Received an invoice from my ex-employer billing me for training; how to handle? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowHow do I deal with an employer withholding my paycheck?How does billing by hours work as skill increases and time to completion decreases?IT contract jobs - how and when to ask your billing rate?Standard for billing followup consultation workHow to respond to a customer's demand for payment extension?How do I prevent a client from bleeding me dry with small questions and tasks they expect to receive for free?How do I convince my employer to take my mention of resignation seriously?How to convince management of changing unethical billing practices?Should I attend an expensive employer-paid training if I plan to quit soon?My Employer forcing me to enter double billing for two customers
Return the Closest Prime Number
How to invert MapIndexed on a ragged structure? How to construct a tree from rules?
Which kind of appliances can one connect to electric sockets located in an airplane's toilet?
In excess I'm lethal
How to safely derail a train during transit?
Is it ever safe to open a suspicious html file (e.g. email attachment)?
What is the result of assigning to std::vector<T>::begin()?
Complex fractions
Is it professional to write unrelated content in an almost-empty email?
Is "for causing autism in X" grammatical?
How do I transpose the first and deepest levels of an arbitrarily nested array?
Is 'diverse range' a pleonastic phrase?
How long to clear the 'suck zone' of a turbofan after start is initiated?
Would a completely good Muggle be able to use a wand?
Plot of histogram similar to output from @risk
Are there any limitations on attacking while grappling?
Geometry problem - areas of triangles (contest math)
Unreliable Magic - Is it worth it?
Solidity! Invalid implicit conversion from string memory to bytes memory requested
Why do professional authors make "consistency" mistakes? And how to avoid them?
If a black hole is created from light, can this black hole then move at speed of light?
Is it possible to search for a directory/file combination?
What is the purpose of the Evocation wizard's Potent Cantrip feature?
Example of a Mathematician/Physicist whose Other Publications during their PhD eclipsed their PhD Thesis
Received an invoice from my ex-employer billing me for training; how to handle?
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowHow do I deal with an employer withholding my paycheck?How does billing by hours work as skill increases and time to completion decreases?IT contract jobs - how and when to ask your billing rate?Standard for billing followup consultation workHow to respond to a customer's demand for payment extension?How do I prevent a client from bleeding me dry with small questions and tasks they expect to receive for free?How do I convince my employer to take my mention of resignation seriously?How to convince management of changing unethical billing practices?Should I attend an expensive employer-paid training if I plan to quit soon?My Employer forcing me to enter double billing for two customers
About 4 months ago I started a job and quit after a month due to a ton of awful things about the organization that aren't relevant here. Today I received in the mail a letter from the company stating that I owe them money, around $5500, for time spent training me, and $1500 for a software license for AutoCAD they bought for me.
They said since I quit before I was able to provide income for the company, I'm responsible for reimbursing their costs. I can post an anonymized copy of the letter if it's needed, but I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
I never signed anything saying that I'd owe them money if I quit - I have a copy of the signed employee agreement with nothing anywhere close to that in it. The AutoCAD license was installed on a work computer that never went home with me and I returned everything they gave me on my last day, down to the free shirt and water bottle.
Should I respond that I'm not paying, or just ignore this?
quitting billing
New contributor
|
show 8 more comments
About 4 months ago I started a job and quit after a month due to a ton of awful things about the organization that aren't relevant here. Today I received in the mail a letter from the company stating that I owe them money, around $5500, for time spent training me, and $1500 for a software license for AutoCAD they bought for me.
They said since I quit before I was able to provide income for the company, I'm responsible for reimbursing their costs. I can post an anonymized copy of the letter if it's needed, but I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
I never signed anything saying that I'd owe them money if I quit - I have a copy of the signed employee agreement with nothing anywhere close to that in it. The AutoCAD license was installed on a work computer that never went home with me and I returned everything they gave me on my last day, down to the free shirt and water bottle.
Should I respond that I'm not paying, or just ignore this?
quitting billing
New contributor
86
Actually this sounds like just one more thing to add to your list of "awful things about the organization."
– shoover
15 hours ago
23
Can you add a country tag?
– ventsyv
12 hours ago
3
It would really help if you mentioned what country you're in, since laws differ.
– jamesqf
12 hours ago
4
@donjuedo Filing a lawsuit would require the OP to take actions that would cost time and/or money before being dismissed by the judge. It's better that the OP forces his ex-company to take on those expenses for the same result (assuming that they even take it that far)
– Peter M
11 hours ago
7
My standard law of legal advice: The only legal advice you can trust from anyone is "get a lawyer" - this includes strangers, friends, family, on the internet, at the cafe, on the train, and in the lobby of a lawyer's office.
– corsiKa
7 hours ago
|
show 8 more comments
About 4 months ago I started a job and quit after a month due to a ton of awful things about the organization that aren't relevant here. Today I received in the mail a letter from the company stating that I owe them money, around $5500, for time spent training me, and $1500 for a software license for AutoCAD they bought for me.
They said since I quit before I was able to provide income for the company, I'm responsible for reimbursing their costs. I can post an anonymized copy of the letter if it's needed, but I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
I never signed anything saying that I'd owe them money if I quit - I have a copy of the signed employee agreement with nothing anywhere close to that in it. The AutoCAD license was installed on a work computer that never went home with me and I returned everything they gave me on my last day, down to the free shirt and water bottle.
Should I respond that I'm not paying, or just ignore this?
quitting billing
New contributor
About 4 months ago I started a job and quit after a month due to a ton of awful things about the organization that aren't relevant here. Today I received in the mail a letter from the company stating that I owe them money, around $5500, for time spent training me, and $1500 for a software license for AutoCAD they bought for me.
They said since I quit before I was able to provide income for the company, I'm responsible for reimbursing their costs. I can post an anonymized copy of the letter if it's needed, but I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
I never signed anything saying that I'd owe them money if I quit - I have a copy of the signed employee agreement with nothing anywhere close to that in it. The AutoCAD license was installed on a work computer that never went home with me and I returned everything they gave me on my last day, down to the free shirt and water bottle.
Should I respond that I'm not paying, or just ignore this?
quitting billing
quitting billing
New contributor
New contributor
edited 12 hours ago
DarkCygnus
39.3k1886168
39.3k1886168
New contributor
asked 15 hours ago
outerviewerouterviewer
24124
24124
New contributor
New contributor
86
Actually this sounds like just one more thing to add to your list of "awful things about the organization."
– shoover
15 hours ago
23
Can you add a country tag?
– ventsyv
12 hours ago
3
It would really help if you mentioned what country you're in, since laws differ.
– jamesqf
12 hours ago
4
@donjuedo Filing a lawsuit would require the OP to take actions that would cost time and/or money before being dismissed by the judge. It's better that the OP forces his ex-company to take on those expenses for the same result (assuming that they even take it that far)
– Peter M
11 hours ago
7
My standard law of legal advice: The only legal advice you can trust from anyone is "get a lawyer" - this includes strangers, friends, family, on the internet, at the cafe, on the train, and in the lobby of a lawyer's office.
– corsiKa
7 hours ago
|
show 8 more comments
86
Actually this sounds like just one more thing to add to your list of "awful things about the organization."
– shoover
15 hours ago
23
Can you add a country tag?
– ventsyv
12 hours ago
3
It would really help if you mentioned what country you're in, since laws differ.
– jamesqf
12 hours ago
4
@donjuedo Filing a lawsuit would require the OP to take actions that would cost time and/or money before being dismissed by the judge. It's better that the OP forces his ex-company to take on those expenses for the same result (assuming that they even take it that far)
– Peter M
11 hours ago
7
My standard law of legal advice: The only legal advice you can trust from anyone is "get a lawyer" - this includes strangers, friends, family, on the internet, at the cafe, on the train, and in the lobby of a lawyer's office.
– corsiKa
7 hours ago
86
86
Actually this sounds like just one more thing to add to your list of "awful things about the organization."
– shoover
15 hours ago
Actually this sounds like just one more thing to add to your list of "awful things about the organization."
– shoover
15 hours ago
23
23
Can you add a country tag?
– ventsyv
12 hours ago
Can you add a country tag?
– ventsyv
12 hours ago
3
3
It would really help if you mentioned what country you're in, since laws differ.
– jamesqf
12 hours ago
It would really help if you mentioned what country you're in, since laws differ.
