Wages overpayment

grazzzz

marybelle01 wrote: »

"His first step should be to ascertain that there has actually been an overpayment by asking for the evidence that he has been overpaid!"

Quote from my first post. I said that the employee should ascertain that the employer can evidence an overpayment has been made.

But I am not going to argue further. The OP has clearly made up their mind what they want their son to do, and I have pointed out the risks involved in that. So if it doesn't work out, that is their decision.

Err we haven't made any decisions if you don't mind, just exercising the options available , we will take each step as it comes just want to be fully aware of the options we could take if necessary

ValHaller

marybelle01 wrote: »

"His first step should be to ascertain that there has actually been an overpayment by asking for the evidence that he has been overpaid!"

Quote from my first post. I said that the employee should ascertain that the employer can evidence an overpayment has been made.

But I am not going to argue further. The OP has clearly made up their mind what they want their son to do, and I have pointed out the risks involved in that. So if it doesn't work out, that is their decision.

You also said

and you cannot take them to court to stop them claiming it

Now it might not have come out the way you intended, but you cannot deny that until and unless the employer takes this to court, then OP can take this to court if the employer starts to deduct.

Prothet_of_Doom

What sort of employer, makes such a trivial mistake (£2400 is chicken feed per week per hour to a decent sized company...perhaps 40p to 30p an hour ?) for so long and then attempts to get it back at all.

Takeaway_Addict

Prothet_of_Doom wrote: »

What sort of employer, makes such a trivial mistake (£2400 is chicken feed per week per hour to a decent sized company...perhaps 40p to 30p an hour ?) for so long and then attempts to get it back at all.

I'm not sure most people would agree £2400 is chicken feed, regardless if its for a large company or not if the money is owed it is owed and should be paid back. However, it does need to be proved first.

Prothet_of_Doom

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

I'm not sure most people would agree £2400 is chicken feed, regardless if its for a large company or not if the money is owed it is owed and should be paid back. However, it does need to be proved first.

3 years = 36 months=£66.67 a month=£15.38 a week=38p an hour.

On a 40 hour week.

CHICKEN FEED IMHO 38p Thats all.38p ....In my humble opppinion if someone is paid at the wrong rate for more than a couple of months, then the t&c's were changed and the rate should be honoured.

Takeaway_Addict

Prothet_of_Doom wrote: »

3 years = 36 months=£66.67 a month=£15.38 a week=38p an hour.

On a 40 hour week.

CHICKEN FEED IMHO 38p Thats all.38p ....In my humble opppinion if someone is paid at the wrong rate for more than a couple of months, then the t&c's were changed and the rate should be honoured.

Just as well your opinion doesn't count. What if it was the other way? A bit like the John lewis issue now...should they not have to pay it back?

goonarmy

marybelle01 wrote: »

It is up to the employer to be able to prove that an overpayment has been made. But if it has, the law allows the employer to go back as far as six years to recover it

:hijacked:

Is this true for all overpayments? Wether or not the employee is still working for the employer who may have overpayed?

Takeaway_Addict

goonarmy wrote: »

:hijacked:

Is this true for all overpayments? Wether or not the employee is still working for the employer who may have overpayed?

Yes. It does work the other way as well then.

goonarmy

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Yes. It does work the other way as well then.

What underpayments?

goonarmy

Another oppotunity for usefullness wasted