Agree 100 %. Furthermore, he can prove that the Intellectual Property he utilized at the firm in question is his own Prior Art which might invalidate many of their terms. And he certainly has a valid claim that the firm's own IT infrastructure, ECN and trading platform technical issues harmed him and therefore the firm should not be unjustly enriched by garnishing his future income and restricting his ability to make a living trading either for himself or as an employee at another trading firm.
Quit prop firm after server side technology issues with API cost me my year; advice on non compete
- Thread starter Bourbon84
- Start date
Agree 100 %. Furthermore, he can prove that the Intellectual Property he utilized at the firm in question is his own Prior Art which might invalidate many of their terms. And he certainly has a valid claim that the firm's own IT infrastructure, ECN and trading platform technical issues harmed him and therefore the firm should not be unjustly enriched by garnishing his future income and restricting his ability to make a living trading either for himself or as an employee at another trading firm.
While I may have to review the non-compete from Tower Hill(yes Tower Hill cause the same thing happened to me, a few weeks ago) but Ellie told me when signing you can still trade personally but not for someone else for 2yrs. I doubt they hold water when their "proprietary" training doesn't significantly improve the success of their traders. What was your acct. # btw. or were you on the GPC side?
Generally non competes mean that the company is paying you a comfortable amount while you're under that period to sit at home. At least that's the way in banking and hedge funds. Is it different in the prop trading world? They pay you nothing and you can't work in your field? That doesn't sound legal. What am I missing?
20 year goals? Really? This is trading - you should be thinking about one month at a time.
Another lawyer's advice: Why would you go to a trading forum to get legal advice? Would you hire an attorney for trading advice? I realize that some on this forum might have had a somewhat similar experience, however, the law in that trader's jurisdiction may be just different enough from yours that it makes their advice wrong.
I've read a lot of "common sense" in the posts, however, the law sometimes/often takes things into account that "common sense" does not contemplate. Further, "common sense" does not consider the effect special interests have on the law.
So. a real lawyer's advice would be to go find an employment lawyer in your state who can tell you where you stand legally. It will be the best money you ever spent. It is also cheaper to pay a lawyer now, than to pay the lawyer later to get you out of trouble which was caused by doing something using your common sense.
Finally, I would not even give you advice if you came to see me and you lived in my state as I don't do employment law. So, I don't know enough about it, but, i suspect I know more than most on this thread. I do know enough to say that you need an employment lawyer.
Good luck.
I've read a lot of "common sense" in the posts, however, the law sometimes/often takes things into account that "common sense" does not contemplate. Further, "common sense" does not consider the effect special interests have on the law.
So. a real lawyer's advice would be to go find an employment lawyer in your state who can tell you where you stand legally. It will be the best money you ever spent. It is also cheaper to pay a lawyer now, than to pay the lawyer later to get you out of trouble which was caused by doing something using your common sense.
Finally, I would not even give you advice if you came to see me and you lived in my state as I don't do employment law. So, I don't know enough about it, but, i suspect I know more than most on this thread. I do know enough to say that you need an employment lawyer.
Good luck.
Last edited:
I have an idea for you... try trading up underneath another persons account, like your parents or relatives, then they probably wont be able to enforce the fact that you were trading. It seems hard to verify that unless they get copies of your trading statements,however just open some other account. A bit shady but hard for them to enforce. Dont bother with the attorney.
My sense is that the OP wants some portability for his strategy in terms of employment with other proprietary trading firms that have better ECN infrastructure and technology support.
HAHA - "a little bit shady". I wish everyone had this mindset as it would be fantastic for my occupation!
I'd like to comment on this trader's advice, but, I can't figure out what it means. Is the word "enforce" being used to mean 1) enforce, 2) discover, 3) prove, 4) some other term 5) or a combination of the aforementioned?(it is used more than one time) Enforce just does not make sense contextually in the first instance it is used. Maybe "prove" is what this trader meant. But the word "enforce" does work in the second instance it is used. So, who knows.
Assuming EliteTraderNYC actually meant "enforce",and using its common meaning, it is pretty easy for a company to gain compliance by filing a lawsuit. Individuals usually don't have the means to fight it out in court. Usually, irrespective on who is right, if one cannot afford to litigate, one cannot win.
Next, what does "trading underneath" mean? Give dad the money and put it in dad's account? Tax issues there. Maybe you could do some sort of entity that is owned by dad but pays out the trader. But, then you would have to set it up-likely using a service and or lawyer.
Seems easier to to go spend some up front money and figure out where you stand legally-then figure out the next step. Sometimes cheap is expensive in the long run.
My last post re this.
I'd like to comment on this trader's advice, but, I can't figure out what it means. Is the word "enforce" being used to mean 1) enforce, 2) discover, 3) prove, 4) some other term 5) or a combination of the aforementioned?(it is used more than one time) Enforce just does not make sense contextually in the first instance it is used. Maybe "prove" is what this trader meant. But the word "enforce" does work in the second instance it is used. So, who knows.
Assuming EliteTraderNYC actually meant "enforce",and using its common meaning, it is pretty easy for a company to gain compliance by filing a lawsuit. Individuals usually don't have the means to fight it out in court. Usually, irrespective on who is right, if one cannot afford to litigate, one cannot win.
Next, what does "trading underneath" mean? Give dad the money and put it in dad's account? Tax issues there. Maybe you could do some sort of entity that is owned by dad but pays out the trader. But, then you would have to set it up-likely using a service and or lawyer.
Seems easier to to go spend some up front money and figure out where you stand legally-then figure out the next step. Sometimes cheap is expensive in the long run.
My last post re this.