– jamesqf
12 hours ago
4
4
@donjuedo Filing a lawsuit would require the OP to take actions that would cost time and/or money before being dismissed by the judge. It's better that the OP forces his ex-company to take on those expenses for the same result (assuming that they even take it that far)
– Peter M
11 hours ago
@donjuedo Filing a lawsuit would require the OP to take actions that would cost time and/or money before being dismissed by the judge. It's better that the OP forces his ex-company to take on those expenses for the same result (assuming that they even take it that far)
– Peter M
11 hours ago
7
7
My standard law of legal advice: The only legal advice you can trust from anyone is "get a lawyer" - this includes strangers, friends, family, on the internet, at the cafe, on the train, and in the lobby of a lawyer's office.
– corsiKa
7 hours ago
My standard law of legal advice: The only legal advice you can trust from anyone is "get a lawyer" - this includes strangers, friends, family, on the internet, at the cafe, on the train, and in the lobby of a lawyer's office.
– corsiKa
7 hours ago
|
show 8 more comments
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
Your question was,
I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
Based on what you said here,
I never signed anything saying that I'd owe them money if I quit - I have a copy of the signed employee agreement with nothing anywhere close to that in it. The AutoCAD license was installed on a work computer that never went home with me and I returned everything they gave me on my last day, down to the free shirt and water bottle.
Then I think the answer is pretty clearly, no. You can't be held responsible. It is sometimes the case that employment contracts include terms for reimbursement of specific expenses or repayment of specific types of benefits (ie an employer that pays for you to go get your Masters degree may have terms in your contract stating that you need to pay them back if you quit within a certain time frame), but that is apparently not the case for you.
It seems like your best course of action is to ignore the request. Any response you make may be seen by them as grounds to continue to push you. If they escalate, it would be appropriate for you to do so as well (ie get a lawyer involved). Otherwise, I would not acknowledge their request in any way.
add a comment |
Oh, keep this, and your signed agreement in a very secure location.
Depending on your location, you may be needing them for a civil suit. Your employer will probably end up wishing that it only cost them $7000.
FWIW: I am inferring the U.S. because of the currency denomination. You might want to specify a location tag.
23
@outerviewer make sure you keep every piece of documentation that you have - I had a letter that stated a date that solved an argument with a senior manager - he wanted to backdate my apprenticeship by 4 months to finish me early and save 4 months money... That one letter stopped him (He was not happy :) )
– Solar Mike
15 hours ago
add a comment |
I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
Right. It's a bluff to see if you would pay anyway.
Should I respond that I'm not paying, or just ignore this?
I would respond once and only once with something like:
"Since my employment agreement said nothing about being required to reimburse any training expenses if I left, I will not do so.
The AutoCAD license was installed and remains on a company computer. The computer was returned when I left. I am not responsible for the cost of this license and will not provide any reimbursement."
Then I would not respond to subsequent letters, although I would keep copies of everything.
In the unlikely event you are sued, make sure you have all the relevant facts and copies of all correspondence. I have a hard time imagining they would waste their time doing so, and an even harder time imagining they could win.
18
In a case like this where the company is so out of line, is it even in the OPs interest to respond? I sort of feel that doing so adds some legitimacy to the claim by acknowledging that it exists in the first place.
– Peter M
11 hours ago
Is it possible that besides a desire for repayment, there is also an element of harassment or vindictiveness?
– trognanders
11 hours ago
5
If you were to respond at all, wouldn't it be better to just ask for evidence of a debt and nothing more? The more you say the more chance there is that you'll give them something that'll help them later (like an acknowledgement that training and software licences existed at all) or make a mistake of some kind. And if they don't respond to a question like that, well, maybe that's useful if you live somewhere where courts don't like litigants who refuse to talk to each other first.
– Alex Hayward
9 hours ago
@AlexHayward: Ask for evidence of a debt? Oh, you mean "I am in receipt of a letter in which you have claimed I owe certain sums. Your claim is deficient because it fails to establish: (1) that I agreed to pay for the benefits alleged to have been provided to me, (2) that the benefits actually were provided to me, and (3) the value of the benefits alleged to have been provided. To establish the value of the AutoCAD license, provide copies of invoice, credit card, and bank statement showing completed payment for the license." ? Then turn around and report using a personal license for business.
– Ben Voigt
1 hour ago
add a comment |
You don't have to do a thing, but there are ways to handle it. In some countries like the US, it may be better to stay silent or ask a lawyer (which costs!), because the law can be very harsh and expensive if done wrong. If you're more sure of writing, then you can probably sort this out yourself.
I'll sum up what I'd expect is a good approach, but you may choose to do nothing and "wait and see", or ask a lawyer, in some places.
How the law sees it
When a business enters a contract, it is assumed that they know what they are doing. A private individual often gets more protection, because they often don't. (Which is why consumer and employment law often strongly favour the consumer/employee).
Your company knew when they employed you, that they wanted certain conditions as part of that employment. They knew you could leave on certain terms, and accepted that. In fact, they probably told you what those terms would be. They actually chose them, rhemselves.
When they bought you software, or trained you, they knew you had that right to leave. If they wanted to make training or purchases conditional on you staying, or chargeable if they didn't, then they had every chance in the world to say if that mattered to them. They could have written it in the original contract (it was only 4 months ago so they surely had some idea of what they'd do!). They could have asked you at the time to sign an additional agreement that you wouldn't leave for a year or would repay if you did, in return for this stuff they were about to do. They didn't do any of that, and they had the choice, the ability, and the awareness to do so. So they can't now look to you, to cover up their failure. They knew they had given you a right to leave without repaying, when they did all that, so they can hardly expect you to voluntarily repay if you take them up on the rights they signed with you.
Put differently, every contract carries risk. If you want to not have a risk, you don't agree to contracts that have the risks in them, that you aren't willing to agree to - much less author those contracts. They didn't want to expose themselves to a risk of investing in someone, only to have them leave after 4 months? Then they shouldn't have signed a contract by which they voluntarily put themselves in that position with their employee.
A second way a court will look at it, for the license at least, is to ask if the company actually lost anything. Presumably they hired you because they needed someone to do work that would involve AutoCAD. They surely didn't buy it as a luxury! So presumably that work still exists. So they'll be able to use the license for their next hire.
After all, every employee who walks, could be sued if that basis were valid. You walked out after a week, and your jib was inputting data from invoices? Well, we had to train you, get you a desk and chair, pay for the floor space you took up, pay for a computer and those internal support time you needed from IT to get it working.....
No. Just no. It doesn't work that way.
What to do
As I said, you may choose to wait, or get advice. But if you intended to write, you would want to write in a way that has a high chance of shutting them up :)
I tend to write strongly, and you may not feel comfortable doing so (and it may in fact be very unwise in some countries or situations to do so, or to not get legal advice). I'm also used to UK laws and legal frameworks where writing this way is a pretty safe bet, which might not apply where you are.
But if you did want to write or handle it yourself, and felt it was safe and you were confident to do so, this is roughly what I'd say, so you can pick the key points and use them as you feel best.
Something like this:
"Dear X,
I am in receipt of your letter of Xx March 2019, which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds.
I was employed under a contract. That contract was authored by Y Inc. itself, and the terms were chosen by and agreeable to Y Inc. The contract stated my rights to leave, and what happens when I leave. I attach a copy for your reference.
If you believe that the contract states that I must pay any sums on training or software you bought as an employer, I would appreciate you citing the paragraphs that contain those agreements. You will find no such agreement, of course, which means I do not expect to be troubled by you again on this spurious claim.
Having set out the contractual situation, I now consider this matter permanently closed. I reserve all of my rights to consider any further attempt to seek payment of this kind, or other adverse action taken in lieu, as likely to be an extortion attempt or other illegal action, and reserve my rights to seek any combination of legal advice, compensation or to report it as a police matter. I may also choose to ignore unfounded claims, if any.
Kindly do not write again.
Signed, Z."
[The "other adverse action" and "other illegal action" is in case they try to blacken your name or make harmful claims in revenge, which some might consider. But I haven't said that explicitly since we don't need to give them foolish ideas. Also note the thin line in defamation law - it is usually very safe to say "It looks to me like X", because that's a true statement of honestly held opinion, but it's much less safe to say "it is X", which claims a true statement absolutely]
IMHO stating "which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds" is both unnecessary and potentially damaging to the OP as it is pure speculation and will only act to aggravate the ex-company - even though you have a disclaimer. Personally I would leave out all speculation and only state provable facts.
