Thanks for your reply. PM to follow (for lots of reasons). I consider it important and only fair that companies have the right to prevent exploitative behaviour by staff. But as in all things a sense of balance is required.

Youch, I knew it was a grey area, but I hoped someone might chip in. So far I have been told from a separate source, " you signed a contract, contracts are binding" end of story. I would hope it's not that straightforward. But then I would hope the law was about justice and reason (more fool me). Anyone?

Hi, I have entered into a training contract with a company, that says I agree to work for them for two years in exchange for 'free' training. I had the option to pay for the training up front or 'in arrears' by working for them for two years. I have agreed to this in writing, but having now done the training I consider the 'fee' they are charging to be totally disproportionate to the costs they have actually incurred in training me. Because they have this economic hold over me, in effect either I accept whatever (separate) terms of employment they give me, or I can choose to leave...and pay. My questions are:- 1). Does the value they ascribe to the training have to reflect actual costs incurred, or can it be any arbitrary figure they choose? 2). Should the amount to be repaid in the event I leave early decrease as time goes on? On the grounds that I am continually 'repaying' under the arrears option with my time? (the contract says no). 3). Can I contest the value of the training under the Sale of Goods Act? 4). Can their strategy fall foul of Unfair Contracts legislation? 5). They have a 12 month no compete after the employment period is finished. Is this enforcable and with what scope? E.g. same (client)company, same role would be a breach, but same company different role or site would be ok? It seems to be a big grey area. See forum discussion here:- Is Training Bond Illegal? [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums thanks Paleto