Been Overpaid - Now they want it back
Discussion
hast2 said:
Wondering if someone I the know could let me know what carries more weight - my contract of employment or law?
I know now, that legally my company can take the money back, however my contract of employment mentions a long list of reasons why they'll take money out my wages, and over payments isn't on the list.
It says - The company reserve the right to make deductions from pay under the following circumstances : lateness, absence, loss of company tools, arrestment by court order. No other deductions will be made without the employees written authority.
...
There is no distinction between your contract and the law. A contract of employment is governed by the law of obligations (which is mostly contained in common law) and is also subject to various statutory rules. I know now, that legally my company can take the money back, however my contract of employment mentions a long list of reasons why they'll take money out my wages, and over payments isn't on the list.
It says - The company reserve the right to make deductions from pay under the following circumstances : lateness, absence, loss of company tools, arrestment by court order. No other deductions will be made without the employees written authority.
...
The list in the contract simply indicates the reasons for which the employer can make deductions from your pay. It is not an exhaustive list of every circumstance in which your employer can call on you to make a payment.
hast2 said:
Eric Mc said:
hast2 said:
For those that are calling me crazy - I'm a salary employee, I have no need to check my wage slip every month,
I find that attitude amazing and rather shocking, to be honest. EVERYBODY has a duty, no matter what their status is, to monitor their financial situation. Ignorance should never be a defence - especially if it's wilfull ignorance.You quickly get a feel in this thread who are employers and who are employees
As for the employer having a duty not to overpay, what should happen if such duty existed ? Should an employee be compensated because the employer paid too much? That is just silly.
The employer made a mistake. That was not a breach of any duty. It was a mistake.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 25th May 07:56
Most barristers whom I know are financially a bit chaotic. A few are very well organised. It is hard to budget, because from month to month and year to year the income fluctuates, quite often widely. You can go weeks and even months without getting paid, or get big splurges of money all in one go. Work comes and goes. A mad busy period can be followed by a period with nothing to do. It can take months and sometimes years to get paid for work done. Tax is due not just on money received but also on money owed by clients but not paid. There is no effective mechanism for enforcing bad debts. If you try to pressurise a solicitor to pay up, his or her firm will simply withdraw all business from you and sometimes your chambers as well. Some solicitors get money on account to pay counsel, but lots don't. If you try suing the client, the solicitor will hear of it and withdraw business. Clients promise a fee before a hearing, and then seek to negotiate it down after the hearing even (often especially) when you have won for them. The worst client is the Government. It pays fast, but pays at fixed rates set in the last century and never increased since. The top Government rate is about a quarter of the market rate. It is also a client that lies to its lawyers as well as to the Courts, and expects the impossible delivered last week with a golden ribbon on it. Hey ho. It's a rubbish job, except for all of the other jobs.
Breadvan72 said:
Most barristers whom I know are financially a bit chaotic. A few are very well organised. It is hard to budget, because from month to month and year to year the income fluctuates, quite often widely. You can go weeks and even months without getting paid, or get big splurges of money all in one go. Work comes and goes. A mad busy period can be followed by a period with nothing to do. It can take months and sometimes years to get paid for work done. Tax is due not just on money received but also on money owed by clients but not paid. There is no effective mechanism for enforcing bad debts. If you try to pressurise a solicitor to pay up, his or her firm will simply withdraw all business from you and sometimes your chambers as well. Some solicitors get money on account to pay counsel, but lots don't. If you try suing the client, the solicitor will hear of it and withdraw business. Clients promise a fee before a hearing, and then seek to negotiate it down after the hearing even (often especially) when you have won for them. The worst client is the Government. It pays fast, but pays at fixed rates set in the last century and never increased since. The top Government rate is about a quarter of the market rate. It is also a client that lies to its lawyers as well as to the Courts, and expects the impossible delivered last week with a golden ribbon on it. Hey ho. It's a rubbish job, except for all of the other jobs.
they must cry them selves to sleep into the alcantara steering wheel of their Ferrari FXX every night 
Yes, the criminal legal aid barristers who get about 50 K a year gross (before expenses and tax) definitely have lots of Ferraris. I do more than OK in civil stuff, but I couldn't afford a Ferrari of any description. Several of my colleagues could, but they mostly have good taste, so they wouldn't have a modern Ferrari.