– Peter M
5 hours ago
This, or ignoring it, are the only correct responses. These people are assholes and need to be told off, without actually using the word "asshole". @PeterM - "looks to me" is the clause that gets you out of jail here. You don't make a factual claim, you report your interpretation.
– Tom
3 hours ago
add a comment |
If you have no documentation stating that you owe them this money (in your contract/employment agreement/etc), then tell them as such: "I never agreed to this, go shove it" (depending on how you feel about this company, I might be tempted to use those exact words) and do not respond to any further communique. If they continue to "shout into the void", as it were, you may want to contact a lawyer regarding harassment.
If you feel like being extra cheeky though, you may want to suggest, at least, if you have to pay $1500 for the AutoCAD subscription, then it should be your property. Issue them a notice to have your AutoCAD license transferred to you on threat of a lawsuit for stolen property, and see what they say. Of course, this is likely to not work out in the way you hope it will, so only do it if you feel like being cheeky and having some fun with a possible potential downside cost down the road. I don't actually recommend doing this, I just think it would be funny to hear their response.
15
I think this advice is entertaining, but so so unprofessional. Be better than them (i.e. not a child). If you're going to stop responding to them after telling them to "shove it", then just don't respond to begin with. What do you aim to gain by starting a confrontation? Same with the AutoCAD license - so you ask them to transfer the license to you and they agree. Now what? You are still out $1500.
– Catsunami
14 hours ago
Agreed cheeky is all but never the professional answer. There is some professional merit though in the concept that if they expect someone to pay for resources they purchased for them, those resources must be transferred or at minimum prorated back for the unusable portion.
– John Spiegel
14 hours ago
12
Yeah, the AutoCAD thing in particular is horrible advice. If the boss wants to screw you over, they'll instantly agree. Suddenly, you went from "Not legally required to pay anything" to "Agreeing to buy an instance of AutoCAD for $1500 that you weren't planning on." After all, it doesn't cost the boss anything to take your $1500 and just buy another license.
– Kevin
11 hours ago
@Kevin I agree that that is horrible advice. As a CAD administrator, though, it would be really difficult and painstaking to transfer a license. While you can give anyone a product key, it is tied to a contract - a contract that likely has multiple Autodesk licenses. To really transfer ownership would probably involve direct assistance from Autodesk... good luck with that.
– Evan Elrod
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "423"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: false,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
outerviewer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f132898%2freceived-an-invoice-from-my-ex-employer-billing-me-for-training-how-to-handle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(function ()
$("#show-editor-button input, #show-editor-button button").click(function ()
var showEditor = function()
$("#show-editor-button").hide();
$("#post-form").removeClass("dno");
StackExchange.editor.finallyInit();
;
var useFancy = $(this).data('confirm-use-fancy');
if(useFancy == 'True')
var popupTitle = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-title');
var popupBody = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-body');
var popupAccept = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-accept-button');
$(this).loadPopup(
url: '/post/self-answer-popup',
loaded: function(popup)
var pTitle = $(popup).find('h2');
var pBody = $(popup).find('.popup-body');
var pSubmit = $(popup).find('.popup-submit');
pTitle.text(popupTitle);
pBody.html(popupBody);
pSubmit.val(popupAccept).click(showEditor);
)
else
var confirmText = $(this).data('confirm-text');
if (confirmText ? confirm(confirmText) : true)
showEditor();
);
);
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Your question was,
I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
Based on what you said here,
I never signed anything saying that I'd owe them money if I quit - I have a copy of the signed employee agreement with nothing anywhere close to that in it. The AutoCAD license was installed on a work computer that never went home with me and I returned everything they gave me on my last day, down to the free shirt and water bottle.
Then I think the answer is pretty clearly, no. You can't be held responsible. It is sometimes the case that employment contracts include terms for reimbursement of specific expenses or repayment of specific types of benefits (ie an employer that pays for you to go get your Masters degree may have terms in your contract stating that you need to pay them back if you quit within a certain time frame), but that is apparently not the case for you.
It seems like your best course of action is to ignore the request. Any response you make may be seen by them as grounds to continue to push you. If they escalate, it would be appropriate for you to do so as well (ie get a lawyer involved). Otherwise, I would not acknowledge their request in any way.
add a comment |
Your question was,
I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
Based on what you said here,
I never signed anything saying that I'd owe them money if I quit - I have a copy of the signed employee agreement with nothing anywhere close to that in it. The AutoCAD license was installed on a work computer that never went home with me and I returned everything they gave me on my last day, down to the free shirt and water bottle.
Then I think the answer is pretty clearly, no. You can't be held responsible. It is sometimes the case that employment contracts include terms for reimbursement of specific expenses or repayment of specific types of benefits (ie an employer that pays for you to go get your Masters degree may have terms in your contract stating that you need to pay them back if you quit within a certain time frame), but that is apparently not the case for you.
It seems like your best course of action is to ignore the request. Any response you make may be seen by them as grounds to continue to push you. If they escalate, it would be appropriate for you to do so as well (ie get a lawyer involved). Otherwise, I would not acknowledge their request in any way.
add a comment |
Your question was,
I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
Based on what you said here,
I never signed anything saying that I'd owe them money if I quit - I have a copy of the signed employee agreement with nothing anywhere close to that in it. The AutoCAD license was installed on a work computer that never went home with me and I returned everything they gave me on my last day, down to the free shirt and water bottle.
Then I think the answer is pretty clearly, no. You can't be held responsible. It is sometimes the case that employment contracts include terms for reimbursement of specific expenses or repayment of specific types of benefits (ie an employer that pays for you to go get your Masters degree may have terms in your contract stating that you need to pay them back if you quit within a certain time frame), but that is apparently not the case for you.
It seems like your best course of action is to ignore the request. Any response you make may be seen by them as grounds to continue to push you. If they escalate, it would be appropriate for you to do so as well (ie get a lawyer involved). Otherwise, I would not acknowledge their request in any way.
Your question was,
I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
Based on what you said here,
I never signed anything saying that I'd owe them money if I quit - I have a copy of the signed employee agreement with nothing anywhere close to that in it. The AutoCAD license was installed on a work computer that never went home with me and I returned everything they gave me on my last day, down to the free shirt and water bottle.
Then I think the answer is pretty clearly, no. You can't be held responsible. It is sometimes the case that employment contracts include terms for reimbursement of specific expenses or repayment of specific types of benefits (ie an employer that pays for you to go get your Masters degree may have terms in your contract stating that you need to pay them back if you quit within a certain time frame), but that is apparently not the case for you.
It seems like your best course of action is to ignore the request. Any response you make may be seen by them as grounds to continue to push you. If they escalate, it would be appropriate for you to do so as well (ie get a lawyer involved). Otherwise, I would not acknowledge their request in any way.
answered 15 hours ago
dwizumdwizum
18.7k93661
18.7k93661
add a comment |
add a comment |
Oh, keep this, and your signed agreement in a very secure location.
Depending on your location, you may be needing them for a civil suit. Your employer will probably end up wishing that it only cost them $7000.
FWIW: I am inferring the U.S. because of the currency denomination. You might want to specify a location tag.
23
@outerviewer make sure you keep every piece of documentation that you have - I had a letter that stated a date that solved an argument with a senior manager - he wanted to backdate my apprenticeship by 4 months to finish me early and save 4 months money... That one letter stopped him (He was not happy :) )
– Solar Mike
15 hours ago
add a comment |
Oh, keep this, and your signed agreement in a very secure location.
Depending on your location, you may be needing them for a civil suit. Your employer will probably end up wishing that it only cost them $7000.
FWIW: I am inferring the U.S. because of the currency denomination. You might want to specify a location tag.
23
@outerviewer make sure you keep every piece of documentation that you have - I had a letter that stated a date that solved an argument with a senior manager - he wanted to backdate my apprenticeship by 4 months to finish me early and save 4 months money... That one letter stopped him (He was not happy :) )
– Solar Mike
15 hours ago
add a comment |
Oh, keep this, and your signed agreement in a very secure location.
Depending on your location, you may be needing them for a civil suit. Your employer will probably end up wishing that it only cost them $7000.
FWIW: I am inferring the U.S. because of the currency denomination. You might want to specify a location tag.
Oh, keep this, and your signed agreement in a very secure location.
Depending on your location, you may be needing them for a civil suit. Your employer will probably end up wishing that it only cost them $7000.
