Re: [messengers] Canadian non-competition clauses?

Date: 9 Feb 2010 22:57:39 +0100
From: Mark Loeppky <leposuction@xxxxxxxxx>


Thanks BikerB. I did not solicit the client, they called me because my
former company routinely told their client that they can not do there
deliveries( said no to a bank deposit at 2:45 pm? unheard of). The client
still uses The other company for most things past  zone 2, therefore they
still remain a client of theirs.
According to the contract I am to avoid contact( including dropping crap
that is coming from other offices) with all Dasher Courier clients for a
full year. At the same time the contract gives Dasher Courier management
permission to break into my house after five days of termination to
repossess anything with their name on it, ie old way bills. For many reasons
the contract will not hold up in court, however the last place I want to go
is to court. I was wondering if anyone's former company has gone all the way
to court?
thanks for the input all



On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Biker Bill <zxmessenger@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> Having been under the gun personally, here is what happened both times I
> was getting the heat here in Alberta.
> First time was a lot of hot air which ended by bringing up "dependant
> contractor status" and showing them what the possibilities of going that
> route would do to them financially and they dropped the suit but not without
> a lot of yelling.
> Second time went to arbitration (different company), where I had to show I
> had not solicited the accounts but had opened accounts for customers who had
> several accounts with other companies in the city, thus proving that they
> were not exclusive clients to the company I had done work for in the past.
> And that was the winning argument that helped me not lose that suit.
> Neither time did I use a lawyer, consult with one ya but defending your own
> right to work looks best defending yourself, unless of course you have
> someone else picking up the tab.
> In my time on the streets I have heard the threats many times and watched
> it go down many different avenues and never once saw it go anywhere...
> This is only my experience, not legal advice. You have to go with your
> gutz! Best of luck, don't let the bastards drag you down!!!
> BikerBill
> Most recently here in my City, one company hired a lot of staff from
> another company and accounts crossed over, a short argument was made but
> nothing has come from it and seems like a dead issue. Why the former company
> did not pursue it with their legal team seems odd as well for something very
> cut and dry. Could be their years of experience dealing with these legal
> issues hmmm?
>
>
>
> > From: yogi@xxxxxxxxxx
> > To: coreythecourier@xxxxxxxxx
> > Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:40:04 +1100
> > CC: messengers@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [messengers] Canadian non-competition clauses?
> >
> > From the eyes of the clients.
> >
> > did you offer a better service that THEY went with?
> > or
> > did you steal (or even poach with cut prices) them?
> >
> > cause if it was the clients choice...
> >
> > caveat emptor
> > http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/caveat%20emptor
> >
> > also did read some interesting stuff on wiki too
> >
> >
> > I cannot offer any real legal advice as an Attorney can be one of 2 jobs
> > here, a barrister or a solicitor.
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > Julian 'Yogi' Somosi
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: messengers-bounces@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:messengers-bounces@xxxxxxxxx]
> On
> > Behalf Of Corey Hilliard
> > Sent: 09 February 2010 12:11
> > Cc: messengers@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [messengers] Canadian non-competition clauses?
> >
> > Regardless of the reasons why you left the courier company, taking a
> recent
> > employer's clients is often considered unethical in the business world.
> As
> > Canada may have unique laws in these matters, you should find a lawyer to
> > advise you pro bono (free). Maintenance of a separate business that
> competed
> > with your previous employer at the same time you worked there will put
> you
> > in a bad position if it is mentioned in court. Your best hope is that the
> > non-compete gets thrown out. Otherwise you may have to pick a new job or
> > city.
> >
> > Corey the Courier
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 11:12 AM, <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Contact a less expensive attorney.
> > > Any advice you get off a mail list is not solid legal advice. (I'm sure
> > you
> > > already know that)
> > > That being said, in any contract in the states you need consideration
> by
> > > both parties and employment is rarely considered consideration for any
> > > non-compete clause.
> > > Good luck.
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jace Brien" <
> treebeard1722@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: "Mark Loeppky" <leposuction@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: <messengers@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 8:22 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [messengers] Canadian non-competition clauses?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  Those contracts usually don't hold up in cpourt in the states.  Has
> > anyone
> > >> had experience with this?
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Mark Loeppky <leposuction@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>  Happy Friday to all.
> > >>> On December 1st I was fired by the company I had been working for for
> > the
> > >>> past 7 years due to irreconcilable differences between the dispatcher
> > and
> > >>> myself. On account  of having nothing but positive relationships with
> > >>> former
> > >>> clients,  I had no trouble at all acquiring clients for Steel Horse
> > >>> Courier,
> > >>> the Company I started up over a year ago.
> > >>> long story short I am now being "sued" by Dasher Courier, under the
> > >>> umbrella
> > >>> of  Direct Integrated Transportation and Canada Cartage(although they
> > >>> have
> > >>> yet to actually contact legal council, and I have a waayyy to
> expensive
> > >>> lawyer). They want me to cease and desist.
> > >>>
> > >>> The contract I signed is illegal because:
> > >>> -It was signed with an opportunity to seek legal advice and signed
> under
> > >>> duress. (we were given 5 minutes to meet a guy in a pick up truck to
> > sign
> > >>> the contract or else we would be fired immediately)
> > >>> -I never received a copy of the contract for myself.
> > >>> -Lots of ambiguities within the contract render the fucker invalid
> > >>> anyhow.
> > >>>
> > >>> If this has to go to trial, It may cost upwards of 15,000 beans in
> legal
> > >>> fees and court costs to save 7-8000 per year that I would bill the
> > >>> client.
> > >>> If anyone has ever gone indy and taken on their former employer under
> > >>> canadaian law, and can offer me some advice I would love to hear it.
> To
> > >>> all
> > >>> else, enjoy the weekend.
> > >>>
> > >>> -Lep
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> Messengers mailing list
> > >>> Messengers@xxxxxxxxx
> > >>> http://ifbma.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/messengers
> > >>>
> > >>>  _______________________________________________
> > >> Messengers mailing list
> > >> Messengers@xxxxxxxxx
> > >> http://ifbma.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/messengers
> > >>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Messengers mailing list
> > > Messengers@xxxxxxxxx
> > > http://ifbma.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/messengers
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Messengers mailing list
> > Messengers@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://ifbma.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/messengers
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Messengers mailing list
> > Messengers@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://ifbma.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/messengers
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469226/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Messengers mailing list
> Messengers@xxxxxxxxx
> http://ifbma.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/messengers
>