Shafted

[yeti]

Hello all GTPers.

Recently I got myself a new job which I have started now.

I handed in my notice to my old job and worked out my notice...

My old job promised me a bonus (Which was due for the Period July - December last year) and would've been payable on 23rd February.

I finished my last job on the 11th Feb having been told that my bonus would be paid in full.

I then took a week off holiday and then started my new job on 21st February.

On that day I received a pay slip from my old job which omitted my Bonus. I rang them up and informed them of their error... however I was informed that my Bonus was not going to be paid.

So my old company have shafted me quite nicely as I wouldn't have taken a holiday (unpaid) if I had known this money wasn't coming and despite that they owed it to me anyway.

So how can you help me?

Annoyance factor... Please feel free to email these people and inform them that they are very foolish and not very moral (Feel free to use other words than these!)

Removed by moderator. Check your PM's

Thank you.

C.

 

[TB]

Is it just me or is posting their e-mails not a good idea?

 

[Minnesota01R6]

I don't know a lot about the laws in England, but I would sue them for the money. In the US you would have a very good chance of winning the case on at least 2 different grounds that I can think of. Call a barrister or soliciter and see what he thinks.

 

[Der Alta]

Is it just me or is posting their e-mails not a good idea?

It's already defined in the Acceptable Use Policy of GTplanet.net

Not a good idea.

While I do feel for you Yeti, leaving a company and expecting them to stay on their word about a bonus is highly unlikely. You should have at least asked for a letter stating your parting from the company and expected benefits based on your performance while there.

If nothing is on paper, they've no reason to stick to it.

AO

 

[ExigeEvan]

If needs be go to the small claims court. Otherwise you've been "Pwned".

 

[PS]

I shall point and laugh at your misfortune until you get paid or sue their pants off. But until then, you're screwed. Just make sure everything is on paper. I'm even starting to do that stuff with my friends- making them sign things so we don't have arguments about how much I owe them.

 

[yeti]

It's already defined in the Acceptable Use Policy of GTplanet.net

Not a good idea.

While I do feel for you Yeti, leaving a company and expecting them to stay on their word about a bonus is highly unlikely. You should have at least asked for a letter stating your parting from the company and expected benefits based on your performance while there.

If nothing is on paper, they've no reason to stick to it.

AO

I got sent an email saying that they would pay it and then next thing I know I get told that I'm not being paid it...

I will be contacting a solicitor shortly... just fancied giving them some spam that they would have to wade through to annoy them!!!

C.

PS Sorry about breach of AUP... didn't realise it was in there.

 

[Minnesota01R6]

Yeti - would you let me know how this turns out? I am interested to see if/what/how you recover money from them.


My guess would be promissory estoppel (if there is still such a thing in the UK). Basicaly, if someone promises something to you (a gift, a bonus, whatever) and you rely on that promise to your detriment (you take a week vacation instead of going right to work at your next job) you are allowed to recover even though you wouldn't be able to otherwise (a promise to give a gift is not enforceable).

The other theory I was thinking of would be run of the mill breach of contract, in that they offered you a bonus for your work and you fulfilled your end of the bargain, so they have to fulfill theirs.

/legal ramblings off

 

[Small_Fryz]

im sure theres a program out there that can generate many many copies of emals and sent it to them, hence blockin up and giving them hell. but id advise against this as you will definelty not get your bonus if this is undertaken.

 

[Der Alta]

im sure theres a program out there that can generate many many copies of emals and sent it to them, hence blockin up and giving them hell. but id advise against this as you will definelty not get your bonus if this is undertaken.

And I ought to crown you for this one.

right out of the AUP: You will not use these forums to violate any laws nor to discuss illegal activities.

As rare as a white ape is, keep it up and we'll have a hard time finding one here.

Der Alta

 

[yeti]

Yeti - would you let me know how this turns out? I am interested to see if/what/how you recover money from them.


My guess would be promissory estoppel (if there is still such a thing in the UK). Basicaly, if someone promises something to you (a gift, a bonus, whatever) and you rely on that promise to your detriment (you take a week vacation instead of going right to work at your next job) you are allowed to recover even though you wouldn't be able to otherwise (a promise to give a gift is not enforceable).

The other theory I was thinking of would be run of the mill breach of contract, in that they offered you a bonus for your work and you fulfilled your end of the bargain, so they have to fulfill theirs.