FWIW: I am inferring the U.S. because of the currency denomination. You might want to specify a location tag.
answered 15 hours ago
Wesley LongWesley Long
50.7k17110183
50.7k17110183
23
@outerviewer make sure you keep every piece of documentation that you have - I had a letter that stated a date that solved an argument with a senior manager - he wanted to backdate my apprenticeship by 4 months to finish me early and save 4 months money... That one letter stopped him (He was not happy :) )
– Solar Mike
15 hours ago
add a comment |
23
@outerviewer make sure you keep every piece of documentation that you have - I had a letter that stated a date that solved an argument with a senior manager - he wanted to backdate my apprenticeship by 4 months to finish me early and save 4 months money... That one letter stopped him (He was not happy :) )
– Solar Mike
15 hours ago
23
23
@outerviewer make sure you keep every piece of documentation that you have - I had a letter that stated a date that solved an argument with a senior manager - he wanted to backdate my apprenticeship by 4 months to finish me early and save 4 months money... That one letter stopped him (He was not happy :) )
– Solar Mike
15 hours ago
@outerviewer make sure you keep every piece of documentation that you have - I had a letter that stated a date that solved an argument with a senior manager - he wanted to backdate my apprenticeship by 4 months to finish me early and save 4 months money... That one letter stopped him (He was not happy :) )
– Solar Mike
15 hours ago
add a comment |
I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
Right. It's a bluff to see if you would pay anyway.
Should I respond that I'm not paying, or just ignore this?
I would respond once and only once with something like:
"Since my employment agreement said nothing about being required to reimburse any training expenses if I left, I will not do so.
The AutoCAD license was installed and remains on a company computer. The computer was returned when I left. I am not responsible for the cost of this license and will not provide any reimbursement."
Then I would not respond to subsequent letters, although I would keep copies of everything.
In the unlikely event you are sued, make sure you have all the relevant facts and copies of all correspondence. I have a hard time imagining they would waste their time doing so, and an even harder time imagining they could win.
18
In a case like this where the company is so out of line, is it even in the OPs interest to respond? I sort of feel that doing so adds some legitimacy to the claim by acknowledging that it exists in the first place.
– Peter M
11 hours ago
Is it possible that besides a desire for repayment, there is also an element of harassment or vindictiveness?
– trognanders
11 hours ago
5
If you were to respond at all, wouldn't it be better to just ask for evidence of a debt and nothing more? The more you say the more chance there is that you'll give them something that'll help them later (like an acknowledgement that training and software licences existed at all) or make a mistake of some kind. And if they don't respond to a question like that, well, maybe that's useful if you live somewhere where courts don't like litigants who refuse to talk to each other first.
– Alex Hayward
9 hours ago
@AlexHayward: Ask for evidence of a debt? Oh, you mean "I am in receipt of a letter in which you have claimed I owe certain sums. Your claim is deficient because it fails to establish: (1) that I agreed to pay for the benefits alleged to have been provided to me, (2) that the benefits actually were provided to me, and (3) the value of the benefits alleged to have been provided. To establish the value of the AutoCAD license, provide copies of invoice, credit card, and bank statement showing completed payment for the license." ? Then turn around and report using a personal license for business.
– Ben Voigt
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
Right. It's a bluff to see if you would pay anyway.
Should I respond that I'm not paying, or just ignore this?
I would respond once and only once with something like:
"Since my employment agreement said nothing about being required to reimburse any training expenses if I left, I will not do so.
The AutoCAD license was installed and remains on a company computer. The computer was returned when I left. I am not responsible for the cost of this license and will not provide any reimbursement."
Then I would not respond to subsequent letters, although I would keep copies of everything.
In the unlikely event you are sued, make sure you have all the relevant facts and copies of all correspondence. I have a hard time imagining they would waste their time doing so, and an even harder time imagining they could win.
18
In a case like this where the company is so out of line, is it even in the OPs interest to respond? I sort of feel that doing so adds some legitimacy to the claim by acknowledging that it exists in the first place.
– Peter M
11 hours ago
Is it possible that besides a desire for repayment, there is also an element of harassment or vindictiveness?
– trognanders
11 hours ago
5
If you were to respond at all, wouldn't it be better to just ask for evidence of a debt and nothing more? The more you say the more chance there is that you'll give them something that'll help them later (like an acknowledgement that training and software licences existed at all) or make a mistake of some kind. And if they don't respond to a question like that, well, maybe that's useful if you live somewhere where courts don't like litigants who refuse to talk to each other first.
– Alex Hayward
9 hours ago
@AlexHayward: Ask for evidence of a debt? Oh, you mean "I am in receipt of a letter in which you have claimed I owe certain sums. Your claim is deficient because it fails to establish: (1) that I agreed to pay for the benefits alleged to have been provided to me, (2) that the benefits actually were provided to me, and (3) the value of the benefits alleged to have been provided. To establish the value of the AutoCAD license, provide copies of invoice, credit card, and bank statement showing completed payment for the license." ? Then turn around and report using a personal license for business.
– Ben Voigt
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
Right. It's a bluff to see if you would pay anyway.
Should I respond that I'm not paying, or just ignore this?
I would respond once and only once with something like:
"Since my employment agreement said nothing about being required to reimburse any training expenses if I left, I will not do so.
The AutoCAD license was installed and remains on a company computer. The computer was returned when I left. I am not responsible for the cost of this license and will not provide any reimbursement."
Then I would not respond to subsequent letters, although I would keep copies of everything.
In the unlikely event you are sued, make sure you have all the relevant facts and copies of all correspondence. I have a hard time imagining they would waste their time doing so, and an even harder time imagining they could win.
I can't seriously be held responsible for this, right?
Right. It's a bluff to see if you would pay anyway.
Should I respond that I'm not paying, or just ignore this?
I would respond once and only once with something like:
"Since my employment agreement said nothing about being required to reimburse any training expenses if I left, I will not do so.
The AutoCAD license was installed and remains on a company computer. The computer was returned when I left. I am not responsible for the cost of this license and will not provide any reimbursement."
Then I would not respond to subsequent letters, although I would keep copies of everything.
In the unlikely event you are sued, make sure you have all the relevant facts and copies of all correspondence. I have a hard time imagining they would waste their time doing so, and an even harder time imagining they could win.
answered 13 hours ago
Joe StrazzereJoe Strazzere
253k1287321043
253k1287321043
18
In a case like this where the company is so out of line, is it even in the OPs interest to respond? I sort of feel that doing so adds some legitimacy to the claim by acknowledging that it exists in the first place.
– Peter M
11 hours ago
Is it possible that besides a desire for repayment, there is also an element of harassment or vindictiveness?
– trognanders
11 hours ago
5
If you were to respond at all, wouldn't it be better to just ask for evidence of a debt and nothing more? The more you say the more chance there is that you'll give them something that'll help them later (like an acknowledgement that training and software licences existed at all) or make a mistake of some kind. And if they don't respond to a question like that, well, maybe that's useful if you live somewhere where courts don't like litigants who refuse to talk to each other first.
– Alex Hayward
9 hours ago
@AlexHayward: Ask for evidence of a debt? Oh, you mean "I am in receipt of a letter in which you have claimed I owe certain sums. Your claim is deficient because it fails to establish: (1) that I agreed to pay for the benefits alleged to have been provided to me, (2) that the benefits actually were provided to me, and (3) the value of the benefits alleged to have been provided. To establish the value of the AutoCAD license, provide copies of invoice, credit card, and bank statement showing completed payment for the license." ? Then turn around and report using a personal license for business.
– Ben Voigt
1 hour ago
add a comment |
18
In a case like this where the company is so out of line, is it even in the OPs interest to respond? I sort of feel that doing so adds some legitimacy to the claim by acknowledging that it exists in the first place.
– Peter M
11 hours ago
Is it possible that besides a desire for repayment, there is also an element of harassment or vindictiveness?
– trognanders
11 hours ago
5
If you were to respond at all, wouldn't it be better to just ask for evidence of a debt and nothing more? The more you say the more chance there is that you'll give them something that'll help them later (like an acknowledgement that training and software licences existed at all) or make a mistake of some kind. And if they don't respond to a question like that, well, maybe that's useful if you live somewhere where courts don't like litigants who refuse to talk to each other first.
