Previous contract offer ignored.

[LondonManc]

i know a number of people have made a similar point, but I am not convinced this is legally correct.

I understand that legally a verbal contract is a valid contract, barring some exceptions such as agreements involving property or guarantees.

Is a Verbal Contract a Valid Contract? - Saracens Solicitors

Of course, as Paryltic suggested earlier, that would be dependent on having the time, energy and resources to go through the courts!

I'm convinced it is. They can simply turn round and show you the list of authorised contract approvers and, guess what, your manager isn't on that list. If they weren't in a position to sign it, then it's null and void.

Point two on that is even simpler. Your pass gets revoked when they expect you to finish. How are you going to get to do your work if you cannot access the systems? You won't get an approved timesheet and you won't have any proven work to invoice against in the absence of a timesheet. Therefore, you're even worse off because you've foolishly incurred expense trying to create work for yourself that has never had an authorised purchase order.

[northernladuk]

So to try summarise the points needed in this mail....

• Never work under a verbal contract. It's fraught with complications so don't do it.
• Understand your relationships. It's client--> Brolly --> you. You have no contractual relationship with the client so cannot agree contracts. You are an employee of the brolly
• Managers very rarely have the authority to sign contracts so always take with a huge pinch of salt and refer to the point above.
• Never work past an end date. You have an implied contract but it's fraught with complications
• Notice periods tend to mean nothing in contracting. You get paid for the day of work you do. If they pull work you don't get paid so the equivalent of instant termination. If they honour it you've done wwll
• You are never an employee of the client. You are inside so considered one for tax but not for employment law. Totally different.
• Contractors never take anything through the courts. It's just not worth the cost. Even if it's not legal you negotiate a result. Anything else past that just be economically viable.
• Even if you take them to court they will invoke notice and pull the work. Effective instant termination.
• You cannot claim for losses for the 6 months. You didn't work it therefore you didn't lose it.
• Building bridges is more important than causing a fuss. They may invite you back after all this is over but not if you've thrown the teddy out of the cot and made a scene.
• A lot about contracting doesn't seem 'fair'. It's just the way it is.

I think that's most of the points and a few you've not asked about yet.

[hairymouse]

One of the first lessons of Contracting is that you do not have a Contract until a Contract is signed by both parties

And even then all you've got is a contract, you are still a few steps away from actually getting money.

[pr1]

Other people are still making useful, relevant and helpful points - SimonMac, Paryltic, etc. It is always interesting to hear that others have had similar issues - LondonManc, etc.

I am grateful to all of them and I am learning a lot, and understanding my situation much better from posts this morning and yesterday.

So I completely understand why I am here. I have no idea about your motivation though? - you clearly have other places you would rather be?

It's nluk's job to read & reply to every thread and he gets irritated when new users haven't read through the >100k existing threads (as he has) before posting

[jayn200]

That sucks that happened to you. I'm sure similar things have happened to many people. Even those with signed contract extensions will be told they are putting all contractors on hold until situation improves (some projects may never resume).

Like others have mentioned umbrella companies aren't furloughing people anyway, so either way you're screwed.

Actually, in reality, you are quite lucky they are giving you 4 weeks of work.

[northernladuk]

It's nluk's job to read & reply to every thread and he gets irritated when new users haven't read through the >100k existing threads (as he has) before posting

To be fair, even if I've only posted 1 piece of useful advice in my 40k+ posts it's one more than you have.

[SimonMac]

Interesting point. So you mean that if there was no contract extension i should have finished on 31/03? By giving me 4 week notice they have effectively admitted I am still an employee?

In relation to your second sentence, there is a further complication. The client has ended the contract, but the Manager makes written reference to re-employing me in due course! Having their cake and eating it in my view!

re-employ? Not quite, they want to re-engage with you at a later date. The distinction is subtle but very important

[LondonManc]

Interesting point. So you mean that if there was no contract extension i should have finished on 31/03? By giving me 4 week notice they have effectively admitted I am still an employee?

In relation to your second sentence, there is a further complication. The client has ended the contract, but the Manager makes written reference to re-employing me in due course! Having their cake and eating it in my view!

You were never an employee - very important to understand that bit.

Given that you're still there, I'd say that your situation is this - you've had your contract extended (and by continuing to work after 31/3 then you've accepted by default) and then had notice served on it.

In terms of notice, they don't have to allow you to work it as a contractor - as others have said, it can vary as to whether they get you to work your notice or not and that's part of the financial risk that you get paid a lot more than a permie for (along with the fact that you don't get paid when you don't work, etc.) Some want you offsite because there's no point you being there or budget has been pulled. Some want to maintain a good reputation among contractors and will have you work your notice.

[Andy Hallett]

One of the first lessons of Contracting is that you do not have a Contract until a Contract is signed by both parties

I disagree. There is such a thing as an implied contract. However, belt and braces is to get a signed document.

[northernladuk]

I disagree. There is such a thing as an implied contract. However, belt and braces is to get a signed document.

Technically yes but the lesson is still valid. Get a contract, read it and get it signed.