Reimbursing an agent for expenses

This is pretty normal. I have the same wording for my contract with my publicist.

My literary agency however absorbs all these costs. (William Morris Agency)

My contract has the same clause, which I believe is pretty standard. And like Patricia, my agent absorbs those costs as well.

Both the agents I've had took the fees only if the book sells, then they take it from the advance. Most of the expenses are for photocopy paper and postage. Which is incentive to sharpen and edit your writing. Cutting 10 pages from your manuscript can save you a couple bucks a year in agent expenses, which means you can afford better than generic beer for the publication celebration.

Expenses

The expenses are normal, but good agents take the expenses out of advance or royalties. I wouldn't go anywhere near an agent who wants money from me. Like me, my agent gets paid when and if a book sells. Period.

The expenses are normal. I had something very similar in my contract and after over 18 months of representation, I still haven't paid a dime. I asked my agent what it was about and it's a standard clause though it doesn't always apply. He explained that some items that agents submit - like children's picture books, for example - can be really expensive, copy-wise. So on items like those, they charge for copies.

I have a friend that has another agent, and when the agent subs her book, the author sends her a check for $10 or $20 to cover Kinko's copies. I found this a bit odd but she doesn't find it unreasonable at all - and her book IS getting submitted to big houses.

I would definitely clarify with the agent if you feel uncomfortable about it.

My agent has the same clause in her contract. When I asked for clarification, she said she only incurs expenses above copying and postage in rare situations, and she'd okay the expense with me ahead of time if the situation arose.

As has just been discussed in another thread, it's becoming increasingly common for reputable agents to bill expenses rather than to accrue them. It's definitely more desirable to accrue, though.

What you cited from the contract sounds standard, but if you're concerned about the expenses, ask the agent exactly what s/he anticipates charging back to you. You might also clarify whether s/he intends to bill you or to take the expenses from your advance.

- Victoria

Same experience. My contract has this clause but my agent has never charged anything for copies and postage, and I know there were some.

If you trust your agent to do what's right, you have no worries. If you don't trust your agent, you've got bigger things to worry about than copy charges.

victoriastrauss said:

As has just been discussed in another thread, it's becoming increasingly common for reputable agents to bill expenses rather than to accrue them. It's definitely more desirable to accrue, though.

What you cited from the contract sounds standard, but if you're concerned about the expenses, ask the agent exactly what s/he anticipates charging back to you. You might also clarify whether s/he intends to bill you or to take the expenses from your advance.

- Victoria

Click to expand...

It is becoming more common, but I think it's still wrong. Agents can do this only because writers allow them to do this.

Another data point - every check I get from my agent for U.S. and foreign sales usually has anywhere from $20 to $100 worth of expenses itemized and deducted. But I've never had to write them a check myself.

One option might be to talk to a few of the agent's other clients to see how things are handled, and whether the clients have any complaints.

James is correct. Always remember...you TEACH people how to treat you.

Jamesaritchie said:

Agents can do this only because writers allow them to do this.

Click to expand...

Same clause in my contract signed in Sept of this year. I questioned the fees and felt uneasy about the clause until I reviewed it and realized that there was a cap on the fees that could be charged without my consent. Great points here as other professionals who work on commission do not charge these handling fees so to speak. I guess this is a sign of the times

mollyluna said:

I would agree with James. I find it somewhat unethical that anyone (in any business) would have something in their contract and then tell you something slightly different verbally. The problem is that, legally, the written contract trumps the verbal agreement and the verbal is virtually impossible to prove (two years of business law). Besides, why would they promise you something other than what's in the contract? And I think they can charge you for copies down the line later if they get into financial trouble. You should assume that anything you sign will hold you legally bound to those costs, regardless of when they charge you for them. That could be scary if they begin deducting when you need the money the most.

Click to expand...

I doubt it's all that much of an issue. Unless you've got the type of agent who throws your manuscript out there willy-nilly, sending out dozens and dozens of copies (in which case, consider another agent), your maximum exposure is probably along the lines of $200 to $300. As to proving things, it's best to correspond by email so any comments as to the contract are in writing. My agent included a clause like this. I asked him about it, and he said it's something he just keeps in reserve in case the client does something blatantly unscrupulous (like plagiarism, lying about background, etc.) or utterly annoying, like being massively late for deadlines for revisions and so on.

