- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 18,117
- Reaction score
- 2,742
- Country
it depends. There are benefits and disadvantages of both. Did you read the second link?
Not getting paid and paying for materials?
- Thread starter newhandyman
- Start date
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2016
- Messages
- 67
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
Had a skim through. I guess for a small timer with low risk of being sued for much money a sole trader is better then change to limited when the risks through being sued get higher. Also, accounts need to be thorough- for basic small jobs like say window cleaning or gardening they need to be jotted on some sort of spread sheet- would need to practise this. HMRC run workshops as well. would be good o find one of these
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 44,060
- Reaction score
- 2,912
- Country
I would not work for a customer if he owed me money. That's just being downright cheeky.
We spent three days of this week working for another customer who owes him £25k for a previous job over a year ago.
I think they have some kind of hold on him. Like holding him to ransome or blackmail.
Our competitors wouldn't touch these guys with a barge pole.
My boss has currently £250,000 owed by a number of customers.
I think they have some kind of hold on him. Like holding him to ransome or blackmail.
Our competitors wouldn't touch these guys with a barge pole.
My boss has currently £250,000 owed by a number of customers.
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 44,060
- Reaction score
- 2,912
- Country
There is something very wrong here.
I agree Secure, lots of Rogers posts don't add up.
Andy
Andy
We did a roof 4 years ago and its bowing down a bit. My boss used undersized timber for the trusses to make savings.
Now we have to go back and rectify it. Will cost about £4000.
Nightmare job. Anyway hope I won't be sent.
I would have told them to go and get stuffed. You wanted a cheap job and that's what you got.
Our competitor did one recently for 90k. Did a top job except some of the girders were off plumb slightly (you wouldn't notice)
The client underpaid by 5k.
They lost nearly 25k on that job.
Same house now is 110k.
My boss is relieved he didn't get it.
Now we have to go back and rectify it. Will cost about £4000.
Nightmare job. Anyway hope I won't be sent.
I would have told them to go and get stuffed. You wanted a cheap job and that's what you got.
Our competitor did one recently for 90k. Did a top job except some of the girders were off plumb slightly (you wouldn't notice)
The client underpaid by 5k.
They lost nearly 25k on that job.
Same house now is 110k.My boss is relieved he didn't get it.
Last edited:
Did they let you out today Roger?
Andy
Andy
Going the ltd route is more onerous. You'll have problems for the first year or 2 getting any sort of credit accounts with suppliers.
You have to submit audited accounts to Companies House annually (they can be abbreviated for low turnover).
But you are then protected from court action by dissatisfied customers- they are sueing the company, not you individually so your house, car etc are safe. It is a little more expensive to place ultimate ownership/control of your company offshore but does limit the reach of the judicial system....you can also do an Amazon and tell the taxman that 20% of your income goes to said offshore entity as a licensing fee for your trading logo. All seems petty until profit gets into the 40% tax band- all of a sudden you can avoid that by the company paying you a modest income (taxed at 20%) and the rest as dividend (also taxed at 20%). All completely legal, politicians whine about people using these schemes to avoid tax but politicians are the ones who can change the laws. But they're mostly at it so that wouldn't suit them at all
You have to submit audited accounts to Companies House annually (they can be abbreviated for low turnover).
But you are then protected from court action by dissatisfied customers- they are sueing the company, not you individually so your house, car etc are safe. It is a little more expensive to place ultimate ownership/control of your company offshore but does limit the reach of the judicial system....you can also do an Amazon and tell the taxman that 20% of your income goes to said offshore entity as a licensing fee for your trading logo. All seems petty until profit gets into the 40% tax band- all of a sudden you can avoid that by the company paying you a modest income (taxed at 20%) and the rest as dividend (also taxed at 20%). All completely legal, politicians whine about people using these schemes to avoid tax but politicians are the ones who can change the laws. But they're mostly at it so that wouldn't suit them at all
Boss man borrowing money from the bank now. Looks like he's on the ropes.
New jobs have dried up and no deposits to keep him afloat.
Owes me nearly 3 grand. Another guy is owed about 10 grand.
Another 2 houses just finished and the client has missed two payments. 80k owed and 70k on another job completed 6 months ago.
One supplier has just billed him for 60k and will likely refuse any more materials unless a substantial payment is made.
Bizarrely he has started to make payments to the taxman instead of declaring his business bust.
Taxman demanding 200k.
New jobs have dried up and no deposits to keep him afloat.
Owes me nearly 3 grand. Another guy is owed about 10 grand.
Another 2 houses just finished and the client has missed two payments. 80k owed and 70k on another job completed 6 months ago.
One supplier has just billed him for 60k and will likely refuse any more materials unless a substantial payment is made.
Bizarrely he has started to make payments to the taxman instead of declaring his business bust.
Taxman demanding 200k.
Hi Roger, are you home for the weekend?
Andy
Andy
Sponsored Links
