Employer blaims husband for falling for scam

Annisele

It sounds to me as though this is more the employer's fault than OP's husband's. The employer should have had procedures in place, and should have given staff training on what sort of evidence the employer is prepared to accept.

I think that if the employer didn't do those things, this is entirely on the employer. But I'm not a laywer, and I'm glad you're seeking proper advice.

But I think there are two issues: does your husband have to pay for half of the car (I think amost certainly not), and does your husband get to keep his job. I can see a scenario where the employer could 'get away' with dismissing your husband for gross misconduct even if your husband wasn't liable for the cost of the car.

There's possibly also a third issue, which is does your husband even want to keep the job. But in his shoes I think I'd be job searching regardless.

tightauldgit

I think employer is taking the mick personally - unless he believes the employee somehow was in cahoots with the fraudster I don't see that he can claim anything back for what appears to be an honest mistake. the absence of checks, processes and training isn't going to help their case either. 

I don't think the employer could even justify a sacking for negligence if they haven't been given proper training and procedures to follow. How long have they worked there? Long enough to be protected from unfair dismissal?

Beyond that it's probably time to find a new job anyway as long term it's unlikely that things will work out in this environment but I certainly wouldn't be paying for any of the business' loss.

DullGreyGuy

There is no automatic right to deduct for losses and so if he has no contract there is no right to take from salary without a court order. Obviously having been there 10 years there is the risk that there was a contract and you've simply forgotten signing it so long ago. 

TBagpuss

Annisele said:

It sounds to me as though this is more the employer's fault than OP's husband's. The employer should have had procedures in place, and should have given staff training on what sort of evidence the employer is prepared to accept.

I think that if the employer didn't do those things, this is entirely on the employer. But I'm not a lawyer, and I'm glad you're seeking proper advice.

But I think there are two issues: does your husband have to pay for half of the car (I think almost certainly not), and does your husband get to keep his job. I can see a scenario where the employer could 'get away' with dismissing your husband for gross misconduct even if your husband wasn't liable for the cost of the car.

There's possibly also a third issue, which is does your husband even want to keep the job. But in his shoes I think I'd be job searching regardless.

I think this is likely correct. If you are getting legal advice then they will be able to comment on that, in the mean time, it's wise for your husband not to be drawn into too many discussions about it, but he should be documenting - e.g make a record that :
-there are no formal procedures
He hasn't been given any training or guidance about what checks need to be done
- He doesn't have a contract which allows deductions from his salary for this kind of thing 

I suspect that his employer would lose if he tried to sue him, but he might be able to dismiss him if the employer takes the view that failure to check was misconduct , and that's a separate issue from whether or not the employer has any basis for trying to claim back the loss. 

pupskuss

Thank you all for the great advice and input so far.
After speaking to a lawyer, the employer is completely in the wrong and cannot hold his employee accountable for any financial losses in the business unless a breach in contract has taken place.
So as far as employment law is concerned, the employer is in the wrong.
He can still try and take my husband to small claims court as a civil matter but the lawyer explained that his case would be very weak and unlikely result in my husband having to pay out.

My husband and has taken the plunge and left the company after almost 20 years of service.

Takeaway_Addict

I was going to say regardless of the legal side the relationship was done so its good to see he has moved on- hopefully for better pastures new

DullGreyGuy

pupskuss said:

After speaking to a lawyer, the employer is completely in the wrong and cannot hold his employee accountable for any financial losses in the business unless a breach in contract has taken place.
So as far as employment law is concerned, the employer is in the wrong.
He can still try and take my husband to small claims court as a civil matter but the lawyer explained that his case would be very weak and unlikely result in my husband having to pay out.

Always good to have an update! Most people disappear into the ether and you never know what the final outcome was.

The lawyers advise however is a little conflicting, if they are saying employment law doesn't allow this then the employer would have no case rather than a very weak one and you'd have no risk of having to payout not it being very unlikely. Either there is a gap in what they've told you or they hedge their bets so much that their advice is pointless.