emloyee being made to reimburse employer for tuition fees

[oggy1]

hi

hope somebody can help on this issue:

my son has been told he must repay fees for exams taken while in employment with his former employer even though these exams were beneficial and a requirement of training on the job

 

i have asked for a copy of his contract of employment , which would have been signed by my son but the employer has refused to issue this.

 

i did a data protection request and was sent a copy of the employee handbook which my son had signed .

 

he has know had court papers issued against him for £350.00 plus interest etc and i was wondering does anybody have any ideas that can help

[rebel11]

Hi oggy

 

What does it say in the Employee Handbook? Also they can't with hold data from you.

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_the_public/personal_information/how_manage/access_info.aspx

 

If they do you can lodge a Complaint with ICO

 

https://www.ico.gov.uk/Global/contact_us.aspx

 

They think that because they paid and he left, they should be reimbursed.

[andydd]

...and if its got to the court stage then things like contract would have to be disclosed,Im surprised they havnt sent you a copy as part of their evidence.

 

Andy

[rebel11]

I'm surprised, the companies tea allowance is probably more then £350 plus interest, it sounds like sour grapes.

[IdaInFife]

More and more companies are adding this into the the employment terms. Some even have a descalling curve so the longer you are there after the training the less there is to pay back if you leave.

 

What does it say in the handbook about training costs?

[andydd]

I can recall a colleasuge of mine went on a (pricey) training course, there was nothing in the T & C's about training payback but on the individual occasion he went he did have to sign a form and this had some sort of scale agreement which required certain amounts to be paid back if you left.

 

I would of thought this case would be quite black and white, either there is an agreement to pay back the cost or there isnt, and clearly the evidence should be avilable to both sides long before the actual court date.

 

Andy

[buzby]

Why on earth did he no challenge the cour action? He now has a CCJ , and unless he applies for a set aside, it's a done deal. It is only fair that he repay his employer if the course they paid for is wasted because they never benefited from any minimum term by their employee.

[rebel11]

That did make me chuckle.

 

Why on earth did he no challenge the cour action? He now has a CCJ , and unless he applies for a set aside, it's a done deal. It is only fair that he repay his employer if the course they paid for is wasted because they never benefited from any minimum term by their employee.

[andydd]

Why on earth did he no challenge the cour action? He now has a CCJ , and unless he applies for a set aside, it's a done deal. It is only fair that he repay his employer if the course they paid for is wasted because they never benefited from any minimum term by their employee.

 

But surely we are not talking about whether its fair or not, either the employee was contracted to pay back training costs or not, if not then he is under no obligation to pay back his employer,whether its fair has nothing to do with it.

 

Andy

[buzby]

It is immaterial now. That was an argument for the court.

 

As he has been found in default and (most likely) has a CCJ, he has to pay up within 28 days to avoid the CCJ applying to his Credit File, or pays for a Set-Aside and has the case re-run. Esoteric discussions of whether the charge is 'fair' won't remove the CCJ.

[andydd]

It is immaterial now. That was an argument for the court.

 

As he has been found in default and (most likely) has a CCJ, he has to pay up within 28 days to avoid the CCJ applying to his Credit File, or pays for a Set-Aside and has the case re-run. Esoteric discussions of whether the charge is 'fair' won't remove the CCJ.

 

Huh..?..Am I missing something ?. Where does it mention a CCJ being issued ?

 

Andy

[buzby]

Message #1 last line. If it has not been defended, then a default judgement is the next step, followed by a CCJ.

[elpulpo]

Aye, the OP would suggest to me that the employer has made an application, nothing suggests that they've been successful.

What needs to be established from the OP is whether their son's contract made provision for the recovery of training costs in this circumstance.

[andydd]

Message #1 last line. If it has not been defended, then a default judgement is the next step, followed by a CCJ.

 

I was under the impression that an application has been made to court not that it has been won, surely the original poster is asking advice on how to defend ?.

 

Of course if the case somehow went ahead without their knowledge and the company won by default then they could get it set aside.

 

Andy

[Zamzara]

Perhaps the OP could clarify whether a judgment has been obtained, or merely a claim issued?