Self employed - Obligations to ex "employer"

wickedphilly

Hello

My friend (MF) who is having problems with an ex employer (EE) - here are the details

1. MF worked for EE on a self employed basis for approx 5 years
2. MF is the director of his own company and is an employee of that company
3. EE offered no formal written contract or terms of employment to MF (who didn't ask for any either)
4. MF left the EE 6 months ago and went about his business
5. The industry is quite specialised and therefore I would expect EE & MF to cross paths
6. MF has never been party to any of EE financial information and carried out trade works for EE "on the tools"
7. Recently MF & EE have competitively tendered for the same contract
8. MF has been awarded this contract
9. EE is now threatening MF with court action (albeit nothing formal has been sent, just some nasty and threatening phone calls) presumably EE feels MF has canvassed his customers for this work

Although I understand there was an inferred contract between MF & EE there was no verbal or otherwise agreement between EE & MF that MF would not work for, or try to work for EE customer base (I presume in a formal contract of employment this would be a restrictive covenant). EE has stated verbally that he will not take action if MF contacts the customer and tells them he made a mistake and his price will have to be increased to a figure above the EE offer.

My thoughts would be to advise MF to tell EE to sling his hook and if EE wants to take it further then he needs to instruct his solicitor to start proceedings - i.e. call his bluff.

this whole thing stinks - has anyone got any thoughts?

Thank you

xapprenticex

For a second there I thought the title said 'obligations to sex employer'..

My bad

DandelionPatrol

wickedphilly wrote: »

Hello

My friend (MF) who is having problems with an ex employer (EE) - here are the details

1. MF worked for EE on a self employed basis for approx 5 years
2. MF is the director of his own company and is an employee of that company
3. EE offered no formal written contract or terms of employment to MF (who didn't ask for any either)
4. MF left the EE 6 months ago and went about his business
5. The industry is quite specialised and therefore I would expect EE & MF to cross paths
6. MF has never been party to any of EE financial information and carried out trade works for EE "on the tools"
7. Recently MF & EE have competitively tendered for the same contract
8. MF has been awarded this contract
9. EE is now threatening MF with court action (albeit nothing formal has been sent, just some nasty and threatening phone calls) presumably EE feels MF has canvassed his customers for this work

Although I understand there was an inferred contract between MF & EE there was no verbal or otherwise agreement between EE & MF that MF would not work for, or try to work for EE customer base (I presume in a formal contract of employment this would be a restrictive covenant). EE has stated verbally that he will not take action if MF contacts the customer and tells them he made a mistake and his price will have to be increased to a figure above the EE offer.

My thoughts would be to advise MF to tell EE to sling his hook and if EE wants to take it further then he needs to instruct his solicitor to start proceedings - i.e. call his bluff.

this whole thing stinks - has anyone got any thoughts?

Thank you

Basically, most of what EE says is bluff and bluster. Unfortunately, the bit you cannot be sure of is whether EE will actually take some complaint to court. Not with the intention of winning, but with the intention of making MF back down and give up the contract or somehow to disrupt MF's shot at doing the work.

In demanding that MF raises his price to that of EE, I believe that EE is acting illegally. [edited to add - and if MF complied, he would be conspiring in the same illegal act.] My speculation is that if EE did go to court, he would try to make some claim of unfair competition because MF had been inside his business.

There are several approaches to this, among them

• Tell the client. Clients generally don't like cartels, but taking this path demands a fair degree of trust in the client
• Write a letter to EE, stating the demands made in the phone call and asking him to confirm in writing by a deadline [it won't be confirmed, of course]
• Employ a lawyer and get the lawyer to offer a meeting with EE where EE can state his demands [he might turn up with his lawyer and state a totally different case]

Whatever, I think that MF should be telling EE not to make contact be phone again, otherwise it will be dealt with as harassment.

patman99

You state MF worked for EE for 5 years 'on the tools' in a self-employed basis.
If EE set the work that MF did, gave MF the tools to undertake the work and set the hours MF had to work on the job for, then MF now has a large plank of wood with which to bash EE round the head with (metaphorically speaking, of course). In that EE may well be in breach of HMRC rule 35.

If I were in MF's shoes, I would ignore EE's threats and keep to the quote as given to the client. If EE cannot beat it, then that is EE's tough luck.

I doubt EE would wish to damage his reputation with a Court case that could well end with a potential investigation into how the whole industry operates.

wickedphilly

Thank you

EE is not a nice person and I think his threats are bluff