How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Ben Jones Your Own Question
Ben Jones
Ben Jones, UK Lawyer
Category: Employment Law
Satisfied Customers: 49816
Experience:  Qualified Employment Solicitor - Please start your question with 'For Ben Jones'
Type Your Employment Law Question Here...
Ben Jones is online now

We are in a situation in which we have introduced a

Customer Question

We are in a situation in which we have introduced a candidate but the client is refusing to pay after another agency who introduced the candidate in September 2015. Our submission was in April 2016 (over 7 months after) is staking a claim for the fee. We have signed term of business for the client who in fact was happy to pay our fee with a confirmation from them on email that they will pass our invoice to accounts until the other agency called and said I introduced this candidate to you back in 2015 I want my fee. Ben
you may remember providing us with advice a week of so ago.
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Employment Law
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Yesterday we received this email from the client. but it is not correct in terms of what she thinks has happened.Dear DebbieI have spoken to Laura on the telephone and explained I was looking into the circumstances and would get back to her however she confirmed that her company would be taking the matter further if we did not pay by yesterday. As our discussions and contract are with you and not her, I think it is with you I should discuss this.I have looked into the matter and as I expected it is complicated but the paper trail is telling us this:Sept 2015 – we were introduced to Laurie Glover by another agency22.3.16 – You presented Laurie to Sophie
22.3.16 - 11.39am – Sophie Woodward confirmed to you by email that we were already aware of Laurie and had telephoned interviewed him and did not wish to proceed with him.
5.4 Debbie contacted Laurie about our position. Laurie highlighted that he had already applied via another agency. Neither with Sophie or Laurie did Debbie request further information on when the other introduction had been made.
5.4 Despite above Debbie forwarded Laurie’s CV to Jo but did not mention to Jo any of the previous conversations with either Sophie or Laurie with regard to the introduction initiating from another agency.
7.4 Laurie was first interviewed
12.4 Laurie was second interviewed
Laurie was offered employment.I understand your frustration as we can all see from the paper trail what has happened. We acknowledge that you were involved in our discussions and subsequent recruitment of Laurie, but we do not agree that you introduced him to us. Your terms clearly state that the applicant is the person introduced by New Recruit.I would like to find a way to resolve this for all parties, and would like to speak to you further to agree a way forward. Because of the position with a third party involved I am not happy to make an offer in writing to you to consider but would suggest that we arrange a meeting by telephone or in person to agree a way to settle this matter. We found working with you constructive and helpful and would like to continue our relationship with you and your company however I cannot do this if you do not communicate with me.I look forward to hearing from you.Yours sincerely.***** *****t 01227 806311
m 07802 254361
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Other Agency submitted Laurie Glover in Sept 2015 for a Marketing Assistant Role. Mulberry rejected him.6 months later Mulberry recommended to New Recruit. We submit Laurie Glover but he is rejected as they do not think he is the right cultural fit. Subsequently another agency places the role.2 weeks later contacted by Marketing Director informed the other agency candidate has not worked out and this is now a NEW role with a REVISED job specification with a more Digital Marketing Focus.Candidate who was rejected 3 weeks previously re-submitted as he is perfect. Re-introduction 6th April.7th April candidate has 1st interview,12th April candidate had second interview with Marketing Director and Managing Director.20th April Offer Made.Offer letter was raised but the person who had rejected the candidate back in March and previously back in Sept 2015 at no
point did they mention the agreement of a 12 month introductory clause with the other agency.20th April offer letter had to be revised - again no mention of the above.(So i am proceeding along believing that we are out of the 6 months introductory clause and the client has not raised an issue so have no concerns at all).25th April candidate starts. Invoice sent. Client confirms receipt of invoice on email and confirms they will put over to
accounts for payment.3rd May 2016. Other Agency makes claim on fee.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Points:1. Sept 2015 submission by other agency was for a low level marketing role and the candidate was rejected after
a telephone interview.2. Client recommended to us as other recruitment firms were not deliverying for a NEW marketing role.3. We did not place the NEW marketing role it was placed by another agency. However the candidate placed did not
work out and the client got back in contact with us.4. They again changed the focus on the role to purely Digital Marketing so another NEW role .5. Candidate resubmitted on 6th April over 6 months from the sept 2015 introduction via the other agency for a new role.6. The submission on 23rd March was rejected and role subsequently changed. Depending when in September the
candidate was submitted it could of been within 6 months BUT it would not had mattered as they had signed a
12 month agreement.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
I had to speak to my HR network as the candidate had had a gastric band operation and they wanted to make sure that a letter was obtained from his GP that he was "Fit for Work". They were also worried about loose skin form his weight loss and that he may have to take time off to have corrective surgery. This was bordering on the line of discrimination hence speaking to an HR Contact as I was very uncomfortable with this. They even asked if he needed a special chair due to his weight.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
It is not true the candidate did confirm they had been submitted in Sept 2015 but we proceeded as it was over 6 months.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
We are a small business and it is a lot of money. It is also my most detailed recruitment campaign in 25 years. We had to help them put together a suitable contract, advise on probation periods due to their concerns.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
That is all the detail
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Hello, my name is***** am a qualified lawyer and it is my pleasure to assist you with your question today.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Hello Ben you helped us a bit last week
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Hi there. OK, Thank you for the detailed information. I will go ahead and review the relevant information and laws and will get back to you as soon as I can. As before, please do not respond to this message as it will just push your question to the back of the queue and you may experience unnecessary delays. Thank you
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Hi Ben, Please may I have your advice I have been waiting all day and this is rather pressing. Thank you.
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Hello, my apologies for not getting back to you sooner I have been in tribunal all day and as we all work in practice we cannot always promise a prompt response on here. Going back to your query, I have checked the latest details and also reviewed the past response. In essence, the position has not really changed much. You do have points to argue which would suggest that the introduction was as a result of your work, not the other agency’s. But in the end only a court can determine that, they will have to look at the evidence supplied by each party, especially that of the employer client to determine what the material factors were in them deciding to recruit this person. As mentioned it is not simply a chronological matters to who introduced them fist, but rather whose introduction materially influenced their decision to recruit this person. So if you cannot reach an amicable solution between yourselves, then the only way forward is the small claims court I’m afraid, there is no other way about it (unless you all agree to some sort of mediation, but that will not be binding). Let me know if you need me to clarify anything further?
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Hello, I see you have read my response to your query. If this has answered your question please take a second to leave a positive rating by selecting 3, 4 or 5 stars from the top of the page. I spend a lot of time and effort answering individual queries and I am not credited for my time until you leave your rating. If you still need further help please get back to me on here and I will assist as best as I can. Many thanks.
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Hello, do you need any further assistance or are you happy with the above response? Look forward to hearing from you.