Lee Nowosad

Leaver - being pursed for remaining balance

Created

None

I am seeking some assistance; we have a training provider who have invoiced us (employer) directly for the remaining balance of an agreed apprenticeship for several leaners that withdrew from the apprenticeship.

They are using clause 7.2 in the contract of services which is a clause in the template all training providers use.

To the extent that Charges are not actually paid by the ESFA from the Apprenticeship Service Account, or the Agreed Services are not Levy Funded, the Training Provider shall be entitled to invoice the Employer for the Charges in accordance with the Payment Schedule and otherwise at any time for services rendered at any time before the end of the most recently ended month and the Employer shall pay such invoices within 30 days of receipt provided however that the Training Provider shall only be entitled to the Completion Payment once the Apprentice has sat his final assessment.

They have invoiced us for remaining balances of the programme

For example. Sales Executive – Max funding £6,000 , learner left halfway through , payments on levy account stopped. We have been invoiced directly by the training company for £3000 saying Balance Of Apprenticeship. Not able to claim from ESFA

we have received legal action for payment and we need to reply. We are levy paying company and understanding was its fully funded and if a learner leaves we are not liable for the remaining balance. There is no additional clause in the contract.

Replies

No one has replied to this post.


Ben James

Not a legal expert in the slightest, and would strongly suggest consulting your legal department/counsel if you have one, however..

Couple of things to note:

  1. We (as a training provider) don't use this clause, though we do include something similar which says if the apprentice leaves after having completed the underpinning qualification, but prior to EPA, we reserve the right to invoice the employer for the completion payment. Understandably some employers do not agree to this and we have at times had to remove it from the template agreement where it is deemed to be incompatible with their standard position
  2. The bit which says in accordance with the Payment Schedule and otherwise at any time for services rendered implies that they wouldn't be in their right to invoice you for future payments, if in fact that's what is happening, on the basis that those services have not yet been rendered. It does, however, make some sense for them to want you to pay for services rendered if they have not in fact been covered by your levy funds for one reason or another
  3. The funding rules prevent the provider and employer from asking the apprentice to financially contribute, but there's nothing that I can immediately recall that says the provider cannot invoice the employer separately, providing they have made it clear within the training services agreement that this may happen

Would be interested to hear others' perspectives though.

(Edited)

Steve Hewitt

Yes, quite heavily into I Am Not A Lawyer territory, here. There isn't per se a generic contract that all providers use (although a lot use the boilerplate one produced by AELP, it's not "official"), providers are fairly free to determine their own terms of engagement with employers.

As such, fairly difficult to comment definitively as there's very little in the funding rules about this explicitly, as Ben says, beyond Apprentices themselves not being charged.

Timmo

Likewise a paid-up member of the 'not a legal expert' club. Don't you just groan at people who write 98 word sentences with 2 commas FFS!

Trying to extract the crucial part of the sentence I think it is this bit: "the Training Provider shall be entitled to invoice the Employer for the Charges in accordance with the Payment Schedule and otherwise at any time for services rendered at any time before the end of the most recently ended month"

So isn't that saying that they can only charge for services rendered before the end of the most recent month and thus excludes future costs? As per Ben's point 2, it then comes down to exactly what they have 'rendered' prior to the learner(s) withdrawal and whether the costs related unavoidably to future services. There may be some costs for which they could reasonably charge but surely not the whole remaining balance of the programme.

Steve Hewitt

Yes, I think it's fair to point out to Lee that this isn't usual, and most of us wouldn't, but that's there's not actually a rule against it and thus it comes down to the contractual terms between you and this provider...

Tracy Clement

Totally agree with Steve. I am aware of Providers that do this but it is in the extra T's and C's and is binding. We do not!

Timmo

Agreed, it comes down to whether that sentence (or something else in the contract) gives them the right to charge an employer the full cost for a withdrawal. I'm not sure that sentence does.