Company charging employee for van

sangie595

As a contractor, unless you can prove otherwise - and despite the link quoted above, most contractors are not employed, so it would be up to you to prove otherwise - the terms of your contract are between you and the railway company. The umbrella company provide you with a service which you have adhered to enter into - you would have a right to provide this service for yourself via a limited company status.

As such the railway company are not paying you wages, as defined in law. They are paying an agreed fee for your services. So unless, or until, you can show some evidence that you are either an employee or a worker, this is purely a contract for services which is determined by the agreed terms between you and the railway company.

Determining this by "remote control" when we cannot see your terms, and you don't really understand what they say (and you don't, otherwise you wouldn't be posting in the way you are) is a recipe for someone giving you terrible advice - probably by accident, but it won't matter if something goes badly wrong as a result of you taking that advice.

To be clear, even many solicitors would not understand the complexities of this area of law. So whilst we are always, to an extent, guessing circumstances here, usually we can make good guesses and ask the right questions. But this is something that needs doing face to face, with the paperwork, by someone who relies on more than Google for their sources!

This is a lot of money, just in terms of the charge being made. But I guess your whole income is more, and you need to be very sure before you enter into an argument that could result in you having no job at all. If you are a contractor, as you say, and as most people who think they are contractors will be, then you can be got rid of very easily.

Tammykitty

Tammykitty wrote: »

He is an employee - of the umbrella company.


Recent case confirming that contractors with this type of arrangement can be employees
https://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/landmark-ruling-finds-against-payroll-company-deductions


It can be hard to understand the payslips with this arrangement.


A lot of "contractors" working for umbrella companies - get paid minimum wage with various expenses etc topping up the take home money.


Has your take home pay actually changed by £72 or just your payslip?

sangie595 wrote: »

Don't bother arguing. We have a new expert in town.

If the OP wishes to listen to the poster they can do so. I wouldn't recommend it though.

Regardless of if the OP is an employee of the umbrella company my question about question about the take home pay is very relevant


OP - do you understand your payslip? A lot of people using umbrella companies don't?


I have worked with "contractors" using umbrella schemes - and a lot don't understand them.


PS - I have not claimed to be an expert, neither am I new - I have been on the boards for years (originally under a different user name I lost the password to!)

ReadingTim

In very general terms:

Yes, you could be charged for it, in the same sort of way a directly employed employee is taxed for it - as benefit in kind on a company car 'cos you could use the van at weekends; and yes, they can decide to do this at any point, notwithstanding what they used to do - that, sadly, is irrelevant.

However, seems a little odd that these changes weren't advertised in advance, or that you weren't given the option to either provide your own work van, or leave as you don't accept the revised terms of your employment.

So what sort of advance notice were you given as to these changes?