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: 49821
Experience:  Qualified Solicitor - Please start your question with 'For Ben Jones'
Type Your Law Question Here...
Ben Jones is online now

I have been set up by my previous employer who said I owe m

This answer was rated:

I have been set up by my previous employer who said I owe him 6950.52 but I owe the HMRC 4222.52 less my last payment of 600.00 net less payment re my salary increase which I was told was 26500 but when I got the letter it said 26000
I was also promised that if I got the debtors down to approx 39500 any thing after that he would pay to me which is approx 11000 he is now saying I am making this all up and he requires the 6950 in 12 monthly instalment otherwise he will take me to court I dontknow what to do

Hello, my name is***** am a qualified lawyer and it is my pleasure to assist you with your question today.

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Hi Ben
I will type any information you require to help me sort this out Sue

Were you employed or self employed there? Also how long ago was this?

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
I was employed and left the company in March as He was always shouting stamped his foot on the floor and banged his hands on the desk when we had a meeting
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
In June 15 I wrote down that my salary was 26500 and that is what I paid my self when he gave me the letter it said 26000
but I still paid myself the 26500 as that was the agreement in the meeting so he is saying I owe him 467.28 as I paid my self to much

Hi Sue. Thank you for your response. Please can you also confirm how long you worked there. I will then review the relevant information and laws and get back to you as soon as I can. Please do not respond to this message after you have provided the information as it will just push your question to the back of the queue and you may experience unnecessary delays. Thank you

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
I started on 29th July 2013 and left on 5th March 2016

Can I please check why he thinks the money you owe him is for exactly please and also what written evidence is there that you had agreed the salary of 26500?

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
I made a note in my note book and that is all I have plus he said £26500 and I then wrote it down I don't have any thing else
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Can you confirm my situation re the above so I know where I stand also what about he said about the Debtors and he shook my hand I have some paperwork with the date and time this happened is this not a verbal agreement

Thank you. Yes it is a verbal agreement but the main issue with these is that it is basically your word against the employer’s. So even if you are in the right and the agreement reflects what you claim was agreed between you, there is no guarantee that if this goes to court it will believe you and take your side.

Saying that you should not be bullied into just paying up because of the threat of legal action. You could have as much a chance of winning as he would so there is certainly no guarantee that it will go in his favour.

The good thing about a potential claim here is that it will be below £10k which means it will go to the small claims court. Even if you were to lose, you will not be responsible for the other side’s legal costs. So if he had to use a solicitor to make the claim and get legal advice on it, if he wins he will have to pay these costs himself, you will not be responsible for them. So in the worst case you will have to pay the claim amount he is after but not his legal costs.

Unfortunately, there is nothing stopping him from making a claim in the first place if he wanted to so if that is the route he wants to follow then it is his right to do so. But as he will be making the claim he will need to prove that what he is claiming is correct and being a verbal agreement, that will not be easy because as mentioned it is just his word against yours. Hopefully the threat of court claim is just that – a threat and he will not go ahead with it, but if he does, which as mentioned he can, at least you will have the chance to put your side of the story forward and hope that the court believes the truth, which is your evidence.

I hope this has answered your query. I would be grateful if you could please take a second to leave a positive rating (3, 4 or 5 stars) as that is an important part of our process and recognises the time I have spent assisting you. If you need me to clarify anything before you go - please get back to me on here and I will assist further as best as I can. Thank you

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
I have not received any information so please return my money and I will see a solicitor in the morning

My response is above, can you not see it?

Ben Jones and other Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
basically he is quite cleaver putting his words across that he is always right and has always made me feel uneasy with this and he know this I really don't stand a chance maybe he should take a lie test but that will not happenThanks for your responseSue

No sadly lie detector tests are not acceptable proof in UK courts and he cannot be forced to take one anyway.

When it comes to assessing factual disputes, where it is essentially one person’s word against another’s, the courts have developed certain tests that would be applied that would help them decide how much weight to attach to each side's evidence. As a general rule, the following are some of the more widely used tests:

· Demeanour - includes matters such as a person’s conduct, manner, bearing, behaviour, delivery and inflexion. They are matters of impression, which are not necessarily revealed by reading a transcript of evidence. It is the more 'personal' side of the individual providing the evidence

· Inconsistency – mainly to do with any apparent inconsistencies in a person’s evidence

· Probability – this would ask of the evidence as a whole, or of a particular part of it: whose account is more probable in the circumstances?

So the courts will apply these or other similar tests in coming to a decision that they believe is fair in the circumstances. That does not mean it is factually the right one, but what has been judged to be the fairest outcome based on all available information.