I quit, what can they do to me???

[HennyBogan]

What is the name of your state? Michigan

I quit my job back in May. I recieved a letter shortly after that said that I had been paid for sick and vacation hours that I had not yet accrued and that I owe the company $370. I have never heard of this before.
Now it is January and I have been informed (by a friend who still works there) that they have given this to an attorney to try to make me pay them. Is this legal??? I had no idea that places did this! Also, how can it be cost effective for them to hire an attorney over $370? Isn't his time going to cost more than the money I owe them? What are my options here and how badly can they damage me? Do I really have to pay them?

 

[cbg]

If you received fringe benefit payout for time you had not yet accrued, then yes it is legal for them to come after you for it and yes you have to pay them. As to whether it is cost-effective for them to use an attorney, that's not your call to make; it's the company's.

They can sue you. They can take you to small claims court. They can win.

 

[HennyBogan]

reply

Thank you for the input. Just for the record, I never stated that it was my call to make and I resent the implication and condescention. I don't know why you decided to take that tone in your response. Just the same, thank you for the reply.

 

[hexeliebe]

Just for the record, I never stated that it was my call to make and I resent the implication and condescention. I don't know why you decided to take that tone in your response.

And people wonder why we get so damn frustrated. There must be an idiot convention at FA.

 

[cbg]

Okay, so you don't like the way I worded my answer, here's a different wording:

Whether you think it is cost-effective to hire a lawyer or not doesn't matter. Evidently the company thinks it is. They are the ones who will be paying the bill, so if they want to handle it that way, they can.

Pay them what you owe them.

 

[HennyBogan]

Thanks

Thank you for your amendment.

I don't think my getting a bit defensive classifies me as an idiot
but you are, of course, entitled to believe what you wish.

I am sure there are, however, a lot of idiots out there, and that
would certainly frustrate me.

FYI, I have already negotiated a reasonable repayment
solution with the former employer I was referring to.

Thanks again for your legal advice (and the interesting dialogue!)

 

[cbg]

I don't recall either saying or implying that you were an idiot. THAT is defensiveness on your part. So was any condescention, or, for that matter, any other "tone" you read into EITHER of my responses. Which says to me that you already knew the answer before you posted, and were only looking for validation of what you wanted to hear, instead. I thought I was giving you a straightforward answer to your question.

Have a nice life.