In my case, my agent not only accrued, but in the end he never charged me for these expenses after my novel sold and we got the advance.

I also spent twenty years in international business, and actually the thing about verbal versus contract happens every day. Very often, it relates to things like penalties for late delivery. It may be stated in the contract that, for example, delivery more than 30 days late will result in liquidated damages. But the buyer often never enforces them if he wants to keep the supplier, and he will often tell the supplier that ahead of time.

Jamesaritchie said:

Agents can do this only because writers allow them to do this.

Click to expand...

That's only true to a degree. It's a buyer's market, and the buyers get to set the terms. If one writer doesn't like it, there's a whole line of others right behind him who'll like it just fine.

Not that I'm defending the increasing trend among agents to shift costs to the client. Although I understand that it's driven by increased numbers and stiffer competition, I find it deplorable.

And Molly, about written contracts--until relatively recently, having a written contract with your agent was unusual. Most agents worked on "handshake" agreements, with the financial relationship formalized by the agent-of-record clause in the publishing contract if the book was sold. Some top agents still do work that way.

- Victoria

times have changed

WOW! Victoria incredible how much the industry has changed since the days of the handshake. I would not mind having a contract thread started here someplace so that all of us could share our input and contract information as this helped me tremendously. Literary attorneys are great if you can afford one but most writers can't. By sharing info it would help as this combined with the Beware & Background section would be a terrific compliment.

(pulling on my lawyers cap, yet not giving actual legal advice...) just a note -- most contracts have a merger clause that says something like "this contract sets forth our entire understanding" or something like that. Essentially, this clause will supercede anything coming before it: emails, verbal communications, etc. So if you and your agent email and he says "we won't charge for copies" but then you sign a contract that gives him the right to charge for copies, then he is legally able to charge for copies, even though y'all had a different understanding/conversation before you signed the contract. The contract trumps all.

So be aware of that and make sure your contract says what you want it to say (my agent doesn't tend to charge for copies, has the right to charge for copies in the contract, and I negotiated a clause limiting how much he can charge if he chooses to).

As for me, being a lawyer I like having a contract with my agent. I like knowing the terms of our agreement and knowing that we're on the same page.

Queen of Swords said:

Yay. The agent in question responded in an email to say that any reimbursement comes out of the first advance payment. That's a load off my mind.

My only question is, does the contract need to be rewritten to reflect this?

Click to expand...

I can't speak to your particular situation and can't give specific legal advice, but in general it's always a good idea to make sure everything is in the contract so that it could be enforced if necessary.

Plus, there's no harm in asking.

Queen of Swords said:

Thanks for your reply, Carrie. I have to say, writing the book was easier than reading up about and clarifying the legalese.

Click to expand...

I totally understand and agree! One of the websites that helped me get a little more familiar with agency contracts was Kristin Nelson's series of posts on the anatomy of the agency agreement: http://pubrants.blogspot.com/search/label/agency agreements

victoriastrauss said:

That's only true to a degree. It's a buyer's market, and the buyers get to set the terms. If one writer doesn't like it, there's a whole line of others right behind him who'll like it just fine.

Not that I'm defending the increasing trend among agents to shift costs to the client. Although I understand that it's driven by increased numbers and stiffer competition, I find it deplorable.

And Molly, about written contracts--until relatively recently, having a written contract with your agent was unusual. Most agents worked on "handshake" agreements, with the financial relationship formalized by the agent-of-record clause in the publishing contract if the book was sold. Some top agents still do work that way.

- Victoria

Click to expand...

I don't think this holds true for agents as much as for publishers, and isn't as true with publishers as many think. Unless things have changed radically, there aren't nearly enough good writers to go around, and an agent is unlikely to turn down a writer who can make her money over upfront fees. I think the problem is that agents say it, and too many writers just go along with it.

There may be plenty of writers waiting in line, but I don;t think there are nearly enough really good writers in that line.

The agent works for me, not the other way around. If there's a line in waiting, it should be a line of agents, not a line of writers.

An agent should get paid when the writer gets paid. Any other way is no longer a commission arrangement.