/legal ramblings off

I'll Certainly keep you in the loop...

Promissory estoppel in English and Welsh law In English law
a promise made without consideration is generally not enforcable. For example, a car saleman promises not to sell a car over the weekend, but does so. The promise cannot be enforced. If however, the car salesman accepts 1 pence in 'consideration' for the promise, the promise is binding and enforcable in court. Estoppel is one of the exceptions to this rule.

Promissory estoppel was developed by Lord Denning in Central London Property Trust Ltd v. High Trees House Ltd [1947] K.B. 130. Previously under English law, a promise to accept part payment in satisfaction of a debt is not enforcable. For example, a mechanic quotes £300 to fix a car, and does so. The owner of the car pleads that he can only afford £250. The mechanic accepts the £250. There is nothing to stop the mechanic from pursuing the remaining payment of £50 at a later time. Applying this principle to High Trees the agreement to accept a lower rent is an acceptance of part payment so there was nothing to stop the plaintiff pursuing the full rent in arrears at a later date. The agreement to accept the lower rent was a promise unsuppported by consideration and so not binding.

Promissory estoppel requires (1) an unequivocal promise by words or conduct, (2) a change in position of the promisee as a result of the promise (not necessarily to anyone's detriment), (3) inequity if the promisor was to go back on the promise. Estoppel is 'a shield not a sword' - it cannot be used as the basis of an action on its own. It also does not extinguish rights. In High Trees the plaintiff company was able to restore payment of full rent (although estopped back rent was lost) from early 1945, but probably could have restored full rent at any time after the initial promise provided a suitable period of notice had been given.

Estoppel is an equitable (as opposed to common law) construct and is therefore discretionary. In the case of D & C Builders v Rees the courts refused to recognise a promise to accept a part payment of £300 on a debt of £482 on the basis that it was extracted by duress.

Promissory estoppel in American law
In the many jurisdictions of the United States, promissory estoppel is generally an alternative to consideration as a basis for enforcing a promise. It is also sometimes referred to as detrimental reliance.

The American Law Institute included the principle of estoppel into § 90 of the 'equity, he may be estopped from his conduct. You relied upon his representation that he would sell you the radio when you came back the same day with the money; you had sold your watch at a price lower than the market price, and thus you have acted to your detriment. (Note that if your watch was worth $10, and you received fair price, there would not be any detriment on your part).

An example of promissory estoppel in the construction of a building: A construction company puts together the estimates of a number of subcontractors and quotes its client a price. The client accepts, and construction begins. However, thereafter one of the subcontractors drastically raises the price above its original estimate. Because of this change, the construction company cannot profit from the building. A court would be likely to give the construction company promissory estoppel, which would allow them to pay what the subcontractor originally estimated rather than the new, higher price.

Note that, in some common law jurisdictions, if when you had approached the owner and indicated that you wanted to purchase one of those radios and he had said "Sold," you may be able to argue that a contract had been created, even if you had to go get the money. But under the classical idea of consideration, until you paid him, the contract would not have concluded.

I think you might mean Propeiertry Estoppel...

Proprietary estoppel
Proprietary estoppel in English and Welsh law Proprietary estoppel arises when one party purports to give but fails to effectively convey, or promises to give property or an interest in property, to another party knowing that party will expend money or otherwise act to his detriment in reliance of the supposed or promised gift. See Dillwyn v Llwellyn (1862) 4 De G.F.& J. 517 C.A. in Chancery. In this case a father promised a property to his son, who took possession, expended a large sum of money on the house and otherwise improved the property. The father never actually gifted the property to the son. After his death the son, claiming to be the equitable owner, obtained a court judgment forcing the trustees to convey the land to him. See also Inwards v Baker [1965] 2 Q.B. 29, C.A.

 

[LoudMusic]

I would fill a fertilizer spreader with bird seed and spread the seed over their parkinglot and walkways. The entire campus would be filled with birds and bird "excrement" for months.

Repeat as necessary (:

 

[yeti]

Reckon you might want to modify that post before a Mod sees it?!

C.

 

[Der Alta]

No. See, LM posted up a good prank.

A good prank effectively annoys the hell out of them, but does no lasting damage. Bogging out their e-mail or harassing them with constant e-mail interputs their business and does monetary damage.

AO

 

[Small_Fryz]

so am i in trouble for what i posted?.

i never said he should do it though.