Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

recovering money for overpayment.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4818 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I wonder whether someone can help me.

 

About months ago i reduced my hours at work from full time to 30 hours per week due to ill health. At the time my manager confirmed that he would put the change of hours through. A few months later my wages didnt look right so i contacted hr to say that my wages didint look right and i think i am being overpaid. I was advised it was all correct and i am being paid correctly.

It has now transpired that the change of hours was not put through properly and half the systems were corrected and the other half were not and have to repay overpayment.

I have given the company my incme expendiure and told them what i could afford to pay back however they have made me agree to an amount way over my means and i dont thnk i will be able to repay however i was told f i didnt make a decison wouldn get paid.

I was told this month only my overpaid tax and national insurance woul go out and i would start repaying from next month, however i have now realised that they have started taken payments out my wages aswell without advising me. Can the company do this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes a company is entitled to reclaim overpayments in wages, there is no fixed rule about the rate of recovery and whether this should be in one lump sum or over a period of months. However, there is a general rule that an employer must not act in such a way as to undermine the employment relationship or to breach trust and confidence. In the light of this general duty, the best advice for an employer is to discuss the overpayment with the employee and propose repayment over a reasonable period of time depending upon the size of overpayment and the period over which it occurred.

 

Basically what they take in repayments must be reasonable and not leave you suffering finanical hardship. i would speak to your employer and state that the deductions they are making is leaving you in financial hardship and as such undermines the employment relationship. Inform them of how much you are willing to repay (make a reasonable monthly/weekly amount offer of repayment), and inform them that if they refuse then they will be in breach of trust and confidence and as such are acting unreasonably. State that you will as a result seek advise from The Union or ACAS, point out to the employer that as it was the fault of the employer and that you had pointed out the error only to be told that the amount you were paid was correct then it s the employers fault that the ovrpayment accured and current deductions have left you at a significant finanical disadvantage.

 

Nw the second issue here, is you say they made you agree to repay more then you can afford. So, the question is how did they make you agree to such high rates of repayment? did they threaten you with anything by any chance?

 

Do you have a union rep?

 

If not then contact ACAS here for informal advice, HERE

 

NOTE ALL REPAYMENTS MUST BE AGREED TO BY THE EMPLOYEE PRIOR TO DEDUCTIONS BEING MADE.

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Always seek the advice of an insured qualified professional. All my legal and nonlegal knowledge comes from either here (CAG),my own personal research and experience and/or as the result of necessity as an Employer and Businessman.

 

By using my advice in any form, you agreed to waive all rights to hold myself or any persons representing myself of any liability.

 

If you PM me, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private. All PMs that are sent in missuse (including but not limited to phinishing, spam) of the PM application and/or PMs that are threatening or abusive will be reported to the Site Team and if necessary to the police and/or relevant Authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

As the error was not yours and you didn't defraud them, it is therefore their mistake. It is therefore your choice if you want to pay them back and it cannot affect your employment within the company as that will be a diffrent issue (if you have been at the company for more then 1 year you have legal rights).

It is nice to pay them back but remember it is your choice as its their mistake.

 

They can not forcefully deduct your wages as that is "unlawful deductions of wages". By forcefully I mean they put in place a measure to reclaim their mistake, without you agreeing to it.

Also if you have already been taxed for the incorrect amount (overpayment), so the taxman is happy.

 

Firstly 7 days for any cooling off period. But I assume its been longer so if they are doing something illegal then its their fault.

 

Putting you in a position were you wont get paid unless you agree is similar to "positional bargaining". it is also applied in cases were I give a quote but then when doing the job I need more, the extra is recoverable in court.

If I was you I would ask a friend or collegue if they are with a union, or if you are already with 1 to call them and ask them for their opinion.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Don't act on my advise as its just a guide, see the unions

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

as the error was not yours and you didn't defraud them, it is therefore their mistake. It is therefore your choice if you want to pay them back and it cannot affect your employment within the company as that will be a diffrent issue (if you have been at the company for more then 1 year you have legal rights).

It is nice to pay them back but remember it is your choice as its their mistake.

 

They can not forcefully deduct your wages as that is "unlawful deductions of wages". By forcefully i mean they put in place a measure to reclaim their mistake, without you agreeing to it.

Also if you have already been taxed for the incorrect amount (overpayment), so the taxman is happy.

 

Firstly 7 days for any cooling off period. But i assume its been longer so if they are doing something illegal then its their fault.

 

Putting you in a position were you wont get paid unless you agree is similar to "positional bargaining". It is also applied in cases were i give a quote but then when doing the job i need more, the extra is recoverable in court.

