Hello, my name is ***** ***** it is my pleasure to assist you with your question today. Have they said why he was not entitled to the money?
no,only that he does not meet the criteria for having been paid it
Whether he was entitled to the money in question or he was overpaid is a factual matter which would depend on the circumstances of the situation – there is only one right answer really although I cannot say who is correct and who is not. One thing is for certain though – if they are going to claim anything from him and force him to pay it back they must prove that they have a case and show that he was actually overpaid. Only then would the court consider issuing judgment in their favour which they can then pursue and try to enforce as necessary. Until they have done so and proven their case there is little they can do to force him t pay.
Unfortunately it I not a legal requirement for them to try and correspond with him at this stage or provide him with details of how they believe he was overpaid, although if they do submit a court claim then that would become more obvious.
So for the time being all he can do is continue corresponding with them, providing information as to why he believes he does not owe them anything and ask for proof of how they reached the conclusion he owes them anything. If it comes to it, they can make the claim if they want to and it would then be for him to show he met the criteria to receive SSP and that he does not owe them anything – the court will make the final decision as to who is right and who is wrong and if it did turn out that he was in the right that would be the end of the matter, otherwise he may have to repay them.
they stated that he could phone them to find out but its strange that they have not stated why in their letter. My son finished uni and returned home and transferred to our local branch but the manageress who is a bully made life very difficult for him and his doctor signed him off,for the first time since he has been working,three years. When he asked about sick pay she said he wasn't entitled to it because she had reduced his hours but he has not signed a contract for less hours especially as he was at home. however the wages department did indeed finally send him a cheque which was the correct amount for the absent time. then a letter arrived a week or so after my son resigned stating that the wages department had been notified they had paid him by mistake. we have proof of his hours worked,plus proof of her forging his signature on another document. can hours be changed without his consent as I suspect that is what she has done. but he does have proof of hours worked up to the time he was of sick.
did he have contracted hours of work?
yes he had an initial contract of 30 hours although he did not receive that amount
the calculation should be made at least on the hours he actually worked, but the employer cannot retrospectively change these for example
it was around 16 hours which was the correct amount
as mentioned I cannot state whether he worked the correct hours or if they were enough to be paid SSP - this is a factual matter that would need to be examined in detail by those making the final decision (i.e. a court if it goes that far) but the hours he avtually worked should be used in the calculation #
ok,thankyou for your help
you are most welcome