Anyway, apols for thread drift. OP, try to keep the negotiations calm and steady.
Anyway, apols for thread drift. OP, try to keep the negotiations calm and steady.
Hasn't the "you have to pay it back" stance changed since Keenan V Barclays 2009 .
Not only did Keenan get to keep the overpayment, but Barclays were ordered to continue paying her the incorrect amount as she'd got used to it and now had ongoing commitments based on the incorrect salary!!!
Not only did Keenan get to keep the overpayment, but Barclays were ordered to continue paying her the incorrect amount as she'd got used to it and now had ongoing commitments based on the incorrect salary!!!
craigjm said:
Gary C] said:
Fortunately I had some overtime due that month otherwise I would actually have had a zero pay packet as the amount was slightly more than my monthly salary)
They are not allowed to do that these days as they can't leave you with less than minimum wage even if you have given permission for the deduction. Fortunately I didn't have a wife, children or a mortgage then. Just had fewer nights out. Now I would be screwed !
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Hasn't the "you have to pay it back" stance changed since Keenan V Barclays 2009 .
Not only did Keenan get to keep the overpayment, but Barclays were ordered to continue paying her the incorrect amount as she'd got used to it and now had ongoing commitments based on the incorrect salary!!!
No, nothing has changed.Not only did Keenan get to keep the overpayment, but Barclays were ordered to continue paying her the incorrect amount as she'd got used to it and now had ongoing commitments based on the incorrect salary!!!
That case -
(1) was decided by an employment tribunal, and so the decision does not bind any other tribunal or any court;
(2) turned on its own facts.
Well a quick update.
As I said before, I sent a polite e-mail, but no one has spoken to me about any of the stuff yet. What they did do is take 25% of the money they have overpaid back on this months wages. Just think it might be nice if they discussed it, even to explain that legally they are in the right and they can do what they want. (I know folk on here have told me they can legally take the money, but they don't know that)
As I said before, I sent a polite e-mail, but no one has spoken to me about any of the stuff yet. What they did do is take 25% of the money they have overpaid back on this months wages. Just think it might be nice if they discussed it, even to explain that legally they are in the right and they can do what they want. (I know folk on here have told me they can legally take the money, but they don't know that)
craigjm said:
Breadvan72 said:
Raise a grievance. Assert that the employer is acting in a manner that breaches the obligation of trust and confidence.
This immediately. FYI - They've still never replied to any of my emails, not even to acknowledge receipt and to say they are looking in to it.
Your employer is obliged to act in a manner that maintains trust and confidence. Taking the money in large chunks, rather than spread out over many months, arguably breaches this obligation. It places you under needless financial pressure. There should be a discussion, and an agreed payment plan.
Your grievance could be based on lack of reasonable discussion and the taking of an unfairly large chunk.
IF you can also argue that you changed your position when you were overpaid, by for example taking a holiday that you would not otherwise have taken, then you may not have to repay the money anyway. That one is a long shot, but a grievance based on lack of discussion and unduly large deductions might succeed.
Success would be a longer time to pay, or even a waiver of all or part of the repayment.
If the employer continues to mishandle this, and if you have at least two years continuity of employment, then you might obtain grounds to assert constructive dismissal. But there are big "ifs" there, and I am far from encouraging you to take that course.
Also, only take that course if you want to leave, and you have another job to go to.
Your grievance could be based on lack of reasonable discussion and the taking of an unfairly large chunk.
IF you can also argue that you changed your position when you were overpaid, by for example taking a holiday that you would not otherwise have taken, then you may not have to repay the money anyway. That one is a long shot, but a grievance based on lack of discussion and unduly large deductions might succeed.
Success would be a longer time to pay, or even a waiver of all or part of the repayment.
If the employer continues to mishandle this, and if you have at least two years continuity of employment, then you might obtain grounds to assert constructive dismissal. But there are big "ifs" there, and I am far from encouraging you to take that course.
