Restrictive covenants?

[namechange1112w]

Anyone with knowledge on the law as I'm worried.
Going self employed.
Just left previous employer and they have a restrictive covenant that says one cannot Work in the same trade in a 10 mile radius (bigger than our town!) for one year after leaving.
I was on min wage there and not senior.
Is this enforceable? It feels like they want to stop me working at all. They don't know where I'm going but if they were to find out? New place I'm self employed is nearby.

I didn't actually sign the restrictive Covenant part of the contract. It had its own page that needed signing and I didn't sign it. I did sign the rest. This was never questioned. Would this make it void or not?

Thank you

No, by working there you accepted all the terms and conditions. You can't pick and choose.

Whether it is reasonable or not would depend on the trade.

Service trade.
Hair/beauty

I think it’s very unlikely that they would even try and enforce that, and that any court would hold you to it - they accept the principle that people need to earn a living and a min wage worker being blocked for a year so7nda unreasonable to me, unless there are specifics?

I’d go ahead

It would cost them too much to try and enforce it. If it went to court they would be unlikely to be able to defend the covenants on a minimum wage worker. (Uk).

I would ignore it. They might send you a few shitty letters but ultimately they have no power.

You also say you never signed the covenants.... good luck in your new job!

It doesn't matter if OP signed it or not. By working there, it means it will still apply.

You'll probably be OK unless loads of clients follow you to your new place of work. In which case your old employer could pursue you legally.

Sorry to butt back in.

But if you signed the contract but NOT the separate document of restrictive covenants then they are clearly unenforceable.

Custom and practice would only apply to the employment terms, NOT the additional covenants on a separate document which were NOT executed.

Clients "following" a former employee of their own volition is different to them deliberately poaching the client from their previous employer. Provided you play things safe and actively develop your own portfolio of clients for the coming months you'll be fine. You have every right to earn a living but your former employer also has the right to place boundaries around their client base, it's ensuring you can evidence you haven't violated the intent of that restriction to the best of your ability.

It might mean not actively advertising on social media which is often a company's first port of call if they want to keep tabs on the situation. they'd have to make efforts to track you down, and ascertain where you are operating from and whether it's within a 10 mile radius. Likely they have other fish to fry unless they suddenly find themselves bereft of any business because you've taken all their customers away!

Some customers are likely to follow me but not all.
I'm creating my own clientele but also some like me and want to follow me.

My contract with the previous employer was zero hours. Does that affect anything?

The company I worked for are national but quite small for a national company.

I'm advertising on social media but not adding anyone. If people were to find me now it would be chancing upon me.

Restraint of trade clauses very unlikely to be upheld against a minimum wage role.

They are difficult to enforce for director level jobs.

So long as you didn't walk out with the appointment diary on the last day you are fine - you are allowed to earn a living in your chosen trade!

You can advertise, but I certainly wouldn't say

"Hi, I'm namechange - you may remember me from haircutsRus"

No I'm not mentioning my ex employer at all on social media haha.
I didn't steal the appointment book either or take anyone details.
I gave a few people that asked for it my number but it's up to them if they contact me.

I few things here
Second Tomcat that very difficult to enforce at minimum wages or even significantly higher, and in any case even at top level and top remuneration, very unlikely to be enforceable beyond six months as they are not supposed to prevent you from earning a living through your profession.
Also if you did not sign the separate piece of paper and your contract did not specifically refer to this covenant, you should be fine in any case.

I would go ahead and be a little careful for the fist 3-6 months for confidence and more that you do not annoy them and put a word on the client base, and then full speed.

... annoy them and THEY put a BAD word on the client base

Years ago in law lecturers I can remember a case of a hairdresser where her ex employer went after her for exactly this. Court found in favour of the ex employer. Lecturer said hairdressing industry was fairly hot on this. 25 years ago mind.

Does the it being a zero hours contract make a difference?

So, it was zero hours, min wage, and they want director level enforcement?

All a bit one sided to me.

I think zero hours contract does make a difference, too onerous to ask for a non compete if not properly employed! But I don't know the legal mechanics about it.
It all sounds a bit of a bluff to me. Dis they mention or threaten you about it when you left?

No they didn't mention it or talk about I'm just aware and easily worried.
You think it's just to scare people off?

It's impossible to know or predict if they have intentions of exercising their rights under the restrictive covenant. Only time will tell.

Don't take it as read that they are "bluffing". The fact is they put that condition to you when you took on the job for a reason, and irrespective of whether you signed in the dotted line on that page, you knew their intention was there and the likelihood is that if you deliberately tried to systematically poach their customer base then they could get nasty.

You could go to the expense of taking your contract to a solicitor and getting their expert opinion about where you stand.

Or if money is tight, you could do as suggested above and be very cautious about whose custom you take on, for the next year, and within a 10 mile radius of your f/employer. If it's someone who was a regular user of your employer's service, then think twice for the next year.

I can see why the restriction exists, but I also think they'd be a pretty nasty piece of work to throw the book at you if you honestly just want to set up your own business and don't intend to cause their business harm.

I honestly think Daisy is being too conservative. I am no lawyer so if you want formal advice, you should seek it but I can tell you my direct experience - For a start, there is no precedent of this kind of restrictive covenants being enforced under English law for a period so long as one year. No matter what you have signed, you are safe beyond six months. The only risk left is the reputational risk as you do not want a war with your ex employer in front of clients.
This is more a business risk for you, but not a litigation risk. Then you have more mitigants to the six months base case. For one, this is a covenant only usually applied to high flying jobs which are paid well beyond minimum wage. Also normally you would have a paid period beyond termination of employment to compensate. You are min wage and zero hours.
Bottom line I would worry more about avoiding a public war or bad mouthing more than they come and sue you. You are then doing well by leaving no public trace for about three/four months, to be cautious.
If they threaten you, tell them that you have taken advice and comes down to 1) there is no expressly signed covenant, as this kind of covenant would need to be explicitly agreed between the parties and not forced on you as a side employee booklet guideline, and 2) it would be unenforceable in the English courts in any case as too onerous and unreasonable. And ask them to stop harassing you if they come back again!
Good luck in the new venture!

It's unlikely to become a bad mouthing issue. I won't talk of them.
The owners/management of the business are remote it's only staff at my level physically where I was actually employed.
Nothing would happen in terms of reputation.

They are a small national company.
All management are in an office situated in one place and the staff work in different stores over the country.

As you were on a zero hours contract I believe that the restrictive covenant is unenforceable. The Employment Rights Act 1996 agrees.
See s.27A(3) below:

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/27A

Case law has established that, for the purpose of post-termination issues, a former employer is treated the same as a current employer.