Reply to: Clause in contract

[Lance]

Ask yourself this:

How will the agent know that you've started working directly for the client?

After all, I'm sure you're not going to tell them, are you?

More importantly. The agent needs evidence not just knowledge.

[billybiro]

Hi

i hope this is the correct section.

I have a contract between myself and a client through an agency. One of the clauses in the contract is that I may not provide services to the client either directly or indirect for a period of 12 months after the currect contract terminates. If I do supply services to the client not through the agency, then the agency will be entitled to charge the client a fee.

I am looking in to contracting directly to the client after the contract finishes, any idea if they would actually go ahead and try and charge the client, if so do you think it would be a set fee or they would try and calculate a percentage for any hours Ive worked for the client directly?

Surely this wouldnt stand up in court if it ever went that far?

Has anybody got any experience of this?

Thanks

Ask yourself this:

How will the agent know that you've started working directly for the client?

After all, I'm sure you're not going to tell them, are you?

[TheFaQQer]

If he was marketing it, that would be ad

GPWM.

As long as someone doesn't decline the hoc...

[WTFH]

Because that would be minus hock, not ad

If he was marketing it, that would be ad

[TheFaQQer]

How do you know he wasn't selling ham?

Because that would be minus hock, not ad

[WTFH]

ad hoc

How do you know he wasn't selling ham?

[NotAllThere]

Yep. They got a contractor in to quote for 3 months work and put that forward as their fiscal loss. The guy settled out of court. He then went on to get sued by his next client for jumping ship.

Then he was an idiot (especially doing it the second time). It's not hard to get yourself released from your notice period, and in worst case, you can always get yourself fired. (This doesn't work for b2b contracts).

[TheFaQQer]

I had a 3 month clause, so waited 3 months and then hooked up direct for a bit of ad hock.

ad hoc

[radish2008]

I had a 3 month clause, so waited 3 months and then hooked up direct for a bit of ad hock.

I also had a contract through Modis and then went direct - everyone was up front and I think the client ended up paying £50 a week or something for 3 months. But to agree with the point made above the contract stated it was between the client and the agency and I left them to it.

[radish2008]

Really? In the UK? I'm rather skeptical because under UK law I know from experience it's quite difficult to enforce a notice period on an employee. Perhaps there was more to it than simply not giving notice.

Yep. They got a contractor in to quote for 3 months work and put that forward as their fiscal loss. The guy settled out of court. He then went on to get sued by his next client for jumping ship.

[PurpleGorilla]

I had a 3 month clause, so waited 3 months and then hooked up direct for a bit of ad hock.

[WordIsBond]

Well, if the penalty isn't defined in OP's contract, then it probably is to paid by the client and is defined in the client's contract with the agency. In which case, it is the client's problem.

OP, you should read this very carefully, and if it really doesn't specify the amount to be paid, and if it really does say that they will be paid a fee by the client, then it simply isn't your problem. IF, and only if, that is the case, tell the client what your contract says, and that you are glad to work for them at the rate the agent has been paying you, but it is up to them to make any arrangements with the agent that their contract requires.

You have to think about payment terms a lot more carefully when you go direct, though. Something to remember.

Some people on this forum seem to struggle with actually reading what is said and considering the possibility that the OP's contract / situation might differ somewhat from their own experience. It's not actually that strange for an agency to word contracts so that they recover from the client rather than the contractor. Clients usually have deeper pockets and are more likely to just pay up rather than try to fight it, so it makes all the sense in the world for agents to structure it that the client would pay handcuff fees.

[NotAllThere]

...You remind me of a guy I once knew who breached a permie notice clause to become a contractor - they sued him and he settled out of court for £20k.

Really? In the UK? I'm rather skeptical because under UK law I know from experience it's quite difficult to enforce a notice period on an employee. Perhaps there was more to it than simply not giving notice.

[northernladuk]

This is all very good for permies but does it hold true for businesses? I’m not so sure.

Even more so for business with so much money involved as well as IP.

[Lance]

Handcuff clauses can't be too generic and all encompassing. If they are they'll fall foul of some restraint of work rule or something. 12 months is definitely too long and as someone mentioned before it is very likely it wouldn't stand up after 9 months.

This is all very good for permies but does it hold true for businesses? I’m not so sure.