Also, only take that course if you want to leave, and you have another job to go to.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 1st June 08:23
Breadvan72 said:
Your employer is obliged to act in a manner that maintains trust and confidence. Taking the money in large chunks, rather than spread out over many months, arguably breaches this obligation. It places you under needless financial pressure. There should be a discussion, and an agreed payment plan.
Your grievance could be based on lack of reasonable discussion and the taking of an unfairly large chunk.
IF you can also argue that you changed your position when you were overpaid, by for example taking a holiday that you would not otherwise have taken, then you may not have to repay the money anyway. That one is a long shot, but a grievance based on lack of discussion and unduly large deductions might succeed.
Success would be a longer time to pay, or even a waiver of all or part of the repayment.
If the employer continues to mishandle this, and if you have at least two years continuity of employment, then you might obtain grounds to assert constructive dismissal. But there are big "ifs" there, and I am far from encouraging you to take that course.
Also, only take that course if you want to leave, and you have another job to go to.
I'll try and find time today to dig out the employee handbook and familiarises myself with our grievance procedure, my workload is pretty high at the moment and I don't want to give my boss an excuse to give me hassle by not being up to date with stuff. If I've not heard anything formal back by the end of the week I'll start a grievance on Monday in accordance with our procedures.Your grievance could be based on lack of reasonable discussion and the taking of an unfairly large chunk.
IF you can also argue that you changed your position when you were overpaid, by for example taking a holiday that you would not otherwise have taken, then you may not have to repay the money anyway. That one is a long shot, but a grievance based on lack of discussion and unduly large deductions might succeed.
Success would be a longer time to pay, or even a waiver of all or part of the repayment.
If the employer continues to mishandle this, and if you have at least two years continuity of employment, then you might obtain grounds to assert constructive dismissal. But there are big "ifs" there, and I am far from encouraging you to take that course.
Also, only take that course if you want to leave, and you have another job to go to.
Edited by Breadvan72 on Thursday 1st June 08:23
Thanks
hast2 said:
Breadvan72 said:
Your employer is obliged to act in a manner that maintains trust and confidence. Taking the money in large chunks, rather than spread out over many months, arguably breaches this obligation. It places you under needless financial pressure. There should be a discussion, and an agreed payment plan.
Your grievance could be based on lack of reasonable discussion and the taking of an unfairly large chunk.
IF you can also argue that you changed your position when you were overpaid, by for example taking a holiday that you would not otherwise have taken, then you may not have to repay the money anyway. That one is a long shot, but a grievance based on lack of discussion and unduly large deductions might succeed.
Success would be a longer time to pay, or even a waiver of all or part of the repayment.
If the employer continues to mishandle this, and if you have at least two years continuity of employment, then you might obtain grounds to assert constructive dismissal. But there are big "ifs" there, and I am far from encouraging you to take that course.
Also, only take that course if you want to leave, and you have another job to go to.
I'll try and find time today to dig out the employee handbook and familiarises myself with our grievance procedure, my workload is pretty high at the moment and I don't want to give my boss an excuse to give me hassle by not being up to date with stuff. If I've not heard anything formal back by the end of the week I'll start a grievance on Monday in accordance with our procedures.Your grievance could be based on lack of reasonable discussion and the taking of an unfairly large chunk.
IF you can also argue that you changed your position when you were overpaid, by for example taking a holiday that you would not otherwise have taken, then you may not have to repay the money anyway. That one is a long shot, but a grievance based on lack of discussion and unduly large deductions might succeed.
Success would be a longer time to pay, or even a waiver of all or part of the repayment.
If the employer continues to mishandle this, and if you have at least two years continuity of employment, then you might obtain grounds to assert constructive dismissal. But there are big "ifs" there, and I am far from encouraging you to take that course.
Also, only take that course if you want to leave, and you have another job to go to.
Edited by Breadvan72 on Thursday 1st June 08:23
Thanks
hast2 said:
AndrewEH1 said:
Is there a union in your workplace?
No.I am reading "Back from the Brink", Michael Edwardes' narrative of the saving of BL 1977-1982. As my late father (a BL man and one of Edwardes' team in the factories) always said, it was crappy management (plus crappy Government) that did more to harm BL than crappy unions.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff