Overpaid final pay, what are the consequences if I ignore letter?

steampowered

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

Playing Devil's Advocate, if you leave an overpayment in your account untouched, and you accept it's an overpayment but you don't pay it back, at what point (if any) can you be argued to have appropriated it dishonestly?

I think the answer to this is 'never'. Theft requires an act - such as touching something, or transferring something to your account. I don't think leaving the money sitting there (in theoretical terms) could ever amount to theft.

Of course the employer could always still take civil action to recover the funds. If the court ordered you to return the money, and you failed to comply with the court order, that would be contempt of court and at that point things would start to enter a more criminal-type sphere.

motorguy

orikien wrote: »

Wow, I didn't know it count as theft, that seemed to be over the top.... That's kind of scary if people receive a sum of money they have no knowledge of. I thought it would be like debt at most.

It becomes theft when you find out you've received it in error, then wont repay it when asked.

Samsung_Note2

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

That's the ridiculously unreasonable bit. It's not what suits the OP, it's what is reasonable. The idea, which you suggest, of paying it back over 30 years is clearly daft. It's only £1300, it's been made in a single payment and the OP has not touched that money (by their own admission). They can pay it back straight away.


In different circumstances your advice might make more sense, but it doesn't here.

You didnt read this line then...lol.

If he can pay it back and not be left short,then one lump sum is good. :T

The point i was making was,the OP needs to pay it back..thats a given,however he needs to pay back at a rate that suits him,whilst 30 years was obviously tongue in cheek (well i thought that was quite obvious)..he should pay it back over a length of timer that works for him.

No point saying he will pay back an amount thats not both affordable and practical,he could offer to pay back £100 but find its not going to work.

We dont know how much he has disposable..so yes if he feels an amount of £xx is affordable then pay that amount,after all he hasn't applied for a loan and agreed in advance to pay £xx per month.

Based on most people seeing a lump of money and spending it...maybe not the case with the OP but a good amount of people will spend it and worry about it after.

chucknorris

orikien wrote: »

However, I received an email today from HR saying they made a mistake and overpaid me by £1300 pounds, I think they are correct as the amount is way higher than I expected. I also checked HMRC record and it displays the amount they paid me (which is wrong I guess). They asked me to 'refund the XXXXX amount ASAP' to the company's bank account, and 'let them know once actioned', Right now the money is sitting in my bank untouched.

When I left an employer once, they forgot to stop the salary payment into my back account until after a payment had been made. When they contacted me (the same week as the payment was made, so I hadn't noticed), I said that I would of course return the money, but less the flexi time that I had worked, which they had refused to pay me. I really enjoyed saying that to them (it was worth more than the money).

Comms69

Samsung_Note2 wrote: »

Well as ive said i can only speak from experience..and trust me i made damn sure i knew what was what regards it being a civil or criminal matter,social media is great to ask about this and that like saving on heating bills or bank switching,legal matters it is not the right place.

But your simply wrong..how can the company involve the police - You dial 101, or pop into a police station and report a theft. OR if they were really vindictive, open a private prosecution. "Yes hello is that Officer dribble...yes id like someone arrested for not returning money in one go that i over paid by mistake,sorry whats that have i taken legal advice..well yes i asked on a internet forum...hello...hello..oh i think they hung up"" - I'd like to report an offence contrary to S.24A of the Theft Act 1968 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/24A)

Again hows the CCJ going to happen...""Hello is that Northampton county court...yeah i want Mr Blob to get a cc j because he owes me money that he said he will pay back but i wont it all in one go."" - you visit Money Claim Online and issue proceedings. (you don't know how CCJs work obviously)

So the above is a bit tongue in cheek and not to be taken deadly seriously...point is Police wont get involved and you cant just get a CCJ until a length process has been carried out.

Like I said the mechanisms are there and can be used.

Comms69

steampowered wrote: »

I think the answer to this is 'never'. Theft requires an act - such as touching something, or transferring something to your account. I don't think leaving the money sitting there (in theoretical terms) could ever amount to theft.

Of course the employer could always still take civil action to recover the funds. If the court ordered you to return the money, and you failed to comply with the court order, that would be contempt of court and at that point things would start to enter a more criminal-type sphere.

A person is guilty of an offence if—
(a)a wrongful credit has been made to an account kept by him or in respect of which he has any right or interest;
(b)he knows or believes that the credit is wrongful; and
(c)he dishonestly fails to take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to secure that the credit is cancelled.

Samsung_Note2

Comms69 wrote: »

Like I said the mechanisms are there and can be used.

Well lets put this another way...ive been there and You are a social media expert who firmly believes they know best.

Shall we agree to disagree...;):D

Comms69

Samsung_Note2 wrote: »

Well lets put this another way...ive been there and You are a social media expert who firmly believes they know best.

Shall we agree to disagree...;):D

For a start you don't know my background, but regardless.


We can agree that you have an individual experience, which doesn't match what I've said. Doesn't make anything I've said incorrect, especially given I've quoted the law.

steampowered

Comms69 wrote: »

A person is guilty of an offence if—
(a)a wrongful credit has been made to an account kept by him or in respect of which he has any right or interest;
(b)he knows or believes that the credit is wrongful; and
(c)he dishonestly fails to take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to secure that the credit is cancelled.

Good point. This is not the definition of theft, but is the definition of a separate offence called 'dishonestly retaining a wrongful credit'.

However, when you read the next sub-section of the Act, it states as follows:

A credit to an account is wrongful to the extent that it derives from—
(a)theft;
(b)blackmail;
(c)fraud (contrary to section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006); or
(d)stolen goods.

This significantly narrows the scope of that offence. It seems to me that an overpayment by an employer does not fall into any of those four categories, so I do not think this situation would fall within the scope of that offence.

Comms69

steampowered wrote: »

Good point. This is not the definition of theft, but is the definition of a separate offence called 'dishonestly retaining a wrongful credit'.

However, when you read the next sub-section of the Act, it states as follows:

A credit to an account is wrongful to the extent that it derives from—
(a)theft;
(b)blackmail;
(c)fraud (contrary to section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006); or
(d)stolen goods.

This significantly narrows the scope of that offence. It seems to me that an overpayment by an employer does not fall into any of those four categories, so I do not think this situation would fall within the scope of that offence.

Indeed, it's a sub section of the theft act, so calling it theft does seem to be ok, but yes point accepted.