Ex-employer chasing study expenses

RJH88

Hi All,


I recently posted about an ex-employer chasing study fee's they say I owe them, I won't go again into the details of why I am disputing as it was explained a lot in another thread. In summary, there is NOTHING in my contract and I DID NOT sign any agreement with them, I have asked for this and it has been ignored.
Now it is with a debt collection agency, they have just responded to the first letter I sent them, could anyone help me with the steps I should take to dispute the alleged debt?


Just to clarify the below response from the debt collection agency, the company handbook was never supplied however the last paragraph of section 30 states:


The Company may, at its discretion in appropriate cases, agree to fund certain training and in those instances, signature of a training contract will be required.


A training contract was never agreed and I did not sign anything, even though they mention my contract states I have read the company handbook this surely negates what they say as it states they should have drafted an agreement and they did not.


My 1st letter


Dear Mr xx

Please be aware that I do not acknowledge the above debt to your company or any other for that matter, and therefore require you to supply the following documentation before I will correspond further.

Firstly, you must supply me with a true copy of the agreement you refer to in this matter. This is my right under the legislation contained within section 77 (1) and section 78 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 - your obligation also extends to providing statements of account, a breakdown of costs, charges, terms and conditions including interest rates of the original loan agreement, signed by myself.

I enclose a £1.00 postal order in payment of the statutory fee for the account as above.

I also require that you supply signed true copies of the Deed of Assignment of the above referenced agreement if available.

You are reminded that you are obliged to supply these documents, whether you are the original creditor or not, under section 189 of the CCA 1974.

As you are aware, a credit agreement that is not properly documented and signed by the customer is totally unenforceable under the Consumer Credit Act and therefore is a complete defence to any court claim that is issued.

Take note at this stage, that any legal action you may be contemplating may not be enforceable in law. In the meantime please be aware that I consider this matter to be “in dispute”, therefore as per the Office of Fair Trading's "Guidance on Debt Collection" you must cease all collection activity while there is any dispute with the alleged debt. As this dispute is with xx Ltd, I would request that you return this matter to them immediately.

Any further contact regarding the payment of the alleged debt or alleged outstanding invoices from yourselves will be seen as harassment and will be dealt with as such.

Yours faithfully

xx


Their response


Dear Mr xx

Thank you for your recent undated letters in relation to the above account with Hugo Boss UK Ltd. We are assigned on behalf of Hugo Boss UK Ltd to recover the overdue payment against invoice 0055315 dated 19.12.14 for the sum of £2853GBP. The invoice relates to fees for accountancy studies and exams. This debt owed is not subject to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, this is not a regulated debt.

Under the terms of your employment contract signed with Hugo Boss UK Ltd there is a statement “ I confirm that I have read and understood the company rules”, under this statement is your signature and the date 20.3.13. This contract was later superseded with your promotion letter dated 13.8.14. However the terms of your contract did not fundamentally change, therefore the statement of “ I confirm that I have read and understood the company rules”, still applies.

I have attached for ease of reference a company of the company rules. Under section 30 it covers Study, Training and Development policy. It states “ the company is not obliged by law to pay for the costs of the training, or the costs of the relevant materials/books required or examination costs”.

It is therefore your liability to pay for the costs under invoice 0055315 dated 19.12.14. I have also attached a copy of their trainee sponsorship policy.

I note you have stated the debt is disputed, in order for us to deal with the dispute we need full details of why you believe you are not liable for the debt. If there is no valid dispute in law, we have the right to issue county court proceedings for the recovery of this debt, plus interest and court charges.

Please submit full details of your dispute for consideration in the next 7 days from the date of this email


xx

retepetsir

Well - did you undertake the course and then leave before completing, or something similar? If you did go for the training then I'm not sure you can wiggle out of it?

shortcrust

RJH88 wrote: »

However the terms of your contract did not fundamentally change, therefore the statement of “ I confirm that I have read and understood the company rules”, still applies.

I have attached for ease of reference a company of the company rules. Under section 30 it covers Study, Training and Development policy. It states “ the company is not obliged by law to pay for the costs of the training, or the costs of the relevant materials/books required or examination costs”.

It is therefore your liability to pay for the costs under invoice 0055315 dated 19.12.14. I have also attached a copy of their trainee sponsorship policy......