– Alex Hayward
9 hours ago
@AlexHayward: Ask for evidence of a debt? Oh, you mean "I am in receipt of a letter in which you have claimed I owe certain sums. Your claim is deficient because it fails to establish: (1) that I agreed to pay for the benefits alleged to have been provided to me, (2) that the benefits actually were provided to me, and (3) the value of the benefits alleged to have been provided. To establish the value of the AutoCAD license, provide copies of invoice, credit card, and bank statement showing completed payment for the license." ? Then turn around and report using a personal license for business.
– Ben Voigt
1 hour ago
18
18
In a case like this where the company is so out of line, is it even in the OPs interest to respond? I sort of feel that doing so adds some legitimacy to the claim by acknowledging that it exists in the first place.
– Peter M
11 hours ago
In a case like this where the company is so out of line, is it even in the OPs interest to respond? I sort of feel that doing so adds some legitimacy to the claim by acknowledging that it exists in the first place.
– Peter M
11 hours ago
Is it possible that besides a desire for repayment, there is also an element of harassment or vindictiveness?
– trognanders
11 hours ago
Is it possible that besides a desire for repayment, there is also an element of harassment or vindictiveness?
– trognanders
11 hours ago
5
5
If you were to respond at all, wouldn't it be better to just ask for evidence of a debt and nothing more? The more you say the more chance there is that you'll give them something that'll help them later (like an acknowledgement that training and software licences existed at all) or make a mistake of some kind. And if they don't respond to a question like that, well, maybe that's useful if you live somewhere where courts don't like litigants who refuse to talk to each other first.
– Alex Hayward
9 hours ago
If you were to respond at all, wouldn't it be better to just ask for evidence of a debt and nothing more? The more you say the more chance there is that you'll give them something that'll help them later (like an acknowledgement that training and software licences existed at all) or make a mistake of some kind. And if they don't respond to a question like that, well, maybe that's useful if you live somewhere where courts don't like litigants who refuse to talk to each other first.
– Alex Hayward
9 hours ago
@AlexHayward: Ask for evidence of a debt? Oh, you mean "I am in receipt of a letter in which you have claimed I owe certain sums. Your claim is deficient because it fails to establish: (1) that I agreed to pay for the benefits alleged to have been provided to me, (2) that the benefits actually were provided to me, and (3) the value of the benefits alleged to have been provided. To establish the value of the AutoCAD license, provide copies of invoice, credit card, and bank statement showing completed payment for the license." ? Then turn around and report using a personal license for business.
– Ben Voigt
1 hour ago
@AlexHayward: Ask for evidence of a debt? Oh, you mean "I am in receipt of a letter in which you have claimed I owe certain sums. Your claim is deficient because it fails to establish: (1) that I agreed to pay for the benefits alleged to have been provided to me, (2) that the benefits actually were provided to me, and (3) the value of the benefits alleged to have been provided. To establish the value of the AutoCAD license, provide copies of invoice, credit card, and bank statement showing completed payment for the license." ? Then turn around and report using a personal license for business.
– Ben Voigt
1 hour ago
add a comment |
You don't have to do a thing, but there are ways to handle it. In some countries like the US, it may be better to stay silent or ask a lawyer (which costs!), because the law can be very harsh and expensive if done wrong. If you're more sure of writing, then you can probably sort this out yourself.
I'll sum up what I'd expect is a good approach, but you may choose to do nothing and "wait and see", or ask a lawyer, in some places.
How the law sees it
When a business enters a contract, it is assumed that they know what they are doing. A private individual often gets more protection, because they often don't. (Which is why consumer and employment law often strongly favour the consumer/employee).
Your company knew when they employed you, that they wanted certain conditions as part of that employment. They knew you could leave on certain terms, and accepted that. In fact, they probably told you what those terms would be. They actually chose them, rhemselves.
When they bought you software, or trained you, they knew you had that right to leave. If they wanted to make training or purchases conditional on you staying, or chargeable if they didn't, then they had every chance in the world to say if that mattered to them. They could have written it in the original contract (it was only 4 months ago so they surely had some idea of what they'd do!). They could have asked you at the time to sign an additional agreement that you wouldn't leave for a year or would repay if you did, in return for this stuff they were about to do. They didn't do any of that, and they had the choice, the ability, and the awareness to do so. So they can't now look to you, to cover up their failure. They knew they had given you a right to leave without repaying, when they did all that, so they can hardly expect you to voluntarily repay if you take them up on the rights they signed with you.
Put differently, every contract carries risk. If you want to not have a risk, you don't agree to contracts that have the risks in them, that you aren't willing to agree to - much less author those contracts. They didn't want to expose themselves to a risk of investing in someone, only to have them leave after 4 months? Then they shouldn't have signed a contract by which they voluntarily put themselves in that position with their employee.
A second way a court will look at it, for the license at least, is to ask if the company actually lost anything. Presumably they hired you because they needed someone to do work that would involve AutoCAD. They surely didn't buy it as a luxury! So presumably that work still exists. So they'll be able to use the license for their next hire.
After all, every employee who walks, could be sued if that basis were valid. You walked out after a week, and your jib was inputting data from invoices? Well, we had to train you, get you a desk and chair, pay for the floor space you took up, pay for a computer and those internal support time you needed from IT to get it working.....
No. Just no. It doesn't work that way.
What to do
As I said, you may choose to wait, or get advice. But if you intended to write, you would want to write in a way that has a high chance of shutting them up :)
I tend to write strongly, and you may not feel comfortable doing so (and it may in fact be very unwise in some countries or situations to do so, or to not get legal advice). I'm also used to UK laws and legal frameworks where writing this way is a pretty safe bet, which might not apply where you are.
But if you did want to write or handle it yourself, and felt it was safe and you were confident to do so, this is roughly what I'd say, so you can pick the key points and use them as you feel best.
Something like this:
"Dear X,
I am in receipt of your letter of Xx March 2019, which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds.
I was employed under a contract. That contract was authored by Y Inc. itself, and the terms were chosen by and agreeable to Y Inc. The contract stated my rights to leave, and what happens when I leave. I attach a copy for your reference.
If you believe that the contract states that I must pay any sums on training or software you bought as an employer, I would appreciate you citing the paragraphs that contain those agreements. You will find no such agreement, of course, which means I do not expect to be troubled by you again on this spurious claim.
Having set out the contractual situation, I now consider this matter permanently closed. I reserve all of my rights to consider any further attempt to seek payment of this kind, or other adverse action taken in lieu, as likely to be an extortion attempt or other illegal action, and reserve my rights to seek any combination of legal advice, compensation or to report it as a police matter. I may also choose to ignore unfounded claims, if any.
Kindly do not write again.
Signed, Z."
[The "other adverse action" and "other illegal action" is in case they try to blacken your name or make harmful claims in revenge, which some might consider. But I haven't said that explicitly since we don't need to give them foolish ideas. Also note the thin line in defamation law - it is usually very safe to say "It looks to me like X", because that's a true statement of honestly held opinion, but it's much less safe to say "it is X", which claims a true statement absolutely]
IMHO stating "which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds" is both unnecessary and potentially damaging to the OP as it is pure speculation and will only act to aggravate the ex-company - even though you have a disclaimer. Personally I would leave out all speculation and only state provable facts.
– Peter M
5 hours ago
This, or ignoring it, are the only correct responses. These people are assholes and need to be told off, without actually using the word "asshole". @PeterM - "looks to me" is the clause that gets you out of jail here. You don't make a factual claim, you report your interpretation.
– Tom
3 hours ago
add a comment |
You don't have to do a thing, but there are ways to handle it. In some countries like the US, it may be better to stay silent or ask a lawyer (which costs!), because the law can be very harsh and expensive if done wrong. If you're more sure of writing, then you can probably sort this out yourself.
I'll sum up what I'd expect is a good approach, but you may choose to do nothing and "wait and see", or ask a lawyer, in some places.
How the law sees it
When a business enters a contract, it is assumed that they know what they are doing. A private individual often gets more protection, because they often don't. (Which is why consumer and employment law often strongly favour the consumer/employee).
Your company knew when they employed you, that they wanted certain conditions as part of that employment. They knew you could leave on certain terms, and accepted that. In fact, they probably told you what those terms would be. They actually chose them, rhemselves.
When they bought you software, or trained you, they knew you had that right to leave. If they wanted to make training or purchases conditional on you staying, or chargeable if they didn't, then they had every chance in the world to say if that mattered to them. They could have written it in the original contract (it was only 4 months ago so they surely had some idea of what they'd do!). They could have asked you at the time to sign an additional agreement that you wouldn't leave for a year or would repay if you did, in return for this stuff they were about to do. They didn't do any of that, and they had the choice, the ability, and the awareness to do so. So they can't now look to you, to cover up their failure. They knew they had given you a right to leave without repaying, when they did all that, so they can hardly expect you to voluntarily repay if you take them up on the rights they signed with you.
Put differently, every contract carries risk. If you want to not have a risk, you don't agree to contracts that have the risks in them, that you aren't willing to agree to - much less author those contracts. They didn't want to expose themselves to a risk of investing in someone, only to have them leave after 4 months? Then they shouldn't have signed a contract by which they voluntarily put themselves in that position with their employee.
A second way a court will look at it, for the license at least, is to ask if the company actually lost anything. Presumably they hired you because they needed someone to do work that would involve AutoCAD. They surely didn't buy it as a luxury! So presumably that work still exists. So they'll be able to use the license for their next hire.
After all, every employee who walks, could be sued if that basis were valid. You walked out after a week, and your jib was inputting data from invoices? Well, we had to train you, get you a desk and chair, pay for the floor space you took up, pay for a computer and those internal support time you needed from IT to get it working.....
No. Just no. It doesn't work that way.
What to do
As I said, you may choose to wait, or get advice. But if you intended to write, you would want to write in a way that has a high chance of shutting them up :)
I tend to write strongly, and you may not feel comfortable doing so (and it may in fact be very unwise in some countries or situations to do so, or to not get legal advice). I'm also used to UK laws and legal frameworks where writing this way is a pretty safe bet, which might not apply where you are.
But if you did want to write or handle it yourself, and felt it was safe and you were confident to do so, this is roughly what I'd say, so you can pick the key points and use them as you feel best.
Something like this:
"Dear X,
I am in receipt of your letter of Xx March 2019, which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds.
I was employed under a contract. That contract was authored by Y Inc. itself, and the terms were chosen by and agreeable to Y Inc. The contract stated my rights to leave, and what happens when I leave. I attach a copy for your reference.
If you believe that the contract states that I must pay any sums on training or software you bought as an employer, I would appreciate you citing the paragraphs that contain those agreements. You will find no such agreement, of course, which means I do not expect to be troubled by you again on this spurious claim.
Having set out the contractual situation, I now consider this matter permanently closed. I reserve all of my rights to consider any further attempt to seek payment of this kind, or other adverse action taken in lieu, as likely to be an extortion attempt or other illegal action, and reserve my rights to seek any combination of legal advice, compensation or to report it as a police matter. I may also choose to ignore unfounded claims, if any.
Kindly do not write again.
Signed, Z."
[The "other adverse action" and "other illegal action" is in case they try to blacken your name or make harmful claims in revenge, which some might consider. But I haven't said that explicitly since we don't need to give them foolish ideas. Also note the thin line in defamation law - it is usually very safe to say "It looks to me like X", because that's a true statement of honestly held opinion, but it's much less safe to say "it is X", which claims a true statement absolutely]
IMHO stating "which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds" is both unnecessary and potentially damaging to the OP as it is pure speculation and will only act to aggravate the ex-company - even though you have a disclaimer. Personally I would leave out all speculation and only state provable facts.
– Peter M
5 hours ago
This, or ignoring it, are the only correct responses. These people are assholes and need to be told off, without actually using the word "asshole". @PeterM - "looks to me" is the clause that gets you out of jail here. You don't make a factual claim, you report your interpretation.
– Tom
3 hours ago
add a comment |
You don't have to do a thing, but there are ways to handle it. In some countries like the US, it may be better to stay silent or ask a lawyer (which costs!), because the law can be very harsh and expensive if done wrong. If you're more sure of writing, then you can probably sort this out yourself.
I'll sum up what I'd expect is a good approach, but you may choose to do nothing and "wait and see", or ask a lawyer, in some places.
How the law sees it
When a business enters a contract, it is assumed that they know what they are doing. A private individual often gets more protection, because they often don't. (Which is why consumer and employment law often strongly favour the consumer/employee).
Your company knew when they employed you, that they wanted certain conditions as part of that employment. They knew you could leave on certain terms, and accepted that. In fact, they probably told you what those terms would be. They actually chose them, rhemselves.
When they bought you software, or trained you, they knew you had that right to leave. If they wanted to make training or purchases conditional on you staying, or chargeable if they didn't, then they had every chance in the world to say if that mattered to them. They could have written it in the original contract (it was only 4 months ago so they surely had some idea of what they'd do!). They could have asked you at the time to sign an additional agreement that you wouldn't leave for a year or would repay if you did, in return for this stuff they were about to do. They didn't do any of that, and they had the choice, the ability, and the awareness to do so. So they can't now look to you, to cover up their failure. They knew they had given you a right to leave without repaying, when they did all that, so they can hardly expect you to voluntarily repay if you take them up on the rights they signed with you.
Put differently, every contract carries risk. If you want to not have a risk, you don't agree to contracts that have the risks in them, that you aren't willing to agree to - much less author those contracts. They didn't want to expose themselves to a risk of investing in someone, only to have them leave after 4 months? Then they shouldn't have signed a contract by which they voluntarily put themselves in that position with their employee.
A second way a court will look at it, for the license at least, is to ask if the company actually lost anything. Presumably they hired you because they needed someone to do work that would involve AutoCAD. They surely didn't buy it as a luxury! So presumably that work still exists. So they'll be able to use the license for their next hire.
After all, every employee who walks, could be sued if that basis were valid. You walked out after a week, and your jib was inputting data from invoices? Well, we had to train you, get you a desk and chair, pay for the floor space you took up, pay for a computer and those internal support time you needed from IT to get it working.....
No. Just no. It doesn't work that way.
What to do
As I said, you may choose to wait, or get advice. But if you intended to write, you would want to write in a way that has a high chance of shutting them up :)
I tend to write strongly, and you may not feel comfortable doing so (and it may in fact be very unwise in some countries or situations to do so, or to not get legal advice). I'm also used to UK laws and legal frameworks where writing this way is a pretty safe bet, which might not apply where you are.
But if you did want to write or handle it yourself, and felt it was safe and you were confident to do so, this is roughly what I'd say, so you can pick the key points and use them as you feel best.
Something like this:
"Dear X,
I am in receipt of your letter of Xx March 2019, which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds.
I was employed under a contract. That contract was authored by Y Inc. itself, and the terms were chosen by and agreeable to Y Inc. The contract stated my rights to leave, and what happens when I leave. I attach a copy for your reference.
If you believe that the contract states that I must pay any sums on training or software you bought as an employer, I would appreciate you citing the paragraphs that contain those agreements. You will find no such agreement, of course, which means I do not expect to be troubled by you again on this spurious claim.
Having set out the contractual situation, I now consider this matter permanently closed. I reserve all of my rights to consider any further attempt to seek payment of this kind, or other adverse action taken in lieu, as likely to be an extortion attempt or other illegal action, and reserve my rights to seek any combination of legal advice, compensation or to report it as a police matter. I may also choose to ignore unfounded claims, if any.
Kindly do not write again.
Signed, Z."
[The "other adverse action" and "other illegal action" is in case they try to blacken your name or make harmful claims in revenge, which some might consider. But I haven't said that explicitly since we don't need to give them foolish ideas. Also note the thin line in defamation law - it is usually very safe to say "It looks to me like X", because that's a true statement of honestly held opinion, but it's much less safe to say "it is X", which claims a true statement absolutely]
You don't have to do a thing, but there are ways to handle it. In some countries like the US, it may be better to stay silent or ask a lawyer (which costs!), because the law can be very harsh and expensive if done wrong. If you're more sure of writing, then you can probably sort this out yourself.
I'll sum up what I'd expect is a good approach, but you may choose to do nothing and "wait and see", or ask a lawyer, in some places.
How the law sees it
When a business enters a contract, it is assumed that they know what they are doing. A private individual often gets more protection, because they often don't. (Which is why consumer and employment law often strongly favour the consumer/employee).
Your company knew when they employed you, that they wanted certain conditions as part of that employment. They knew you could leave on certain terms, and accepted that. In fact, they probably told you what those terms would be. They actually chose them, rhemselves.
