Sink your legal teeth into this one

[abc123]

State : Louisiana

I work in a management capacity with purchasing authority. Due to some defects with a product, I secured a refund for my Employer from the vendor (we got to keep the product AND the full refund).

The refund was received in 2 checks. The first one was made out to my employer, so I turned it in to accounting. A few weeks later, when the second check arrived, it was made out to me personally. I deposited the check into my account, and wrote a personal check to accounting for the entire amount. However, when I returned to the office (before I had time to go to accounting) I was told I had committed fraud and that I could quit or be fired.

Here is my question...
Forget the fact that I certainly had NO intention of keeping the money -- and that I am in a management capacity where decisions of this nature should be made at my discretion... what I want to know is -- WAS FRAUD COMMITTED upon my company?? Since I secured the refund, and the check was issued in my name, it seems to me the only entity I could have actually been defrauding is the Vendor. My company had possession of the product and never intended to ask for a refund. The only entity who incurred an actual loss was the vendor.

PART II
I was given the option of resigning or being fired... I, of course chose to resign. A potential Employer called for a reference -- and you guessed it -- they said I was fired for Fraud.
In addition they have informed my former subordinates and co-workers that I was fired because I stole from the company (how can I steal a check made out to me? At most I failed to reimburse in a timely manner -- but stealing???)

So my final question is... is this slander? I was not prosecuted for anything, no court of law said I was guilty, the item I supposedly "stole" was not yet property of my employer, I whole-heartedly disputed the accusations... so to brand me a thief is slanderous, is it not?

Thanks in advance for your help. I am in my 40s and have NEVER had any job even suggest that I wasn't doing my job correctly -- much less suggest that I am a common criminal. This has been rather devastating.

 

[HomeGuru]

You handled the refund in the capacity of an emloyee of your employer, therefore you had no business accepting the personal check and depositing it into your personal account.
The proper way that you should have handled the situation was to send the check back to the vendor together with a cover letter explaining that the vendor made a mistake and you were returning the check intact. The fact that you worked on this refund "project", you are management and your company got to keep the product and get a refund has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the wrongdoing on your part in accepting the money.

I am not quite certain that the act of fraud was engaged but would say without reservation that theft and commingling was committed. It makes no difference it it was not your intention of keeping the money because the act and intent were there.
The bottom line is that despite the check being made payable directly and soanlly to you (even though due to a vendor mistake) the money was never yours at any time and was your employer's to decide what to do with. The act appears questionable especially if the amount of the check is substantial.
In the eyes of the law and white collar crime, you do appear to have committed a criminal act. For the sake of discussion, replace your employer with government say Dept. of Justice, the White House, HUD or the IRS. How would the act appear now?

 

[LawandOrder]

Not legal advice -- just a few definitions

Defamation is a false statement that injures someone's reputation and exposes him/her to public contempt, hatred, ridicule or condemnation (if the false statement is published in print or through broadcast media, such as radio or TV, it is called libel). If it is only spoken, it is called slander.
Defamation is a tort (a civil wrong) that entitles the injured party to compensation if (s)he can prove that the statement damaged his/her reputation.
For example, if a worker can show that (s)he lost her job because a co-worker started a false rumor that (s)he came to work drunk, she might be able to recover monetary damages .
In certain extreme cases, such as a false accusation that a person committed a crime or has a feared disease, the plaintiff need not prove that (s)he was damaged because the law presumes that damage was done. These cases are called "libel per se" or "slander per se."
Public officials or figures who want to prove defamation must meet a higher standard than the standard for private citizens; they must prove that the person who issued the false statements knew they were false or recklessly disregarded a substantial likelihood that they were false.

 

[abc123]

HomeGuru,

Thanks for the opinion and the scolding. However, I do not believe you understood what I was asking.

I fully realize that I did not handle the situation as I should have. Even though my company has done the same thing -- I was still wrong (i.e., I paid for classes out of my own pocket, a refund was given due to a lack of accreditation issue - it was assumed that my company had either paid for the classes or reimbursed me - this was not the case, but the refund check was still issued in the name of the coorporation -- it was deposited and I was issued a company check).

Unfortunately, I thought what was good for the goose was good for the gander, and I was misled by the casual relationship I have always had with my employers. This was my mistake.

That is why I did not ask if they had the right to fire me.

What I asked was...

1.) did I committ fraud?,

2.) since I have never been charged with, or convicted of, fraud, isn't it slander to inform potential employers that I committed fraud (isn't it up to a judge or jury to make that determination -- not some guy from Human Resources whom, I am sure, doesn't know the legal definition or elements of such a crime)?,

and

3.) is it legal to inform potential employers that I was fired when (technically) I quit?