Revenue says lack of permission will not stop it contacting end clients

As part of this ongoing IR35 review part of our last response stated that the client did not grant permission for the IR to pursue the end client for clarifications as he felt this could be detrimental to his future dealings with these clients, but that after having reviewed the contracts, if it was felt further clarification was required, WE would seek such clarification.

The IR had made the statement in previous correspondence that the Commissioner on the Lime-IT case had stated that clarifications must be sought by the IR. We informed them that the Commissioner did not state that it was the responsibility of the IR, but simply that prior to a case going before the Commissioners, the client's interpretation of the arrangement should be sought and that if this was to be the case then WE would carry this out, as it was felt this would have the least impact on future trade.

The IR have responded by saying that they are "disappointed that our client is not co-operating voluntarily" and that "I can advise that this will not preclude me from contacting the client companies and I can confirm that my enquiries are continuing."

So they are simply ignoring the fact that our client has stated that they do not have his permission to contact these clients. I find this absurd, when we have not stated that client clarifications will not be provided, simply that WE will provide them.

Has there been previous experience of this stance? Any input would be appreciated. I will be speaking to the officer in charge early this week to discuss this letter.

-- alex1967