I'm happy with the advice I've been given - wish I could work for the same hourly rate! Thanks for answering my question - I thought it was worthwhile posing it, just in case.

I have deliberately steered clear of current clients due to the restriction in my contract. Yes my choice to use a lawyer as employment law is complex and I needed confirmation that how things occured put me in the right. The action is being directed at me directly, my solicitor thinks that the convenant is not applicable, however that is his opinion. We are not talking multi-million pound contracts, we are talking about a requirement for a couple of days work which was well suited to my current organisation. I feel the use of lawyers was heavy handed and unecessary, like I said they couldn't do the job, but it is almost as if, if we can't do it we don't want you to do it. Confident I am in the right, I am more than happy to defend myself, should this go further, however I'm peeved that it has cost me to confirm something that I thought was correct.

Haven't asked him! I am endeavouring to keep costs to a minimum. It was worthwhile taking the advice to establish my legal position and I have enough information from him to defend myself should it go any further. However he thinks a letter he has drafted for me to send should be enough to prevent it going any further. Personally I think it is reasonable for me to claim my costs incurred if there were no grounds for my former employer to go 'legal' in the first place.

I recently received a letter from my former employer stating that they understood I was dealing with former clients, stating I should sign an undertaking to desist as I was in breach of contract. I work in a specialist field, and although I did make it known I was moving to work with another company, it was in an area which although similar, is different in the fact my former employer does not have the expertise or the equipment that the new company does. I was contacted directly by the client and asked if we could perform the task. I of course replied we could. This is an organisation who does not directly use my former employers services any more - the contract expired July 2011. The covenant restricts me to working with clients or former clients within a year of leaving my previous employer. I left in May 2012. I have taken legal advice - which has cost over £500, and my solicitor states that a firm rebuff should suffice and it should not go any further. If that is the case, assuming the matter goes no further, am I in a position to put a claim to my former employer for costs incurred as a result of their action?

I work for a private company on a government contract and was employed on a fixed term contract starting January 2002 until March 2007. At the end of the fixed term contract period I was paid a bonus which amounted to about £2800 before tax, however I was still required as the company I work for had an entension granted to their contract, so my contract was rolled over and I was reissued with a new one. I am currently waiting to see if my contract is once again going to be renewed starting again 1st April 2011, however that is dependent on whether we retain the main contract I work on which should be awarded soon. I will know by 31st December 2010 as I am on three months notice. January 2011 means I would have been employed by the company with no break of service for nine years. My assumption was that a bonus for the additional years on the current contract would apply - we were given the opportunity to not take the bonus in 2007 but to let it build until the award of the new contract proper as opposed to the extensions we have had, I took it in 2007, however I was informed informally that there is no bonus for the extra years worked. There are several implications, 1. If I get a better job offer then there is no point in me seeing out the rest of the contract as there is no financial incentive to stay - which was the reason for the bonus in the first place. 2. Am I now entitled to redundency as having been employed in the same job for nine years I can be classed as a permanent employee. In which case I can assume it will be nine weeks worth of salery and tax free? Tupe may apply - there has been no confirmation of this, however the geographical location of the new provider if applicable (I have an idea who else is bidding for the contract) could be a fair distance from my current location so can I be forced to moved to keep my job? Could I claim redundency from my current employer and go into a job with the new employer if Tupe is applicable. Or if I do not take the TUPE option due to location do I waive my rights to redundency if it applies. I'm obviously a bit up in the air and not sure which direction to take, knowing the facts reference any entitlement I may have would be useful.

I was informed by Cobbetts at the end of May that Nat West has made the commercial decision not to continue the case. I phone up Nat West Credit Managment and was told that the loan will 'probably be written off'. I subsequently wrote to Credit Services confirming the situation. The reply I received was as follows: 'Further to your request we confirm we were not minded to proceed the matter to trial and so the proceedings were discontinued, effectively brought to an end. This was done without prejudice to any rights the Banks may seek to enforce at any time now or in the future.' I would quite like this settled, however it appears with that sentence they could if they wish start proceedings all over again. Any suggestions on what the next course of action should be?

Quick update.... having stated that I was prepared to carry onto court rather than now pay £160 - my original offer at the start of all this; Cobbetts have come back stating that their client - Nat West, will accept £100 per month.....

I have requested that on several ocassions, but I think I will re-request to make the point. So the gist is they are prepared to accept £160 - my original offer that was turned down, because if it went to court they would not be able to get a judgement against me. Is that correct? What is a post judgment interest clause?

Have emailed... thanks.

We haven't actually gone to court yet.... this is all the preamble still. My defence consists of... 2. Under OFT Debt collection Guidelines I believe the Claimant's conduct amounts to unlawful harassment under section 40 of The Administration of Justice Act 1970. Notably: and 4. The claimants particulars of claim are not in full compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules in particular practice direction 16 Para 7.3 which states, 7.3 Where a claim is based upon a written agreement: A copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement should be attached to or served with the particulars of claim and the original(s) should be available at the hearing. The claimant cites at point 4 of the particulars that ‘The claimants claim is in respect of monies due pursuant to an account maintained with the claimant.’ Yet the claimant has, to date, failed to provide a copy of the contract between parties as required under the civil procedure rules. I have obviously expanded on those statements referencing documents conversations held and brought in past case history to back up the reasons why I no longer feel the debt is valid.

Further to events, I wrote a pretty firm letter of what I had thought of the situation, where I stood and what I wanted.... I have now been informed that the bank will accept my original offer of £160 per month as a payment subject to entering into a Tomlin Order. We appear to have gone full circle.. apart from all the rubbish I have had to deal with inbetween times and am wondering what to do next... my defence in relation to continuing on to court does seem fairly solid at this point in time....

My defence has been accepted by the District Judge and the case is now stayed until late February to enable myself and the bank to come to an agreement. I have still not received a copy of my original credit agreement and the bank's solicitors have sent an income and expenditure queationnaire and a request for a proposal of how I intend to repay the debt..... considering I did this right at the beginning of all this happening it seems a little bizarre and almost like we've gone full circle. Just after some advice on the best way to proceed from this point, I don't want to provide the information but still wish to be seen to be trying to resolve this prior to going to court.....

Considering that is their primary job, you'd think they'd get the basics right..... Re Allocation Questionnaire and Defence all done and in. I spoke to the courts before filing the questionnaire and they suggested a motion to amend my defence. No forms to fill in, just annotate on the allocation questionnaire that I wished to motion to replace the original defence submitted, pay the appropriate fee - which was £40, and Bob's your Uncle! Copies of everything have also been sent to Cobbetts, so it'll be interesting to see what their next move is.... still no sign of a copy of the original credit agreement with my signature on it....

Pretty much there re: defence. Eight pages of it with documentation and Exhibits to match. Just noticed the new solicitors have put the wrong claim number on their Allocation Questionnnaire. Where does that leave them?