When they bought you software, or trained you, they knew you had that right to leave. If they wanted to make training or purchases conditional on you staying, or chargeable if they didn't, then they had every chance in the world to say if that mattered to them. They could have written it in the original contract (it was only 4 months ago so they surely had some idea of what they'd do!). They could have asked you at the time to sign an additional agreement that you wouldn't leave for a year or would repay if you did, in return for this stuff they were about to do. They didn't do any of that, and they had the choice, the ability, and the awareness to do so. So they can't now look to you, to cover up their failure. They knew they had given you a right to leave without repaying, when they did all that, so they can hardly expect you to voluntarily repay if you take them up on the rights they signed with you.
Put differently, every contract carries risk. If you want to not have a risk, you don't agree to contracts that have the risks in them, that you aren't willing to agree to - much less author those contracts. They didn't want to expose themselves to a risk of investing in someone, only to have them leave after 4 months? Then they shouldn't have signed a contract by which they voluntarily put themselves in that position with their employee.
A second way a court will look at it, for the license at least, is to ask if the company actually lost anything. Presumably they hired you because they needed someone to do work that would involve AutoCAD. They surely didn't buy it as a luxury! So presumably that work still exists. So they'll be able to use the license for their next hire.
After all, every employee who walks, could be sued if that basis were valid. You walked out after a week, and your jib was inputting data from invoices? Well, we had to train you, get you a desk and chair, pay for the floor space you took up, pay for a computer and those internal support time you needed from IT to get it working.....
No. Just no. It doesn't work that way.
What to do
As I said, you may choose to wait, or get advice. But if you intended to write, you would want to write in a way that has a high chance of shutting them up :)
I tend to write strongly, and you may not feel comfortable doing so (and it may in fact be very unwise in some countries or situations to do so, or to not get legal advice). I'm also used to UK laws and legal frameworks where writing this way is a pretty safe bet, which might not apply where you are.
But if you did want to write or handle it yourself, and felt it was safe and you were confident to do so, this is roughly what I'd say, so you can pick the key points and use them as you feel best.
Something like this:
"Dear X,
I am in receipt of your letter of Xx March 2019, which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds.
I was employed under a contract. That contract was authored by Y Inc. itself, and the terms were chosen by and agreeable to Y Inc. The contract stated my rights to leave, and what happens when I leave. I attach a copy for your reference.
If you believe that the contract states that I must pay any sums on training or software you bought as an employer, I would appreciate you citing the paragraphs that contain those agreements. You will find no such agreement, of course, which means I do not expect to be troubled by you again on this spurious claim.
Having set out the contractual situation, I now consider this matter permanently closed. I reserve all of my rights to consider any further attempt to seek payment of this kind, or other adverse action taken in lieu, as likely to be an extortion attempt or other illegal action, and reserve my rights to seek any combination of legal advice, compensation or to report it as a police matter. I may also choose to ignore unfounded claims, if any.
Kindly do not write again.
Signed, Z."
[The "other adverse action" and "other illegal action" is in case they try to blacken your name or make harmful claims in revenge, which some might consider. But I haven't said that explicitly since we don't need to give them foolish ideas. Also note the thin line in defamation law - it is usually very safe to say "It looks to me like X", because that's a true statement of honestly held opinion, but it's much less safe to say "it is X", which claims a true statement absolutely]
edited 5 hours ago
answered 5 hours ago
StilezStilez
2,4051413
2,4051413
IMHO stating "which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds" is both unnecessary and potentially damaging to the OP as it is pure speculation and will only act to aggravate the ex-company - even though you have a disclaimer. Personally I would leave out all speculation and only state provable facts.
– Peter M
5 hours ago
This, or ignoring it, are the only correct responses. These people are assholes and need to be told off, without actually using the word "asshole". @PeterM - "looks to me" is the clause that gets you out of jail here. You don't make a factual claim, you report your interpretation.
– Tom
3 hours ago
add a comment |
IMHO stating "which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds" is both unnecessary and potentially damaging to the OP as it is pure speculation and will only act to aggravate the ex-company - even though you have a disclaimer. Personally I would leave out all speculation and only state provable facts.
– Peter M
5 hours ago
This, or ignoring it, are the only correct responses. These people are assholes and need to be told off, without actually using the word "asshole". @PeterM - "looks to me" is the clause that gets you out of jail here. You don't make a factual claim, you report your interpretation.
– Tom
3 hours ago
IMHO stating "which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds" is both unnecessary and potentially damaging to the OP as it is pure speculation and will only act to aggravate the ex-company - even though you have a disclaimer. Personally I would leave out all speculation and only state provable facts.
– Peter M
5 hours ago
IMHO stating "which looks to me like a simple attempt to extort money without good grounds" is both unnecessary and potentially damaging to the OP as it is pure speculation and will only act to aggravate the ex-company - even though you have a disclaimer. Personally I would leave out all speculation and only state provable facts.
– Peter M
5 hours ago
This, or ignoring it, are the only correct responses. These people are assholes and need to be told off, without actually using the word "asshole". @PeterM - "looks to me" is the clause that gets you out of jail here. You don't make a factual claim, you report your interpretation.
– Tom
3 hours ago
This, or ignoring it, are the only correct responses. These people are assholes and need to be told off, without actually using the word "asshole". @PeterM - "looks to me" is the clause that gets you out of jail here. You don't make a factual claim, you report your interpretation.
– Tom
3 hours ago
add a comment |
If you have no documentation stating that you owe them this money (in your contract/employment agreement/etc), then tell them as such: "I never agreed to this, go shove it" (depending on how you feel about this company, I might be tempted to use those exact words) and do not respond to any further communique. If they continue to "shout into the void", as it were, you may want to contact a lawyer regarding harassment.
If you feel like being extra cheeky though, you may want to suggest, at least, if you have to pay $1500 for the AutoCAD subscription, then it should be your property. Issue them a notice to have your AutoCAD license transferred to you on threat of a lawsuit for stolen property, and see what they say. Of course, this is likely to not work out in the way you hope it will, so only do it if you feel like being cheeky and having some fun with a possible potential downside cost down the road. I don't actually recommend doing this, I just think it would be funny to hear their response.
15
I think this advice is entertaining, but so so unprofessional. Be better than them (i.e. not a child). If you're going to stop responding to them after telling them to "shove it", then just don't respond to begin with. What do you aim to gain by starting a confrontation? Same with the AutoCAD license - so you ask them to transfer the license to you and they agree. Now what? You are still out $1500.
– Catsunami
14 hours ago
Agreed cheeky is all but never the professional answer. There is some professional merit though in the concept that if they expect someone to pay for resources they purchased for them, those resources must be transferred or at minimum prorated back for the unusable portion.
– John Spiegel
14 hours ago
12
Yeah, the AutoCAD thing in particular is horrible advice. If the boss wants to screw you over, they'll instantly agree. Suddenly, you went from "Not legally required to pay anything" to "Agreeing to buy an instance of AutoCAD for $1500 that you weren't planning on." After all, it doesn't cost the boss anything to take your $1500 and just buy another license.
– Kevin
11 hours ago
@Kevin I agree that that is horrible advice. As a CAD administrator, though, it would be really difficult and painstaking to transfer a license. While you can give anyone a product key, it is tied to a contract - a contract that likely has multiple Autodesk licenses. To really transfer ownership would probably involve direct assistance from Autodesk... good luck with that.
– Evan Elrod
11 hours ago
add a comment |
If you have no documentation stating that you owe them this money (in your contract/employment agreement/etc), then tell them as such: "I never agreed to this, go shove it" (depending on how you feel about this company, I might be tempted to use those exact words) and do not respond to any further communique. If they continue to "shout into the void", as it were, you may want to contact a lawyer regarding harassment.
If you feel like being extra cheeky though, you may want to suggest, at least, if you have to pay $1500 for the AutoCAD subscription, then it should be your property. Issue them a notice to have your AutoCAD license transferred to you on threat of a lawsuit for stolen property, and see what they say. Of course, this is likely to not work out in the way you hope it will, so only do it if you feel like being cheeky and having some fun with a possible potential downside cost down the road. I don't actually recommend doing this, I just think it would be funny to hear their response.
15
I think this advice is entertaining, but so so unprofessional. Be better than them (i.e. not a child). If you're going to stop responding to them after telling them to "shove it", then just don't respond to begin with. What do you aim to gain by starting a confrontation? Same with the AutoCAD license - so you ask them to transfer the license to you and they agree. Now what? You are still out $1500.
– Catsunami
14 hours ago
Agreed cheeky is all but never the professional answer. There is some professional merit though in the concept that if they expect someone to pay for resources they purchased for them, those resources must be transferred or at minimum prorated back for the unusable portion.
