Is this clause legal??

**kirk** · 28 September 2007, 20:45

Yes it's legal - no you can't just change your ltd. co. name

HTH

**tim123** · 28 September 2007, 21:10

Originally posted by unisign124 View Post

Hi,

I've looked back through 8 pages but didn't find anything similar so thought I'd ask some advice.

I started work under brolly for 3 months, exactly a year ago.Had the three months extended 2 more times, then set up myCo Ltd and got another 3 months.

Structure is as follows; Client/Agency/MyCoLTD

Client has decided they can't afford the Agency and have asked me to go direct saving them 30%.

Agency has clause in my contract that I can't work for end client for 12 months unless client pays agency 35% of my years salary.

They spent all afternoon on phone but talks broke down.

Agency rang me tonight and told me I'd finished and goodbye.
Client has told me to come in and we'll sort something out.

Is this not a restriction of trade?

Cannot I turn up there if I rename mycoLtd?

As always thanks for all the help and advice!!

Did you correctly sign an opt out of the regs?

If yes then it's legal.

If No then the clause is uneforcable.

Though this is the client's problem. If the client wants you to go in and work direct then I would do so (assuming that you can agree terms wich compensate you for the delays in payment that you will suffer). It is they who will get the bill from the agency and they who will have to contest it in court.tim

tim

**unisign124** · 28 September 2007, 21:21

Hi Tim,

Yes I did opt out of the regs.

But what would happen if I went to work for TimsCoLtd and you sent me to work on my old site??

If I turn up at work for the client directly, why did you say there would be a delay in payment?

Also, how would the agency know if I was working direct with client??

Thanks,

**Sockpuppet** · 28 September 2007, 23:17

Just turn up there and work.

Maybe have it so that your wife/partner "works" at the clients and uses her substitution clause to send you paying you £1/day in the process.

Sorted.

**r0bly0ns** · 29 September 2007, 08:48

I had a slightly similar situation, an agency got a gig but the agency refused to work with the client's contract. They were an American firm and refused to change the contract.

Agency phoned me up and said the gig was a no go.
Client phoned me up and said they wanted to go direct.

Me being honest and nieve

phoned the Agency and told them

I started work and the client and agency argued about fee's and whatnot and I never got involved.

**Sockpuppet** · 29 September 2007, 09:16

Originally posted by r0bly0ns View Post

I started work and the client and agency argued about fee's and whatnot and I never got involved.

So you shouldnt.

If neither you nor the agency got a contract there is no way they would be able to enforce money.

**mace** · 29 September 2007, 10:43

Yes it's legal

I've never actually heard of an agency suing a candidate, however. Many allege that they will, never met anybody whose actually been sued or has commented on somebody they know having been sued. Seeing as it's a dog eat dog world out there, I'd speculate it's agency bull. Taking somebody to court isn't an easy procedure, and most people will avoid it unless they're either bloody-minded, in receipt of legal aid or as a very much last resort

**VectraMan** · 29 September 2007, 10:54

On the other hand, you did sign the contract and agree to the terms. They can come after you if they want to, and you'll probably lose and have to pay their costs. That's quite a big risk everybody is suggesting you take.

Changing your Ltd. company name wouldn't help, but you could start a new Ltd. company.

**tim123** · 29 September 2007, 12:01

Originally posted by unisign124 View Post

Hi Tim,

why did you say there would be a delay in payment?

Because there almost certainly will be.

Most companies pay their suppliers on 30 days and usually try to find a reason to make this longer.

If you are used to the agency paying you on 7 days with no aggro, you are in for a big shock dealing direct.

tim

Is this clause legal??