Wage Overpayment Notice after Leaving Work

KatrinaWaves

Honestly without giving us the info you DO have there is zero point in you continuing to post hypotheticals

Undervalued

Influense wrote: »

Thank you for your reply, and whilst I understand where you are coming from and that overpayments are legally entitled to be reclaimed, can I ask you a hypothetical question?

I am going to employ you for 1 week, 37.5 hours, at the end of that week I transfer £300.00 to your account. Have you been overpaid, underpaid or paid correctly?

As others have said that is pointless.

More relevant is this....

Assuming she worked 37 to 40 hours a week for four weeks that is something around 150+ hours. So the claimed £600 over payment represents c. £4 per hour.

What is the going rate for a 17 year old working for a major retailer? If that is in the region of £4 and hour less than they have paid her then she will have a devil of a job to argue that she was entitled to believe that her pay was correct.

Two points that may help......

Did she take any paid holiday? She will have accrued roughly two days holiday in a month's work and if she didn't take them she is entitled to be paid for them. Has she been paid for them?

Also, exactly how long did she work there? If it was a month or more she has a statutory entitlement to a week's notice, or pay in lieu. Less than a month there is no statutory entitlement to notice but she could reasonably assume she was on Boots standard terms which might give a contractual entitlement to notice even with less than a month's employment. Worth checking!

Manxman_in_exile

Influense wrote: »

Thank you for your reply, and whilst I understand where you are coming from and that overpayments are legally entitled to be reclaimed, can I ask you a hypothetical question?

I am going to employ you for 1 week, 37.5 hours, at the end of that week I transfer £300.00 to your account. Have you been overpaid, underpaid or paid correctly?[/QUOTE]


We can't answer that question, but you and your daughter can because you have enough information already to answer it: "She applied for the Job on indeed which gave an annual wage only, but didn't specify it was a fixed contract. She worked there for 5 weeks, at an intial glance at the PA wage the monthly payment she recieved looked proportionally close." (#6).


The only way your daughter (with your help if necessary) can resolve this is to contact Boots and ask them for a calculation of the alleged overpayment. They will have to do this anyway if they decide to sue her to recover it.


Once you have a detailed breakdown of the overpayment calculation, you can compare it to the information she had at the outset and you can make your own minds up as to whether there has or has not been an overpayment. As others have suggested, it may demonstrate that Boots have actually made a mistake. But as you and your daughter seem to have no useful information at all, you aren't going to move forwards without getting that info from Boots first.


(Assuming what you have told us about Boots' handling of your daughter's employment is complete and accurate - it seems incompetent to me - I'd be inclined to make a complaint to their head office. Wait to see what they provide in support of the overpayment first).


PS - seems odd to me that Boots have not already provided a breakdown of the overpayment. Am I reading that wrong? Where has the overpayment letter come from? Is an Assistant Manager trying to cover their back? It all seems very strange. Can employers go around employing young girls so easily?

Influense

Again thanks to all for comments.

I initially did not want to go into too much detail, but here goes, this is the only information I have.

We have no way to check her payslip as she can no longer access Boots epayslips, her email address is no longer recognized.

So the info I have is as follows.

The job was advertised circa £16000 pa.

She worked there for 5 weeks, so if you include a weeks notice in lieu that would equate to 6 weeks. excluding any holiday entitlement.

Based on this 6 weeks at £16000 pa would be £1846.00

She was paid £1891.91 (gross). £1372.96 (net)

She was not informed at the initial interview that it was fixed term only, neither were other new staff members, they only discovered this when the logged into the boots internal system. If she had known is was only for 5 weeks, she would not have applied, she is looking for full-time employment.

She was not provided with a contract of employment for any information relating to the Job title, her expected duties, working hours or rate of pay.

So the payment she received looks to be very close, in terms of what the position was advertised.

Boots claim she was overpaid leavers pay, stating she was eligible for 37.5 hours, but was paid for 162.94 hours, this would make her rate of pay approximately £4.60 per hour, not the £8.20 the job was advertised at. She was not told she would be paid a lower rate (presumably a 17yr old rate), so it was impossible for her to identify that any overpayment had been made. She, therefore, believed that the amount she was paid was what she was entitled.

I hope this info helps.

LilElvis

Influense wrote: »

She worked there for 5 weeks, so if you include a weeks notice in lieu that would equate to 6 weeks. excluding any holiday entitlement.

Why would she expect an additional week in lieu? Earlier you said that she was told on 17/10 that her contract would terminate on 26/10, so she was served notice and worked it - she doesn't get an additional week.

swingaloo

She needs to get in touch with whoever sent the overpayment details as it seems obvious that she has been overpaid. At 17 and for short term retail work she would never be on over £10 an hour.

They are entitled and will claim the money back so the sooner she gets clarification the better.

Influense

LilElvis wrote: »

Why would she expect an additional week in lieu? Earlier you said that she was told on 17/10 that her contract would terminate on 26/10, so she was served notice and worked it - she doesn't get an additional week.

It's because that's what Boots have stated on the claim, they state that she should have been paid 37.5 hours leavers pay (one week) but was paid 162.94 hrs leavers pay.

That then equates to her earning £4.60 per hour going by what they say she should have received. However, if you calculate this with what they actually paid her it comes out at £8.20 per hour, £8.20 x 37.5 x 52 = £15,990.

So, to me it looks like they have paid her a rate of pay for an 18+, instead of her being paid at a reduced 17yr old rate, but have claimed it to be an overpayment of leavers pay.

swingaloo

In that case whatever the reason they have stated your daughter has clearly been overpaid so she will need to come to some arrangement to pay back the overpayment.

Whatever she was supposed to get, the amount she was actually paid was surely more than you or your daughter could have been expecting.

Diamandis

Why would anyone accept a job without asking what they're being paid?

Influense

Diamandis wrote: »

Why would anyone accept a job without asking what they're being paid?

She didn't, the job was advertised at £16,000 pa.