• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Wage Adjustment Payment Error Letter

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

justalayman

Senior Member
I am not at all sure that you are correct. They paid him the rate that the paid him. I don't think that they can come back 7 or 8 months later and claim a mistake that he is liable to repay.

He can always consult a local attorney for a more informed opinion.
It depends how he was mistakenly paid excess amount. If the raise was not supposed to be awarded then it is an error


Here is an extreme example. You tell me why it’s different



I make $50/hour


Starting July 1, my pay was increased to $100/ hour. Nobody said I was going to get a raise. None was anticipated. I didn’t say anything to anybody. Just figured i deserved it.

So, by the end up the year I made an extra $50,000 that I was never told I would be paid. It was simply an error by the pay clerk. Employer realized the error in their end of the year accounting and asked for it back.

Using your argument I get to keep it.



While there are some reasons it wouldn’t have to be repaid, being simple error isn’t one of them. While others mention contracts, the fact is all employees do have some form of contract. Usually it’s oral and simple. When told you’ll get $50/hour, that is one of the terms of your contract. Unless the employer intentionally alters the terms (a mistake is not an intentional act for the purpose at hand), you must be paid (at least) $50/ hour. That is in your contract. Now if the employer agrees to pay you more (and you accept of course), you can then expect to get paid that addditional amount for every hour worked. If you are unintentionally paid more, the employer does have all rights to demand to be repaid that amount.
 


justalayman

Senior Member
And just for fun, here is the inverse that, according to your understanding of the law, would mean the employee was just sol.



I hire on to a company. Pay rate is stated as $100/ hour.

Pay clerk inadvertently screws up and puts in my pay rate as $10/ hour. I get my paycheck and realize the error.

Now using your argument, the employer get to say;
Well, that’s downright funny but sorry, your tough luck. Our mistake but we don’t have to pay you the extra $90/ hour.


That is no different than an employee being paid too much but I bet you’ll say the employee has a right to demand the extra $90/ hour they were supposed to be paid.

So you tell me the difference.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
And just for fun, here is the inverse that, according to your understanding of the law, would mean the employee was just sol.



I hire on to a company. Pay rate is stated as $100/ hour.

Pay clerk inadvertently screws up and puts in my pay rate as $10/ hour. I get my paycheck and realize the error.

Now using your argument, the employer get to say;
Well, that’s downright funny but sorry, your tough luck. Our mistake but we don’t have to pay you the extra $90/ hour.


That is no different than an employee being paid too much but I bet you’ll say the employee has a right to demand the extra $90/ hour they were supposed to be paid.

So you tell me the difference.
In both of your examples, the error is discovered while the employer is still employed by the employer, protested while the employee is still employed by the employer.

In the first example I think its iffy because the employer took 6 months to catch the error. In the second example the employee took just one pay period to catch the error.

In the case at hand the employee hasn't even worked for the employer for 7 months...and its sure not 50k we are talking about, its $1258.60...which, over the 9 months that the OP's son was employed, was just under 140.00 a month. Since odds are the employee was direct deposit with paystubs only available online, its probably not something that the employee would have noticed or felt needed to be dealt with.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
In both of your examples, the error is discovered while the employer is still employed by the employer, protested while the employee is still employed by the employer.

In the first example I think its iffy because the employer took 6 months to catch the error. In the second example the employee took just one pay period to catch the error.

In the case at hand the employee hasn't even worked for the employer for 7 months...and its sure not 50k we are talking about, its $1258.60...which, over the 9 months that the OP's son was employed, was just under 140.00 a month. Since odds are the employee was direct deposit with paystubs only available online, its probably not something that the employee would have noticed or felt needed to be dealt with.
Ok so if I quit before they discovered they overpaid me I get to keep it and In the other if I quit or was terminated before I saw the improper pay I am just out of luck
Sorry Ldij. The only thing thAt prevents seeking a correction of pay or a contract is the applicable statute of limitations.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
Ok so if I quit before they discovered they overpaid me I get to keep it
You get to keep it until or unless a judge agrees with the employer that it was a recoverable error and orders you to repay it.

and In the other if I quit or was terminated before I saw the improper pay I am just out of luck
Until the DOL or a court orders them to pay you, yes you are.

Sorry Ldij. The only thing thAt prevents seeking a correction of pay or a contract is the applicable statute of limitations.
And someone taking the proper legal steps to get a judge or the DOL to agree with them and ordering the payment, assuming that they would agree with them.

Seriously. Think about it. The city sues the OP's son because they paid him say 9.75 an hour rather than 8.75. They did that for 7 months. 7 months later they discover the error. They are going to have to convince the judge that he should have to pay them back when it took them 14 months (7 months after he stopped working for them) to discover their error.

The OP's son should NOT just roll over and play dead on this one.
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
No one is saying roll over and play dead. The son is certainly entitled to an accounting of how the mistake occurred. No one is saying otherwise.

But YOU are saying that if there was a genuine error and it isn't discovered until after he is no longer employed, the law is going to let him keep it no matter what. And that is not the case.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
No one is saying roll over and play dead. The son is certainly entitled to an accounting of how the mistake occurred. No one is saying otherwise.

But YOU are saying that if there was a genuine error and it isn't discovered until after he is no longer employed, the law is going to let him keep it no matter what. And that is not the case.
I didn't say "no matter what". If they double paid him one pay period or paid him an extra pay period after he quit or any number of things that were really obvious errors then a judge would likely find in favor of the employer.

If the guy got 50 cents or a dollar more an hour than what they intended to pay him, then I think its not guaranteed at all that a judge would find in favor of the employer...particularly if it takes the employer 14 months to figure it out.
 

not2cleverRed

Obvious Observer
No one is saying roll over and play dead. The son is certainly entitled to an accounting of how the mistake occurred. No one is saying otherwise.

But YOU are saying that if there was a genuine error and it isn't discovered until after he is no longer employed, the law is going to let him keep it no matter what. And that is not the case.
I think that this would be the best place to start.
 

CTU

Meddlesome Priestess
I didn't say "no matter what". If they double paid him one pay period or paid him an extra pay period after he quit or any number of things that were really obvious errors then a judge would likely find in favor of the employer.

If the guy got 50 cents or a dollar more an hour than what they intended to pay him, then I think its not guaranteed at all that a judge would find in favor of the employer...particularly if it takes the employer 14 months to figure it out.
You said this:

I don't think that they can come back 7 or 8 months later and claim a mistake that he is liable to repay.
Did you mean something different?
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
You said this:



Did you mean something different?
Do you think that "I don't think" means "absolutely cannot"? To me, "I don't think" is an opinion expressed rather than an absolute fact. I still have the opinion that in this particular scenario, that it would be difficult for the employer to prevail, unless the OP provides additional information that I, along with others, have asked for.
 

Stephen1

Member
Well, morally I think he needs to repay the amount. But can he repay the amount (i.e. is he financially in a position to pay it)? If repayment would cause an actual hardship then I suggest he pursue getting the employer to waive the overpayment. Of course this would have to be in writing.

If I was in the government office evaluating the request for waiver, part of what I would consider would be should the employee have noticed or realized there was an error and what actions did the employee take to clarify it was the correct amount.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
Ldij,

You confuse moral and legal rights and oblogations.

I would expect a judge to uphold the legal rights and obligations of the parties. The laws as written do reflect the mores of society at the time the were written and as such, reflect the moral standards of society of the day. Therefor a decision based on the law should also be seen as a proper moral decision as well. (Your moral values may differ)

Until the op provides more information, it’s impossible to determine the correct answer as it is not known how the overpayment occurred. If it was simple error, trying to argue some arbitrary time such as 7-8 or 14 months or the fact the kid no longer works for the city has no legal support and is based entirely on your moral belief of fairness. That is most likely not the basis a judge will use to come to a conclusion.

If the error was just that and the kid had no reason to believe he got a raise and given the fact he had the opportunity to inquire as to the newer bigger pay rate and refused to do so and any time period in any applicable statute of limitations has not expired, based on a legal determination , the kid is going to be ordered to repay the money.

If the kid can support some reasonable claim he had no reason to be suspicious of the raise, or mybe even that it was expected, he might convince a judge he has a valid right to keep the money.


We can prattle on all day long but without more information, we cannot reach a reasonably dependable answer regarding the case at hand.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
Ldij,

You confuse moral and legal rights and oblogations.

I would expect a judge to uphold the legal rights and obligations of the parties. The laws as written do reflect the mores of society at the time the were written and as such, reflect the moral standards of society of the day. Therefor a decision based on the law should also be seen as a proper moral decision as well. (Your moral values may differ)

Until the op provides more information, it’s impossible to determine the correct answer as it is not known how the overpayment occurred. If it was simple error, trying to argue some arbitrary time such as 7-8 or 14 months or the fact the kid no longer works for the city has no legal support and is based entirely on your moral belief of fairness. That is most likely not the basis a judge will use to come to a conclusion.

If the error was just that and the kid had no reason to believe he got a raise and given the fact he had the opportunity to inquire as to the newer bigger pay rate and refused to do so and any time period in any applicable statute of limitations has not expired, based on a legal determination , the kid is going to be ordered to repay the money.

If the kid can support some reasonable claim he had no reason to be suspicious of the raise, or mybe even that it was expected, he might convince a judge he has a valid right to keep the money.


We can prattle on all day long but without more information, we cannot reach a reasonably dependable answer regarding the case at hand.
You are assuming that the employer absolutely can and will prove that they made a mistake. I agree that we need the additional information, but I do not think its as simple as you wish to insist.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
You are assuming that the employer absolutely can and will prove that they made a mistake. I agree that we need the additional information, but I do not think its as simple as you wish to insist.
No I am not.

I am starting to wonder how you come to the conclusions you do. I am not assuming anything. I provided multiple scenarios, both from the city’s perspective and the kids.

I said nothing claiming or even suggesting the city will absolutely prevail nor even mentioning that I believed they will take it to court if not settled otherwise.

I’m amazed that by providing what I saw as each side needing to prove their case over a couple hundred word post would be seen as me seeing the situstion as simple.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top