Ex Employer trying to damage my reputation

harz99

ILW wrote: »

Many businesses will run down their competitors to get an order, unless they put something which is proveably untrue in writing, then this appears to just be the normal rough and tumble of commerce.

Really; including the bits where the previous employer turned up at MissM's workplace - I don't think so!

timbo58

actually I don't know how he can actually include a non-employment with a competitor within xxx miles clause in your contract in any case.
Surely this wouldn't stand up in court?

Jarndyce

MissMotivation wrote: »

Yes......it stated that I was unable to work for a competitor or set up my own company within a 5 mile radius for a period of 6 months after termination of employment. I've not got the contract with me but thats roughly the wording in there.....I thought that this clause was unenforceable? I spoke to ACAS about this and they said that it's an unenforceable term?

Yes - if they are simply to prevent competitiion they are unenforceable, as that is not considered a legitimate business interest! If they are to protect a legitimate business interest, eg trade connections, confidential information, then they can be enforceable but only if the covenenant is proportionate to the aim - unlikely in this case anyway.

Twopints

MissMotivation wrote: »

Yes......it stated that I was unable to work for a competitor or set up my own company within a 5 mile radius for a period of 6 months after termination of employment. I've not got the contract with me but thats roughly the wording in there.....I thought that this clause was unenforceable? I spoke to ACAS about this and they said that it's an unenforceable term?

Whether the clause is enforcable or not, if your previous employment was terminated in January, then the 6 months is up, isn't it?

Jarndyce

Twopints wrote: »

Whether the clause is enforcable or not, if your previous employment was terminated in January, then the 6 months is up, isn't it?

It is now obviously, but they started in June for the competitor so that was within 6 months. But it is academic anyway.

SarEl

Jarndyce wrote: »

It is now obviously, but they started in June for the competitor so that was within 6 months. But it is academic anyway.

Not entirely academic. And you know how I really love ACAS advice...

This clause absolutely was enforceable - time limited and geographically limited - and if the OP broke the clause then it is still enforceable because this is contract law and the OP's former employer can still bring legal action because they are well within the time limit for a breach of contract claim. That complicates the matter somewhat further because whilst I cannot honestly envisage the employer doing so, even any possible legal action by the OP would more than likley result in a counter suit.

I would like to say that I cannot imagine what ACAS were doing when they gave the OP this advice, but my imagination is quite good....

Jarndyce

SarEl wrote: »

Not entirely academic. And you know how I really love ACAS advice...

This clause absolutely was enforceable - time limited and geographically limited - and if the OP broke the clause then it is still enforceable because this is contract law and the OP's former employer can still bring legal action because they are well within the time limit for a breach of contract claim. That complicates the matter somewhat further because whilst I cannot honestly envisage the employer doing so, even any possible legal action by the OP would more than likley result in a counter suit.

I would like to say that I cannot imagine what ACAS were doing when they gave the OP this advice, but my imagination is quite good....

Equally not wanting to go into bat for Acas...

...but I thought that the ruling in Dawnay Day & Co meant that a blanket restriction on setting up in competition was void and unenforceable as a contract term? That case set out three categories of legitimate business interest which could be protected - trade connections (thus preventing outright 'poaching' from lists of customers); workforce stability (ie you can't take colleagues with you) and trade secrets (eg formulae etc). Simply outlawing competition as such is not therefore covered.

As usual I look forward to being stood corrected!

Mistral001

If I was a cleint of someone and I heard him put down an ex-employee in the way that you have described, I would feel uncomfortable with that person. I might even feel so uncomfortable with him/her that I would take my business elsewhere. Hold your ground and only say good things about him. People will form their own opinion about who is doing the right thing.

MissMotivation

Mistral001 wrote: »

If I was a cleint of someone and I heard him put down an ex-employee in the way that you have described, I would feel uncomfortable with that person. I might even feel so uncomfortable with him/her that I would take my business elsewhere. Hold your ground and only say good things about him. People will form their own opinion about who is doing the right thing.

I have so far refrained from making any negative comments about him and only confirmed that I used to work for him, this seems to be working in my favour.

MissMotivation

SarEl wrote: »

Not entirely academic. And you know how I really love ACAS advice...

This clause absolutely was enforceable - time limited and geographically limited - and if the OP broke the clause then it is still enforceable because this is contract law and the OP's former employer can still bring legal action because they are well within the time limit for a breach of contract claim. That complicates the matter somewhat further because whilst I cannot honestly envisage the employer doing so, even any possible legal action by the OP would more than likley result in a counter suit.

I would like to say that I cannot imagine what ACAS were doing when they gave the OP this advice, but my imagination is quite good....

Just playing Devils advocate here BUT if I did break the terms of the contract by working for a competitor because that was the only vacancy available what would be the outcome?