Do I really need to join a group to start?

[BADTROUT]

For the record, as much as everyone loves to add them in, non-competes are unenforceable. Don't get me wrong, you will end up walking away from clients written under another agency, that's the nature of the beast. However, they can't prevent you from work once you leave.
https://www.macelree.com/the-top-10-mistakes-with-non-competition-agreements/

That's an awfully broad statement... "non-competes are unenforceable". The enforcement of one most often is going to be interdependent on the original contract language, the state you are governed by, and whether you are in any way afforded any ownership of the business.

One must also remember that ego plays a factor in lawsuits as well, and many have absolutely nothing to do with the ABILITY to win or to enforce. You must remember that one of the reasons we have insurance in the first place is to mitigate financial loss even in even frivolous lawsuits. You have the cost to defend, regardless of the outcome.

So, in the end, are you likely to be tracked down and sued? I guess that depends on many factors but there is a universal truth to be had here... it would be irresponsible to make a broad assessment, but more so to get legal advice from a blog or forum.

 

[shawnmwalker]

That's Funny ^^^^^^^ and true! HAHAHAHA

 

[KimFBQCareers]

@BADTROUT
Well, it has become such a burdensome process for companies, whether large or small to enforce them, that at this point the value of the contract is severely offset by the court cost involved in proving their legal basis. Non-Enforcement of Non-Competes: What's an Employer to Do?
It seem to me, that it would be less expensive to do the whole "golden handcuffs" thing used by so many agencies. You get 1/2 of your renewals after you leave (provided you're vested) for X amount of years, under the agreement that you do nothing to impact the business that you wrote or any client you have knowledge of, as well as...hmm.. well, basically keeping a civil tongue in your mouth regarding your former employer. It's easily as effective, keeps people from bad mouthing you until the end of days, and wouldn't be considered unreasonable in court as the person is being remunerated for their compliance.

 

[KimFBQCareers]

@BADTROUT Btw, I 100% agree that it would be a horrible idea to take legal advice from a discussion forum. Hopefully everyone here recognizes that fact, but I have to admit that it isn't a bad idea to say it just in case. In the end though, we are all professionals, who would hopefully have enough sense not to listen to the ramblings of strangers for any reason than as a sounding board.

 

[BADTROUT]

@BADTROUT Btw, I 100% agree that it would be a horrible idea to take legal advice from a discussion forum. Hopefully everyone here recognizes that fact, but I have to admit that it isn't a bad idea to say it just in case. In the end though, we are all professionals, who would hopefully have enough sense not to listen to the ramblings of strangers for any reason than as a sounding board.

One would be surprised! I also agreed with nearly everything except the solid "are not" part. They are not likely to be enforced, they are in many cases too overbearing even in states they otherwise COULD have been enforced. At the end of the day though I know of a few specific incidents where someone was basically threatened to be law-suited out of the business if they pressed their luck. It sucks, but its the nature of the litigious business environment we are in.

I also agree on the most effective way to prevent is to make it too good to leave.

 

[Strategy101]

For anyone wondering. Yes, I am still following my thread and have read each of your contributions. I appreciate you all taking the time to provide some insight.

Thank you