Kobayashi Maru - PwC results are in!

[LetterBox]

Looks like everyone is to be inside IR35 based on a PwC assessment, the good news is, based on the level to which you had to reach to achieve an outside determination and that only a CEST-like tool was used in determination, I believe the end result is worthless in court.

Client was completely open about the level to which PwC were assessing, they clearly had just a few big hitting questions in their CEST-like tool that if not watertight, enacted and evidenced, were going to result in an inside determination. It was not good enough to have a substitute clause, but you also needed to have acted on it, with client recorded evidence of the fact. Similar story with 'at own expense' fixes for work that needed remedying, you needed to have acted on it, with client recorded evidence of the fact.

PwC have really just done what they were asked to do, based on the CEST tool, if a case goes to court and the CEST tool is presented, ensure all big hitting questions can be batted back with ease due to being implemented and evidenced, anything less will not be acceptable, hence so many inside determinations.

I'll ask QDOS to intervene in the 45 day argument, I'm sure they'll quote case law, what has actually happened in court, MOO etc. This is only for my benefit though to show due diligence in fighting with the correct terms of reference rather than the limited scope that PwC work to, I have no doubt the result of the argument will be the QDOS points are not relevant when the client is ultimately just advised by PwC to look at securing a watertight CEST answer sheet.

[Lance]

I believe the end result is worthless in court.

that's incredibly optimistic

[GhostofTarbera]

Blah blah blah

Your company accepts PWC assessment

People leave

Replaced by pWC people

What’s your point?


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

[LetterBox]

that's incredibly optimistic

Ok, the narrow guide and high watermark on which the result is based through a PwC review I believe would be a lot easier to argue than a more rounded review of someone like QDOS who then determine you inside.

[Lance]

Ok, the narrow guide and high watermark on which the result is based through a PwC review I believe would be a lot easier to argue than a more rounded review of someone like QDOS who then determine you inside.

Don’t get me wrong. I admire your optimism. It’s kinda sweet.

[LetterBox]

Blah blah blah

Your company accepts PWC assessment

People leave

Replaced by pWC people

What’s your point?


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

Now now, be nice, it's Friday tomorrow.

Just offering a personal boots-on-the-ground view of one of the big 4 reviewing en-mass the status of a clients contractor base. I have read many reviews of "unfair", "ignored what was in the contract", "but CEST says I'm outside!", "QDOS says I'm outside!". Now I see how it is framed to the client from PwC I thought I'd post up. Whether or not PwC have an ulterior motive or are using a gold plated CEST tool to fully insulate their client, nobody knows for sure I guess.

I'll argue the assessment until I have no further recourse (so that wont take long), highlight MOO, case law, WP, not having to have enacted the contracted terms blah blah. Expect to get a short response of not relevant or an equivalent, they could just ignore the arguments that QDOS give, which is fine. This is just a record for me of the PwCs review limitations and so the weakness of my clients determination if I ever need to defend myself against it in court.

[eek]

Now now, be nice, it's Friday tomorrow.

Just offering a personal boots-on-the-ground view of one of the big 4 reviewing en-mass the status of a clients contractor base. I have read many reviews of "unfair", "ignored what was in the contract", "but CEST says I'm outside!", "QDOS says I'm outside!". Now I see how it is framed to the client from PwC I thought I'd post up. Whether or not PwC have an ulterior motive or are using a gold plated CEST tool to fully insulate their client, nobody knows for sure I guess.

I'll argue the assessment until I have no further recourse (so that wont take long), highlight MOO, case law, WP, not having to have enacted the contracted terms blah blah. Expect to get a short response of not relevant or an equivalent, they could just ignore the arguments that QDOS give, which is fine. This is just a record for me of the PwCs review limitations and so the weakness of my clients determination if I ever need to defend myself against it in court.

Why would you need to defend yourself in court - the only way you would end up in that situation is:-

If you stay
If HMRC use the agency report and chase up historic IR35 cases
You survive the 5+ years of random crap HMRC use to encourage you to give in and pay.
You actually get a day in court

Otherwise you won't get a court case over an SDS determination, your end client and / or agency will have you out the door well before your day in court arrived.

[Acme Thunderer]

Now now, be nice, it's Friday tomorrow.

Just offering a personal boots-on-the-ground view of one of the big 4 reviewing en-mass the status of a clients contractor base. I have read many reviews of "unfair", "ignored what was in the contract", "but CEST says I'm outside!", "QDOS says I'm outside!". Now I see how it is framed to the client from PwC I thought I'd post up. Whether or not PwC have an ulterior motive or are using a gold plated CEST tool to fully insulate their client, nobody knows for sure I guess.

I'll argue the assessment until I have no further recourse (so that wont take long), highlight MOO, case law, WP, not having to have enacted the contracted terms blah blah. Expect to get a short response of not relevant or an equivalent, they could just ignore the arguments that QDOS give, which is fine. This is just a record for me of the PwCs review limitations and so the weakness of my clients determination if I ever need to defend myself against it in court.

When my Assessment was carried out I answered the questions as I thought they applied and was outside on 2 of the 3, MoO and SDC. However when the clients managers answered the same questions it came back as Inside on all counts.

A lot of people are saying "QDOS says I'm outside" however some very rose coloured glasses are being worn when the working practices questions were answered.

[LetterBox]

When my Assessment was carried out I answered the questions as I thought they applied and was outside on 2 of the 3, MoO and SDC. However when the clients managers answered the same questions it came back as Inside on all counts.

A lot of people are saying "QDOS says I'm outside" however some very rose coloured glasses are being worn when the working practices questions were answered.

Agree, there will be a lot of creative QDOS members.

But these inside/outside client determinations are not based on the validity on the answers in a question sheet, whether that be CEST, what Qdos provide or anything else for that matter. Business ask themselves, is the business at risk if I no longer deal with PSCs? For big contractor hires, it really isn't.

Any argument, QDOS or otherwise, has no bearing.

[LetterBox]

Why would you need to defend yourself in court - the only way you would end up in that situation is:-

If you stay
If HMRC use the agency report and chase up historic IR35 cases
You survive the 5+ years of random crap HMRC use to encourage you to give in and pay.
You actually get a day in court

Otherwise you won't get a court case over an SDS determination, your end client and / or agency will have you out the door well before your day in court arrived.

They have besmirched my company name, I must have vengeance!

1. 3 week holiday booked for 2nd April
2. Informed the client that I would be ceasing my services at the end of March.