Just my very uninformed opinion, but I don't see that "It is therefore your liability to pay for the costs". I would think if they want to take you to court they'd have to have something better than that.

pvt

RJH88 wrote: »

It states “ the company is not obliged by law to pay for the costs of the training, or the costs of the relevant materials/books required or examination costs”.

It may not be obliged to pay, but it did pay. As I see it, the company could try to get their money back from the supplier of the training, but I don't see how they can pursue their ex-employee for it.

bamgbost

I personally don't think they have a leg to stand on. If that's the best they can say!

Although if the creditors persue things, it could hamper your credit history. And then that would need sorting out in addition

RJH88

Thanks for your input people, this is my response:


I would like to point out again that I dispute the alleged debt.



I have a copy of all of my contracts of employment and have thoroughly read them, I agree that it states “I confirm that I have read and understood the company rules”. On reading the company rules that were never given to me whilst in employment I would like to clarify the last sentence of section 30 states, “The Company may, at its discretion in appropriate cases, agree to fund certain training and in those instances, signature of a training contract will be required”. Furthermore the company rules also states a request for training must be made in writing detailing the study or training to be undertake, and also a meeting will be held to discuss the request within 28 days following the date of the request.



On the basis that no request was made by myself for training, a meeting was never held to discuss the details of training costs and repayment of training costs incurred and most importantly no training contract was provided to me or signed by myself regarding study fees or training costs, I dispute your claims that I owe any money to yourself on behalf of XX Ltd for study fees and therefore any costs incurred are not my liability.



I have already requested this document once from XX, but once again I will ask again for a copy of the signed training agreement to be sent to me, as without this document I am not obliged by law to repay any alleged costs as clearly the company have not followed their own stated rules. Furthermore there is absolutely no mention of this in any of my employment contracts which you have referred to and in the clearly unfinished training sponsorship policy you sent over which was also never provided to me whilst in employment at XX, again this does not constitute a signed training agreement required as stated in the company rules. I believe these reasons to be sufficient grounds to base my dispute in law as you requested.



Unless you can provide such debt validation in the form of the training contract I consider this matter to be “in dispute” in law, therefore as per the Office of Fair Trading's "Guidance on Debt Collection" you must cease all collection activity while there is any dispute with the alleged debt, any further collection activities are totally unenforceable by law. If you do continue I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.



I have also provided a copy of the Royal Mail letter tracking number with signature to prove delivery to your business which contained a £1 postal order for such documents to be sent over to me following my previous request sent on 29th May 2015.

I looked forward to receiving the required document, otherwise, I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed.



Yours faithfully

RJH88

As you can see in their letter they stated if there is no valid dispute they will proceed with court action, I can't see how my dispute could have been anymore valid, can someone confirm if this is now a valid dispute in law and must cease their chasing activities?


What is the chances this will got to court? If it does what are my chances in defending my case?


All I have done is validate the debt by asking for signed training agreement the company handbook says they should have drafted, as they didn't follow this or any other of the procedures I can't see how they will have a case to chase me for this any longer.

fierystormcloud

I would say 'see you in court then!'

I don't think they have any legal right to get that money back!

andyfromotley

Yup, i think its time to call their bluff, as a completely lay person i agree that they don't have a leg to stand on. The company chose to pay for it. The company omitted to get any agreement from you that you would pay them back the money if you left. Their bad.

They will be happy to play letter ping pong as you may just get fed up and pay, i'm guessing that they also get to add charges too. As Fiery said, i'd send them a letter saying 'see you in court.' (i'd be amazed if they took it there to be honest.)

Clive_Woody

pvt wrote: »

It may not be obliged to pay, but it did pay. As I see it, the company could try to get their money back from the supplier of the training, but I don't see how they can pursue their ex-employee for it.

Exactly this.

They were not obliged to pay but decided to do so anyway, and in doing so they did not follow their own policy and ask you to sign a training contract detailing any liability that you had towards repayment of the costs if you left the company.

I don't see they have a leg to stand on.

I would also state that should they decide to proceed with court action you will appoint a legal representative to defend yourself and will seek to reclaim all associated costs when the ruling goes in your favour.

DandelionPatrol

Something a little bit Freudian about posting this on the 'Loans' forum, but never mind.

RJH88, you are up the pole on this one trying to argue under the Consumer Credit Act. Even if you did owe them, it would not be under consumer credit.

As I understand it, they need an explicit signed agreement from you to enforce a clawback. More and better advice if you post on the employment forum, because your issue is primarily related to employment.