If i was you i would ask a friend or collegue if they are with a union, or if you are already with 1 to call them and ask them for their opinion.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Don't act on my advise as its just a guide, see the unions

nah

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes a company is entitled to reclaim overpayments in wages, there is no fixed rule about the rate of recovery and whether this should be in one lump sum or over a period of months. However, there is a general rule that an employer must not act in such a way as to undermine the employment relationship or to breach trust and confidence. In the light of this general duty, the best advice for an employer is to discuss the overpayment with the employee and propose repayment over a reasonable period of time depending upon the size of overpayment and the period over which it occurred.

 

Basically what they take in repayments must be reasonable and not leave you suffering finanical hardship. I would speak to your employer and state that the deductions they are making is leaving you in financial hardship and as such undermines the employment relationship. Inform them of how much you are willing to repay (make a reasonable monthly/weekly amount offer of repayment), and inform them that if they refuse then they will be in breach of trust and confidence and as such are acting unreasonably. State that you will as a result seek advise from the union or acas, point out to the employer that as it was the fault of the employer and that you had pointed out the error only to be told that the amount you were paid was correct then it s the employers fault that the ovrpayment accured and current deductions have left you at a significant finanical disadvantage.

 

Nw the second issue here, is you say they made you agree to repay more then you can afford. So, the question is how did they make you agree to such high rates of repayment? Did they threaten you with anything by any chance?

 

Do you have a union rep?

 

If not then contact acas here for informal advice, here

 

note all repayments must be agreed to by the employee prior to deductions being made.nah

gfchg,jhfyl./nbkjgylfutx

Link to post
Share on other sites

y.kjl/dbn'bnjpnp :

 

 

I won't even ask what you been taking tonight for your meds Elpulpo lol

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Always seek the advice of an insured qualified professional. All my legal and nonlegal knowledge comes from either here (CAG),my own personal research and experience and/or as the result of necessity as an Employer and Businessman.

 

By using my advice in any form, you agreed to waive all rights to hold myself or any persons representing myself of any liability.

 

If you PM me, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private. All PMs that are sent in missuse (including but not limited to phinishing, spam) of the PM application and/or PMs that are threatening or abusive will be reported to the Site Team and if necessary to the police and/or relevant Authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

note all repayments must be agreed to by the employee prior to deductions being made.nah

gfchg,jhfyl./nbkjgylfutx

 

I think you will find that an employer can not simply take deductions for overpayments without the consent and prior acknowledgement to the deductions from the employee.If they didnt need such consent then they'd just take it all back in one go. So its unreasonable for them to take prior to consent and by not asking the employee it is a breach of trust.

Edited by teaboy2

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Always seek the advice of an insured qualified professional. All my legal and nonlegal knowledge comes from either here (CAG),my own personal research and experience and/or as the result of necessity as an Employer and Businessman.

 

By using my advice in any form, you agreed to waive all rights to hold myself or any persons representing myself of any liability.

 

If you PM me, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private. All PMs that are sent in missuse (including but not limited to phinishing, spam) of the PM application and/or PMs that are threatening or abusive will be reported to the Site Team and if necessary to the police and/or relevant Authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

have a nose at setion of the employment rights act

 

14 Excepted deductions. E+W+S

(1)Section 13 does not apply to a deduction from a worker’s wages made by his employer where the purpose of the deduction is the reimbursement of the employer in respect of—

(a) An overpayment of wages, or

(B) An overpayment in respect of expenses incurred by the worker in carrying out his employment,

 

 

an employer can take back an overpayment just like the employer will have to repay any under payment

 

 

its good practice to get the consent of the employee to repay over a period but they dont have to.

 

 

its good practice for you line manager to speak to you about the overpayment and decide on a repayment proposal but if the employee becomes difficult,

 

 

teaboy2 is spot on

 

 

 

THEY CAN TAKE IT BACK THROUGH FORCED DEDUCTIONS OF WAGES IF THEY WISH

Link to post
Share on other sites

have a nose at setion 13 of the employment rights act

 

 

14 Excepted deductions

. E+W+S

(1)Section 13 does not apply to a deduction from a worker’s wages made by his employer where the purpose of the deduction is the reimbursement of the employer in respect of—

(a) An overpayment of wages, or

(B) An overpayment in respect of expenses incurred by the worker in carrying out his employment,

 

 

an employer can take back an overpayment just like the employer will have to repay any under payment

 

 

its good practice to get the consent of the employee to repay over a period but they dont have to.

 

 

its good practice for you line manager to speak to you about the overpayment and decide on a repayment proposal but if the employee becomes difficult,

 

 

teaboy2 is spot on

 

 

 

THEY CAN TAKE IT BACK THROUGH FORCED DEDUCTIONS OF WAGES IF THEY WISH

 

Yep, and given they denied there was an error in the wages paid, then they are in a very tight situation as they confirmed the payments were correct. So the error is the employers and the employee was led to believe there was no error when they qeuried it, so any deductions made without consent could be reclaimed in court by the employee as unlawful deductions on the above point. So the employers safe bet would be to only reclaim the overpayments made after the date the employee was told the wages were correct and to accept a payment offer made by the employee.

