Agencies banned for 10 years!

Location > Networking > Forum > Agencies banned for 10 years!

	Topic: Agencies banned for 10 years!
Posted : 03/02/11 / Views : 1559 / Replies : 5 /
CliveHurst 1001 posts last on: 07/02/12 send private reply	Two former modelling agency Directors have been banned from running an employment agency for a total of twelve years following action taken by the Employment Agency Standards inspectorate (EAS). The decisions by London Central Employment Tribunal follow investigations by the EAS, which is part of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). Ifran Khan of Islington, London, ran Platinum Models and was banned for seven years whilst Michael Brown of Malaga, Spain, ran Target Models and was banned for five years. Mr Khan operated Platinum Models from an address in Canary Wharf. Target Models traded in the Holborn area of London. Both judgements are effective from 1 August 2010. The Tribunal heard how Platinum Models breached the law by: charging fees to models before any work-finding services were provided; repeated failures to provide the EAS investigators with the information they requested and obstructing the investigators in the exercise of their enforcement powers; not operating a client account as required by the relevant regulations; and issuing terms of employment to models that did not comply with the relevant regulations. The Tribunal also heard how Target Models breached the law by: deducting commission fees from payments due to models and charging a commission fee to hirers booking models; holding payments to models for longer than 10 days; failing to provide records that showed they recorded details of job requests from the hirer, records of booking details from the hirer, a copy of the terms issued to the hirer, or copies of applications from models; paying money received on behalf of models into the business account rather than the client account; and only issuing very basic terms of employment to models that did not comply with the relevant regulations. EAS brought these cases under the Employment Agencies Act 1973. New regulations that protect workers come into force on 1 October 2010, which tighten the restrictions on the charging of up-front fees in the entertainment and modelling sectors. Edward Davey, the Minister responsible for employment relations, said: “Unfortunately there is a history of exploitation in some parts of the modelling sector by unscrupulous agencies but these verdicts should act as a warning signal to them. “We will take action against rogue recruiters in London, and across the country, who flout the law and undermine the vast majority of agencies who play fairly.” Click: http://nds.coi.gov.uk/content/detail.aspx?NewsAreaId=2&ReleaseID=414778&SubjectId=15&DepartmentMode=true **:^¬))

[add comments | all topics]

	Reply #1
Posted : 16/08/10
CliveHurst 1001 posts last on: 07/02/12 send private reply	This is what wrote to 'The Stage'... 'Getting away with it' Published Monday 16 August 2010 at 17:35 I again refer to the latest government's propagandist claims, "Directors of London modelling agencies banned following investigations" (The Stage Online, July 30). I have to say that, although these two agency proprietors can no longer use their real names, they can still trade through a third party. As to punishments, the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate has just advised me - that there were no fines imposed whatsoever. To all intents and purposes these tricksters got away with no financial penalty whatsoever. The only message the EAS Inspectorate is (still) sending out is that in the entertainment industry you can still do what you like, when you like. What sort of message is that? Click: http://www.thestage.co.uk/features/letters/feature.php/29277/getting-away-with-it **:^))

Reply #1

Posted : 16/08/10

CliveHurst
1001 posts
last on: 07/02/12
send private reply

This is what wrote to 'The Stage'...

'Getting away with it'

Published Monday 16 August 2010 at 17:35

I again refer to the latest government's propagandist claims, "Directors of London modelling agencies banned following investigations" (The Stage Online, July 30). I have to say that, although these two agency proprietors can no longer use their real names, they can still trade through a third party.

As to punishments, the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate has just advised me - that there were no fines imposed whatsoever. To all intents and purposes these tricksters got away with no financial penalty whatsoever.

The only message the EAS Inspectorate is (still) sending out is that in the entertainment industry you can still do what you like, when you like.

What sort of message is that?

Click: http://www.thestage.co.uk/features/letters/feature.php/29277/getting-away-with-it

**:^))

	Reply #2
Posted : 16/08/10
Edward.Llewelyn 81 posts last on: 15/12/11 send private reply	Sounds like these people can do what they want again Clive. The best advice we can have is to send these people out of business and not trade with them i.e. keep ourselves informed, keep our friends informed and third parties informed, that these people are out there. It seems disgusting that no fine has been imposed considering that their greediness has taken money off their clients. I think we have to work together on this one and publicise that these scumbags are still trading and hopefully send them out of business.

Reply #2

Posted : 16/08/10

Edward.Llewelyn
81 posts
last on: 15/12/11
send private reply

Sounds like these people can do what they want again Clive.

The best advice we can have is to send these people out of business and not trade with them i.e. keep ourselves informed, keep our friends informed and third parties informed, that these people are out there. It seems disgusting that no fine has been imposed considering that their greediness has taken money off their clients.
I think we have to work together on this one and publicise that these scumbags are still trading and hopefully send them out of business.