– John Spiegel
14 hours ago
12
Yeah, the AutoCAD thing in particular is horrible advice. If the boss wants to screw you over, they'll instantly agree. Suddenly, you went from "Not legally required to pay anything" to "Agreeing to buy an instance of AutoCAD for $1500 that you weren't planning on." After all, it doesn't cost the boss anything to take your $1500 and just buy another license.
– Kevin
11 hours ago
@Kevin I agree that that is horrible advice. As a CAD administrator, though, it would be really difficult and painstaking to transfer a license. While you can give anyone a product key, it is tied to a contract - a contract that likely has multiple Autodesk licenses. To really transfer ownership would probably involve direct assistance from Autodesk... good luck with that.
– Evan Elrod
11 hours ago
add a comment |
If you have no documentation stating that you owe them this money (in your contract/employment agreement/etc), then tell them as such: "I never agreed to this, go shove it" (depending on how you feel about this company, I might be tempted to use those exact words) and do not respond to any further communique. If they continue to "shout into the void", as it were, you may want to contact a lawyer regarding harassment.
If you feel like being extra cheeky though, you may want to suggest, at least, if you have to pay $1500 for the AutoCAD subscription, then it should be your property. Issue them a notice to have your AutoCAD license transferred to you on threat of a lawsuit for stolen property, and see what they say. Of course, this is likely to not work out in the way you hope it will, so only do it if you feel like being cheeky and having some fun with a possible potential downside cost down the road. I don't actually recommend doing this, I just think it would be funny to hear their response.
If you have no documentation stating that you owe them this money (in your contract/employment agreement/etc), then tell them as such: "I never agreed to this, go shove it" (depending on how you feel about this company, I might be tempted to use those exact words) and do not respond to any further communique. If they continue to "shout into the void", as it were, you may want to contact a lawyer regarding harassment.
If you feel like being extra cheeky though, you may want to suggest, at least, if you have to pay $1500 for the AutoCAD subscription, then it should be your property. Issue them a notice to have your AutoCAD license transferred to you on threat of a lawsuit for stolen property, and see what they say. Of course, this is likely to not work out in the way you hope it will, so only do it if you feel like being cheeky and having some fun with a possible potential downside cost down the road. I don't actually recommend doing this, I just think it would be funny to hear their response.
answered 15 hours ago
Ertai87Ertai87
11.9k31534
11.9k31534
15
I think this advice is entertaining, but so so unprofessional. Be better than them (i.e. not a child). If you're going to stop responding to them after telling them to "shove it", then just don't respond to begin with. What do you aim to gain by starting a confrontation? Same with the AutoCAD license - so you ask them to transfer the license to you and they agree. Now what? You are still out $1500.
– Catsunami
14 hours ago
Agreed cheeky is all but never the professional answer. There is some professional merit though in the concept that if they expect someone to pay for resources they purchased for them, those resources must be transferred or at minimum prorated back for the unusable portion.
– John Spiegel
14 hours ago
12
Yeah, the AutoCAD thing in particular is horrible advice. If the boss wants to screw you over, they'll instantly agree. Suddenly, you went from "Not legally required to pay anything" to "Agreeing to buy an instance of AutoCAD for $1500 that you weren't planning on." After all, it doesn't cost the boss anything to take your $1500 and just buy another license.
– Kevin
11 hours ago
@Kevin I agree that that is horrible advice. As a CAD administrator, though, it would be really difficult and painstaking to transfer a license. While you can give anyone a product key, it is tied to a contract - a contract that likely has multiple Autodesk licenses. To really transfer ownership would probably involve direct assistance from Autodesk... good luck with that.
– Evan Elrod
11 hours ago
add a comment |
15
I think this advice is entertaining, but so so unprofessional. Be better than them (i.e. not a child). If you're going to stop responding to them after telling them to "shove it", then just don't respond to begin with. What do you aim to gain by starting a confrontation? Same with the AutoCAD license - so you ask them to transfer the license to you and they agree. Now what? You are still out $1500.
– Catsunami
14 hours ago
Agreed cheeky is all but never the professional answer. There is some professional merit though in the concept that if they expect someone to pay for resources they purchased for them, those resources must be transferred or at minimum prorated back for the unusable portion.
– John Spiegel
14 hours ago
12
Yeah, the AutoCAD thing in particular is horrible advice. If the boss wants to screw you over, they'll instantly agree. Suddenly, you went from "Not legally required to pay anything" to "Agreeing to buy an instance of AutoCAD for $1500 that you weren't planning on." After all, it doesn't cost the boss anything to take your $1500 and just buy another license.
– Kevin
11 hours ago
@Kevin I agree that that is horrible advice. As a CAD administrator, though, it would be really difficult and painstaking to transfer a license. While you can give anyone a product key, it is tied to a contract - a contract that likely has multiple Autodesk licenses. To really transfer ownership would probably involve direct assistance from Autodesk... good luck with that.
– Evan Elrod
11 hours ago
15
15
I think this advice is entertaining, but so so unprofessional. Be better than them (i.e. not a child). If you're going to stop responding to them after telling them to "shove it", then just don't respond to begin with. What do you aim to gain by starting a confrontation? Same with the AutoCAD license - so you ask them to transfer the license to you and they agree. Now what? You are still out $1500.
– Catsunami
14 hours ago
I think this advice is entertaining, but so so unprofessional. Be better than them (i.e. not a child). If you're going to stop responding to them after telling them to "shove it", then just don't respond to begin with. What do you aim to gain by starting a confrontation? Same with the AutoCAD license - so you ask them to transfer the license to you and they agree. Now what? You are still out $1500.
– Catsunami
14 hours ago
Agreed cheeky is all but never the professional answer. There is some professional merit though in the concept that if they expect someone to pay for resources they purchased for them, those resources must be transferred or at minimum prorated back for the unusable portion.
– John Spiegel
14 hours ago
Agreed cheeky is all but never the professional answer. There is some professional merit though in the concept that if they expect someone to pay for resources they purchased for them, those resources must be transferred or at minimum prorated back for the unusable portion.
– John Spiegel
14 hours ago
12
12
Yeah, the AutoCAD thing in particular is horrible advice. If the boss wants to screw you over, they'll instantly agree. Suddenly, you went from "Not legally required to pay anything" to "Agreeing to buy an instance of AutoCAD for $1500 that you weren't planning on." After all, it doesn't cost the boss anything to take your $1500 and just buy another license.
– Kevin
11 hours ago
Yeah, the AutoCAD thing in particular is horrible advice. If the boss wants to screw you over, they'll instantly agree. Suddenly, you went from "Not legally required to pay anything" to "Agreeing to buy an instance of AutoCAD for $1500 that you weren't planning on." After all, it doesn't cost the boss anything to take your $1500 and just buy another license.
– Kevin
11 hours ago
@Kevin I agree that that is horrible advice. As a CAD administrator, though, it would be really difficult and painstaking to transfer a license. While you can give anyone a product key, it is tied to a contract - a contract that likely has multiple Autodesk licenses. To really transfer ownership would probably involve direct assistance from Autodesk... good luck with that.
– Evan Elrod
11 hours ago
@Kevin I agree that that is horrible advice. As a CAD administrator, though, it would be really difficult and painstaking to transfer a license. While you can give anyone a product key, it is tied to a contract - a contract that likely has multiple Autodesk licenses. To really transfer ownership would probably involve direct assistance from Autodesk... good luck with that.
– Evan Elrod
11 hours ago
add a comment |
outerviewer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
outerviewer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
outerviewer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
outerviewer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f132898%2freceived-an-invoice-from-my-ex-employer-billing-me-for-training-how-to-handle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
86
Actually this sounds like just one more thing to add to your list of "awful things about the organization."
– shoover
15 hours ago
23
Can you add a country tag?
– ventsyv
12 hours ago
3
It would really help if you mentioned what country you're in, since laws differ.
– jamesqf
12 hours ago
4
@donjuedo Filing a lawsuit would require the OP to take actions that would cost time and/or money before being dismissed by the judge. It's better that the OP forces his ex-company to take on those expenses for the same result (assuming that they even take it that far)
– Peter M
11 hours ago
7
My standard law of legal advice: The only legal advice you can trust from anyone is "get a lawyer" - this includes strangers, friends, family, on the internet, at the cafe, on the train, and in the lobby of a lawyer's office.
– corsiKa
7 hours ago