 

Though i think SarEl expertise would be of benefit in clearing up any uncertainties. Either way the money is the employers and not the employees but its all about what is deemed to be reasonable action from the employer in their attempt to recover overpaid wages made as a result of their own errors especially after confirming to the employee that its was correct when queried

 

In order to show that an overpayment is not recoverable, then the employee must demonstrate three things. Firstly, it must be shown that the overpayment was the fault of the company and not the employee. Secondly, it must have been reasonable for the employee not to know that they were being overpaid (is being told by the employer that payment was correct reasonable to assume they were not being overpaid?). Thirdly, the employee must have acted to their disadvantage or the assumption that the payment of salary was correct (for example by spending the money!). The most common difficulty for employees is the second condition since it is often obvious when an overpayment has occurred. It is not acceptable for an employee to assume that they have received a substantial increase in pay unless there is some reason to believe that this is the case.

 

It would seem to me that the employer acted with negligence, by failing to adequately check accounts and ensure the wages paid were correct when the employee raised the query. Which as a result, despite the short term financial gain for the employee, they are now at a financial disadvantage after being told the wages were correct and led to believe, as such, that it was ok to spend it. Only to now be told he/she must pay it all back and therefore leaving them less money per week than what they would otherwise receive if the employer had not acted with negilgence.

Edited by teaboy2

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Always seek the advice of an insured qualified professional. All my legal and nonlegal knowledge comes from either here (CAG),my own personal research and experience and/or as the result of necessity as an Employer and Businessman.

 

By using my advice in any form, you agreed to waive all rights to hold myself or any persons representing myself of any liability.

 

If you PM me, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private. All PMs that are sent in missuse (including but not limited to phinishing, spam) of the PM application and/or PMs that are threatening or abusive will be reported to the Site Team and if necessary to the police and/or relevant Authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing to add - everyone except alistair would be correct. The deductions are allowed, they do not have to reach an agreement on what you think you can afford, and the only rule is that no deduction should reduce your wage below the NMW rate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks SarEl, that certainly helps clear things up :-)

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Always seek the advice of an insured qualified professional. All my legal and nonlegal knowledge comes from either here (CAG),my own personal research and experience and/or as the result of necessity as an Employer and Businessman.

 

By using my advice in any form, you agreed to waive all rights to hold myself or any persons representing myself of any liability.

 

If you PM me, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private. All PMs that are sent in missuse (including but not limited to phinishing, spam) of the PM application and/or PMs that are threatening or abusive will be reported to the Site Team and if necessary to the police and/or relevant Authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol thank goodness for that, was worried you'd lost the plot or something when i first saw your posts :-)

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Always seek the advice of an insured qualified professional. All my legal and nonlegal knowledge comes from either here (CAG),my own personal research and experience and/or as the result of necessity as an Employer and Businessman.

 

By using my advice in any form, you agreed to waive all rights to hold myself or any persons representing myself of any liability.

 

If you PM me, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private. All PMs that are sent in missuse (including but not limited to phinishing, spam) of the PM application and/or PMs that are threatening or abusive will be reported to the Site Team and if necessary to the police and/or relevant Authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your replies. I have always stated to the company that i will pay the money back that is owed, however theya re being extremely unreasonable in the amount they wish to be paid back and as result i will be caused financial hardship. I have given the company my expenditures and this clearly shows i cannot afford to repay the amount they propose however they are standing their ground. I had to agree the amountthey proposed as i was told if i did not then my pay would stop till they recovered the money. I was also advised by a hr rep to increase my hours knowing i cannot as i suffer from an illness which disables me and i have to have weekly chemotherapy which makes me extremely tired.

Thecompany is a very big company making millions in profit they are hardly going to miss a few thousands. i really dont know what to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should have told us this to begin with! When you say hardship, do you mean that things will be tight - or that you can't pay your bills or medicals? In which case you should submit a grievance outlining the medical grounds (try to get your doctor to support you) for lower repayments as a "reasonable adjustment". You have some moral grounds here for an adjustment - although the legal grounds are somewhat murky, so you really don't want to go there if you can avoid it. It may work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry i should have mentioned before. By hardship i mean i may struggle to pay the bills. My medical costs have gone up as not only is there medicine costs there is also the parking charges everytime i attend hospital which is quite frequent.Any grievance i raise goes to my line manager however he is fully aware of the situation so is his manager who is overseeing the whole thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry i should have mentioned before. By hardship i mean i may struggle to pay the bills. My medical costs have gone up as not only is there medicine costs there is also the parking charges everytime i attend hospital which is quite frequent.Any grievance i raise goes to my line manager however he is fully aware of the situation so is his manager who is overseeing the whole thing.

 

Well then you have to decide whether to go over their heads. You have to either accept that you pay back the money at the rate they have said, or you have to appeal the decision and agree something different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...