019, 14:01.Comment
-
Originally posted by Whumpie View PostOk all - the limit of my free legal advice has been reached, and finding out more will cost about £500 - so until I know whether I need to pursue it I'll leave it at this point.
I've sent the original ad, offer, correspondence and notice given to a specialist contract/employment lawyer, and the verdict is:
"It appears that you may have a claim against the ********* for negligent misrepresentation however you will appreciate that I am unable to provide you with advice on the merits of your case until I have undertaken a thorough review of the documentation."
Not exactly a glowing endorsement of the strength
So those (NLUK - ahem)
It strikes me that your attempts to ridicule this stem from the need to validate your own recessive behaviour when someone screws you over. You need to MTFU, frankly. Perhaps spend less time willy-waving on forums and more time sticking up for yourselves and your profession. Just a suggestion.Last edited by northernladuk; 23 July 2019, 14:37.'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!Comment
- 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
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment