How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Ben Jones Your Own Question
Ben Jones
Ben Jones, UK Lawyer
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 47377
Experience:  Qualified Solicitor - Please start your question with 'For Ben Jones'
29905560
Type Your Law Question Here...
Ben Jones is online now

My wife has worked for a county council since 2005 and due

Resolved Question:

My wife has worked for a county council since 2005 and due to an error made by her manager who says it was the Human Resources department that had in turn advised her, therefore the council, in advising how much she should claim mileage for using her own car on council business, she has been underclaiming.

She now has to give them details of the underclaimed mileage in order for them to pay her for them. The problem is that they are refusing to pay anything more than the previous six years.

As this is not my wife's fault, she was claiming what she was told to, has she a claim for the other years and is it unlawful for the council to say it's against their policy to reimburse for more than six years?

The council is causing her to lose out on three years claims.

Regards

Tom
Submitted: 3 years ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 3 years ago.

Ben Jones :

Hello, my name is XXXXX XXXXX it is my pleasure to assist you with your question today.

Ben Jones :

How many years does this go back?

Customer:

From 1st August 2005

Ben Jones :

Whilst i agree that this appears incorrect, the issue is that if the employer refused to consider any claims going back more than 6 years and she decided to claim for them, she would be out of time to do so because the courts can only consider claims going back 6 years. This means that whilst she can pursue any claims that fall within the last 6 years, she would be legally out of time to pursue claims that fall outside of this period. It means the employer can refuse to consider them and she is not legally able to challenge this. Whilst morally wrong, her hands will be tied in terms of her legal rights on challenging this.


 


It does not prevent her from trying to pursue this matter internally, for example through the formal grievance procedure which would prompt the employer to formally investigate this and deal with it. It could end up with a manager sympathetic with her position or it may even go higher up the management ladder on appeal so that those with more power can reverse the current decisions, although there is of course no guarantee of that, but still may be worth a try.


 

Customer:

I'm pretty sure that their rules would be dismissed if it were her that owed them money going back 8 years.

Ben Jones :

well that is speculation at this stage, but her legal position is as described above. If this amounted to 'wages' she could have claimed for a continuous deduction going back to the beginning and claimed for the whole period but the legal definition of 'wages' specifically excludes expenses so this is not an option here

Customer:

Okay thank you.

Customer:

Okay, thank you.Tom

Ben Jones :

You are most welcome. Please take a second to leave a positive rating for the advice I have provided as that is an important part of our process. Thank you and all the best

Ben Jones and other Law Specialists are ready to help you