Employer refusing expenses claim because its late

nicechap

The thread has, pretty much, gone the way expected.

silverwhistle

[quote=[Deleted User];73350455]Sangie - I honestly dont give a monkeys what you think to be honest. You have proved time and time again that the only reason you are on this forum is because you appear to like criticising people.[/QUOTE]

Really? That's not my perception at all. You, on the other hand, only seem to come on the forum to air your latest problem. No problem with that, but when people give you advice you don't like or ask questions to clarify understanding you abuse them.

I very much doubt that that is only my perception. I have this image of you in the Boy's Brigade band: "Oh look, everybody is out of step except our Paul".

[Deleted User]

RichardD1970 wrote: »

It was actually gettingtheresometime who bought up the contractor issue.

As pointed out by sangie595 it is quite relevant to the situation so maybe enlighten us so the correct advice can be given (although I think both angles have been pretty well covered in the previous replies).

Its all in the title....

Sarastro

[quote=[Deleted User];73341128]Very funny I'm sure. If you don't want to offer advice then please dont waste everyone elses time on this thread.

Take a look at this posters posting history and you will see they rarely have a nice word to say about anyone. Sadly, there seem to be a few on this forum like this who are all too keen to jump on and start an argument for the sake of it.[/QUOTE]

That really is unfair - Sangie595 is clearly an experienced HR professional and I've read a lot of posts written by them and they have been fair and helpful.

sangie595

Sarastro wrote: »

That really is unfair - Sangie595 is clearly an experienced HR professional and I've read a lot of posts written by them and they have been fair and helpful.

Not HR anything!

TELLIT01

[quote=[Deleted User];73350455]Sangie - I honestly dont give a monkeys what you think to be honest. You have proved time and time again that the only reason you are on this forum is because you appear to like criticising people.[/QUOTE]

What utter rubbish. Sangies advice and input generally been carefully thought through and is an honest appraisal of their view of the situation. The fact that at times his opinion doesn't match that of the person to whom he is responding doesn't mean he is criticising.

k3lvc

TELLIT01 wrote: »

What utter rubbish. Sangies advice and input generally been carefully thought through and is an honest appraisal of their view of the situation. The fact that at times [STRIKE]his[/STRIKE] her opinion doesn't match that of the person to whom she is responding doesn't mean he is criticising.

Edited for you

getmore4less

[quote=[Deleted User];discussion/5736566]Company has a rule that you've got to submit expenses within 3 months. Which I did. But there have been problems with the system and I checked why it hadn't been paid. For some reason, the claim was back as "un-submitted".

So now system flags that part of the claim is over 3 months old and you have to justify this. Manager can then OK it. So I put reason.

Manager has knocked it back and said its valid but too old. Can they do that? I wouldn't mind but its over £300.

What would next step be?[/QUOTE]

3 month is fairly generous.

claim in
week 1. check everything is in ok, fix if not, chase sign off.
week 2. repeat above if signed off make a note of payment due
week 3. reapeat above and if hit payment date check payment.
week4.

IME typical payment cycle is next payroll run so 1 month from approval max to get paid.

with 3 months that's up to 13 checks with only one a week.

even if a claim is delayed as it is part of a longer claim(trip) there is going to be 8 weeks window unless away long time then there should be a way to split those claims into shorter periods.

How many weeks of the 3 months window did you sit on the claim initially?

TELLIT01

k3lvc wrote: »

Edited for you

Too kind, but you missed changing a 'he' to a 'she'. Can't get good staff any more.

[Deleted User]

TELLIT01 wrote: »

What utter rubbish. Sangies advice and input generally been carefully thought through and is an honest appraisal of their view of the situation. The fact that at times his opinion doesn't match that of the person to whom he is responding doesn't mean he is criticising.

Related at all ;-)