Tweet
Hi, here's my situation and I was hoping someone could advise whether I have some recourse. It's a convoluted story so I've tried to keep it as brief as possible but feel free to ask for clarifying details.
The short version is: As a result of a business that I founded having lost a major revenue stream, I was made redundant from a company I founded and I was paid 4 months salary in lieu . I have since learnt that the company is continuing to operate as it was beforehand.
CAVEAT
I realise that, to a large extent, this is my fault as I've agreed to some terrible deals along the way. However, I have been advised throughout by people with serious conflicts of interest.
BACKGROUND
CURRENT SITUATION
Towards the end of last year, the business was doing alright. Not great and certainly not the numbers I’d forecast, but I was making a profit.
My primary revenue sources had dried up although I was actively looking for a new strategy. I was confident.
At the time, the main revenue source was coming direct from my parent company - the company who had acquired my previous partners shares.
The parent company were very short on inventory for their online advertising network, so they bought inventory from me on my news website at a ridiculously reduced rate.
It was a symbiotic relationship; I was selling at below market value but still making margin while they were buying far below market value and increasing their profitability while being able to deliver their obligations to clients.
It was low quality inventory and they knew it, but without it they wouldn’t come close to delivering their campaigns and for most of 2015 they were happy to continue this way.
I said to the board that if they continued buying from me, like they had for the majority of 2015, then I would be sustainable into 2016 until such time as we could establish a new strategy for growth.
They said absolutely not - they wouldn’t be buying any of that inventory after midnight on the 31st December. That was a new "company policy". And as such, I became insolvent overnight. Which is why I was made redundant.
At the time it seemed fair enough and I accepted the redundancy terms.
Except tonight, I logged into the Google Analytics as part of a process I’m going through to collate all the company logins for them (I’m the only one who has access to any of the company accounts) and noticed something suspicious.
It looks like on the 12th of February - 3 days after I signed the contract agreeing not to sue them - (6 weeks after I'd been formally made redundant and was made to hand over my 30% stake in the business), they have switched on the exact same campaigns, driving traffic from the exact same supplier to the exact same landing page that I was managing for them.
They're doing it through the exact same vendors that I had sourced and developed relationships with, using the exact same logins with the exact same accounts that I had set up and developed.
Literally, the only difference between how the business was operating in 2015 while I was there and in 2016 after I've left, is that now they don't have to pay my salary.
ADDITIONAL DETAILS
QUESTIONS
Thanks in advance and give me a shout if there are any questions!
The short version is: As a result of a business that I founded having lost a major revenue stream, I was made redundant from a company I founded and I was paid 4 months salary in lieu . I have since learnt that the company is continuing to operate as it was beforehand.
CAVEAT
I realise that, to a large extent, this is my fault as I've agreed to some terrible deals along the way. However, I have been advised throughout by people with serious conflicts of interest.
BACKGROUND
- I founded an online advertising company with 2 friends. The business owned several news websites. My partners each had a 35% stake in the business and I had the remaining 30%. I went on to take the lead on everything from business development to operations, while they contributed nothing (no time, no investment etc...).
- Dividends were paid regularly and, despite doing 100% of the work, I received my 30%.
- My partners already owned a larger, more established online advertising business between the two of them that they were actively looking to sell or raise funding for. This was their primary focus.
- They found a company willing to buy their existing business, but the terms of that agreement were that they would have to also sell their stake in the business they had with me. So they each did exceptionally well out of selling their stake in my business despite of the fact they had contributed nothing. They each made around £75k (£150k total). I made nothing.
- The majority shareholder in my business was now a multinational corporation that I had no dealing with and had no relationship with until that point.
CURRENT SITUATION
Towards the end of last year, the business was doing alright. Not great and certainly not the numbers I’d forecast, but I was making a profit.
My primary revenue sources had dried up although I was actively looking for a new strategy. I was confident.
At the time, the main revenue source was coming direct from my parent company - the company who had acquired my previous partners shares.
The parent company were very short on inventory for their online advertising network, so they bought inventory from me on my news website at a ridiculously reduced rate.
It was a symbiotic relationship; I was selling at below market value but still making margin while they were buying far below market value and increasing their profitability while being able to deliver their obligations to clients.
It was low quality inventory and they knew it, but without it they wouldn’t come close to delivering their campaigns and for most of 2015 they were happy to continue this way.
I said to the board that if they continued buying from me, like they had for the majority of 2015, then I would be sustainable into 2016 until such time as we could establish a new strategy for growth.
They said absolutely not - they wouldn’t be buying any of that inventory after midnight on the 31st December. That was a new "company policy". And as such, I became insolvent overnight. Which is why I was made redundant.
At the time it seemed fair enough and I accepted the redundancy terms.
Except tonight, I logged into the Google Analytics as part of a process I’m going through to collate all the company logins for them (I’m the only one who has access to any of the company accounts) and noticed something suspicious.
It looks like on the 12th of February - 3 days after I signed the contract agreeing not to sue them - (6 weeks after I'd been formally made redundant and was made to hand over my 30% stake in the business), they have switched on the exact same campaigns, driving traffic from the exact same supplier to the exact same landing page that I was managing for them.
They're doing it through the exact same vendors that I had sourced and developed relationships with, using the exact same logins with the exact same accounts that I had set up and developed.
Literally, the only difference between how the business was operating in 2015 while I was there and in 2016 after I've left, is that now they don't have to pay my salary.
ADDITIONAL DETAILS
- I had a contract in place that said they guaranteed to pay me a salary until September 2017, which has now been breached.
- I was the sole employee of the company. So if I was redundant, then surely the company should cease trading?
- The board and shareholders of my former parent company are actively looking to exit in a deal which I expect to be north of £100 million.
- The redundancy contract I signed stated I wouldn't sue. However, I feel that this is unenforceable due to the fact that
- I signed under duress: I was told that if I didn't sign, they would wind down the business and I would receive nothing.
- I was advised by people with conflicts: my primary advisors were board members of the parent company and their lawyers. I had no legal counsel of my own.
QUESTIONS
- Should I have had a better deal when my partners sold their stake to the multinational?
- Should I have been offered a better deal than 4 months pay for redundancy?
- Do I have unfair dismissal recourse given that the company is clearly operating without me? My understanding is that according to UK law, “If you were made redundant – that is, you were told that your job was no longer needed – but you get clear evidence later that this was not the case, you can claim unfair dismissal.”
- Should I have access to any revenue that comes when the parent company sells to a larger company?
Thanks in advance and give me a shout if there are any questions!
Comment