	Reply #3
Posted : 17/08/10
markkempner 1113 posts last on: 07/02/12 send private reply	Why is it is that all governments fail to close these blindingly obvious loopholes? You can start a Co for £30......go bust owing out £1000's....then simply start another exact same Co doing the exact same thing with a slightly different Co name....and carry on doing the same ripping off of everyone.....and nothing in the law will stop you. Isn't it about time a government with the house of Old Farts...ummm Lords....put an act together to prevent this? Is it really rocket science.....NO! Its darn site easier than invading Iraq or elsewhere that pleases us!!! If your Co goes bankrupt.....you should not be allowed to start up again till you prove you are in a position to be solvent. I am always having to prove my solvency when contracted to work for large corporations before they employ the services of my Co. Yet I can take several deposit fees and just fold up and nobody can do bugger all to stop me??? God I hate politicians!!!

Reply #3

Posted : 17/08/10

markkempner
1113 posts
last on: 07/02/12
send private reply

Why is it is that all governments fail to close these blindingly obvious loopholes?

You can start a Co for £30......go bust owing out £1000's....then simply start another exact same Co doing the exact same thing with a slightly different Co name....and carry on doing the same ripping off of everyone.....and nothing in the law will stop you.

Isn't it about time a government with the house of Old Farts...ummm Lords....put an act together to prevent this? Is it really rocket science.....NO! Its darn site easier than invading Iraq or elsewhere that pleases us!!!

If your Co goes bankrupt.....you should not be allowed to start up again till you prove you are in a position to be solvent. I am always having to prove my solvency when contracted to work for large corporations before they employ the services of my Co. Yet I can take several deposit fees and just fold up and nobody can do bugger all to stop me???

God I hate politicians!!!

	Reply #4
Posted : 02/02/11
CliveHurst 1001 posts last on: 07/02/12 send private reply	I don't know if you have seen this threatened prohibition order against Gerald Leslie Hemming, running an employment agency? "The owner of an entertainment agency that supplied acts to venues has been banned from supplying entertainers as an employment business for seven years after his formal order of disqualification began today. "Mr. Hemming is also prohibited from the 5 January 2011 to the 4 January 2018 from running an employment agency unless the following conditions are met: "- to fully comply with the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003 over the next 7 years; "- that each contract with a work-seeker includes express provisions as to payments to work-seekers and Mr. Hemming complies with his contractual obligations; "- every 13 weeks (starting 1 April 2011) Mr. Hemming discloses to the EAS full written details of each contract entered into during that time period." Click: http://nds.coi.gov.uk/content/Detail.aspx?ReleaseID=417732&NewsAreaID=2 http://www.birminghammail.net/news/solihull-news/2011/01/19/agent-still-owes-me-100-15-years-on-97319-28010816/ http://www.solihullnews.net/news/solihull-news/2011/01/17/solihull-showbiz-agent-failed-to-pay-stars-their-wages-105074-28001198/ ***:~))

Reply #4

Posted : 02/02/11

CliveHurst
1001 posts
last on: 07/02/12
send private reply

I don't know if you have seen this threatened prohibition order against Gerald Leslie Hemming, running an employment agency?

"The owner of an entertainment agency that supplied acts to venues has been banned from supplying entertainers as an employment business for seven years after his formal order of disqualification began today.

"Mr. Hemming is also prohibited from the 5 January 2011 to the 4 January 2018 from running an employment agency unless the following conditions are met:

"- to fully comply with the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003 over the next 7 years;

"- that each contract with a work-seeker includes express provisions as to payments to work-seekers and Mr. Hemming complies with his contractual obligations;

"- every 13 weeks (starting 1 April 2011) Mr. Hemming discloses to the EAS full written details of each contract entered into during that time period."

Click:

http://nds.coi.gov.uk/content/Detail.aspx?ReleaseID=417732&NewsAreaID=2

http://www.birminghammail.net/news/solihull-news/2011/01/19/agent-still-owes-me-100-15-years-on-97319-28010816/

http://www.solihullnews.net/news/solihull-news/2011/01/17/solihull-showbiz-agent-failed-to-pay-stars-their-wages-105074-28001198/

***:~))

	Reply #5
Posted : 03/02/11
CliveHurst 1001 posts last on: 07/02/12 send private reply	To read an earlier post about Hemmings - being highlighted on BBC Watchdog etc... Click: http://www.thestage.co.uk/stagetalk/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=9886 ***:~))

[add comments | all topics]

Please note: Messages written in the forum do not represent the views of Casting Call Pro, nor have they been vetted by Casting Call Pro staff. If you read something which you believe to be offensive or defamatory, please contact us and we will take the appropriate action.