Contract issue

Sparrowjoe

Hi All be grateful for any help.

I got a call a few weeks ago on a Friday asking if I could start a role the following Monday. I work in IT as a contractor and am a LTD company. No contract was exchanged over the weekend as the call to attend was late on the Friday.

I attended the company on the Monday and done a days work at the agreed rate of £300 per day as per the emails on the Friday. Stupidly I went out for a few drinks with friends and it turned very messy and I missed my stop on the last train home (90 mile train commute) and got to bed about 2.3am forgetting to charge my phone.

I woke up at 11am missing the second day of work (use my phone as a alarm clock) and spoke to the agency and they said the client no longer wants me because of the failure to attend which is understandable. Not much of an issue as I walked into another role a few days later.

I sent an invoice for the one days work and had a reply asking if I am joking, I replied nope and said they had 14 days to pay as per my terms. This passed without payment. I gave sent them a LBA giving them 7 days to pay the invoice and total silence.

I am about to embark on the MCOL route but wanted to know if I am well within my rights for the days work bearing in mind I failed to attend the following day and they disposed of my services, this in the absence of a contract but emails pertaining to the role adn rate.

ValHaller

You don't appear in the best of light, but you are entitled to payment for the time you did spend. Keep the emails as evidence.

The reason you did not turn up is perhaps something not to major on in your claim - I doubt the judge will be sympathetic, but I think he will have little option but to rule in your favour.

imoneyop

The only problem I can see here is that the OP has no signed contract and thus proof that he was contracted to the client and actually did the days work.

It is also possible that the contract that he should have signed could stipulate that he would only be paid on submission of an authorised timesheet from the client.

Sparrowjoe

Thanks Valhaller & imoneyop. I thought it would be the case they still owed me and would go that way in court. I suspect they will pay on the receipt of the notification from court.

With regards to your response imoneyop, I have proof via email the work was completed and was in attendance from the conversation with the agency on email. With absence of the contract I do not see how they could invoke the the invoice would be paid on submission of an authorised timesheet.

Not my finest hour and certainly a first for me and was willing to go straight in but they declined.

Many thanks once again.

Takeaway_Addict

Sparrowjoe wrote: »

Thanks Valhaller & imoneyop. I thought it would be the case they still owed me and would go that way in court. I suspect they will pay on the receipt of the notification from court.

With regards to your response imoneyop, I have proof via email the work was completed and was in attendance from the conversation with the agency on email. With absence of the contract I do not see how they could invoke the the invoice would be paid on submission of an authorised timesheet.

Not my finest hour and certainly a first for me and was willing to go straight in but they declined.

Many thanks once again.

Does not going in cause the company to lose any money? If so I would expect a counter claim against, a bit of tit for tat.

LittleVoice

imoneyop wrote: »

The only problem I can see here is that the OP has no signed contract and thus proof that he was contracted to the client and actually did the days work.

It is also possible that the contract that he should have signed could stipulate that he would only be paid on submission of an authorised timesheet from the client.

Given that there wasn't a signed contract, what it might have contained is irrelevant. Such a term may also not be a fair term.

Sparrowjoe

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Does not going in cause the company to lose any money? If so I would expect a counter claim against, a bit of tit for tat.

I did consider this but I offered to go in ASAP and apologise (doesn't go that far to be honest) but they declined me going back in so surely this would not stand up?

Takeaway_Addict

Sparrowjoe wrote: »

I did consider this but I offered to go in ASAP and apologise (doesn't go that far to be honest) but they declined me going back in so surely this would not stand up?

It would depend on whether they had got someone else in, or whether the cost was irretrievable in my opinion. If your actions have cost them money and they can prove it then would you not expect them to sue you back?

Sparrowjoe

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

It would depend on whether they had got someone else in, or whether the cost was irretrievable in my opinion. If your actions have cost them money and they can prove it then would you not expect them to sue you back?

Yes of course I would. The role was working for a managed services company as a pool resource so they would have been able to get a resource to go to the client site so would not incur any cost and they did say that someone else would be attending. I cannot see any costs incurred