Fired for using the company phone... old boss says it was fraud

Keano

Have a friend who recently got fired from their job. The reason given was excessive use of the company phone. They were not in the job that long and had made €30 worth off personal calls in a 3 week period. They were told they would have to cough up which they did. Silly thing to do and harsh lesson learnt but in order to receive payment protection on her loan they needed old employer to explain the reason for their dismissal. He put down fraud and now they bank are not going to give her payment protection (t&c's).

Is it really fraud to use a company phone?

leeroybrown

I think that she definitely needs to talk to a solicitor about this. The company are essentially making what sounds like an unsubstantiated allegation that she committed an offence covered under criminal law. Also, under criminal law it may well be the case that what she did couldn't be classed as fraud.

Personally, I don't think it's fraud and I don't think that the employer are in a position to accuse her of it but the only advice I'll give is for her to contact a solicitor.

AARRRGH

Keano A Legend wrote: »

...in order to receive payment protection on her loan...

Slightly OT, but people nearly never receive payment protection when they lose their job, even when everything seems in order. For example, if there is *any* job they could do, or if their husband/wife has a job, it is refused.

So just get the loan without the payment protection.

Keano

AARRRGH wrote: »

Slightly OT, but people nearly never receive payment protection when they lose their job, even when everything seems in order. For example, if there is *any* job they could do, or if their husband/wife has a job, it is refused.

So just get the loan without the payment protection.

But what happens if you cant meet the monthly payments?

AARRRGH

Keano A Legend wrote: »

But what happens if you cant meet the monthly payments?

You get a bad credit rating...

Jo King

leeroybrown wrote: »

I think that she definitely needs to talk to a solicitor about this. The company are essentially making what sounds like an unsubstantiated allegation that she committed an offence covered under criminal law. Also, under criminal law it may well be the case that what she did couldn't be classed as fraud.

Personally, I don't think it's fraud and I don't think that the employer are in a position to accuse her of it but the only advice I'll give is for her to contact a solicitor.

If an employee is talking to their friends on the phone when they are supposed to be working for the company it may well be a fraud on the employer.A lot depends on whether the company has a policy on phone calls, the number of calls and their duration. Not alone is there the cost of the calls but the cost of the time involved. If the employee actively attempted to cover up what they were doing it would certainly be fraud.

leeroybrown

Thanks for the clarification Jo King. That said, if I were in that position I wouldn't be willing to accept an allegation of fraud unless the employer was willing to take it further.

Shelflife

Technically its fraud , purporting to do one thing while doing another.

in this case if your friend spent an hour on the phone chatting to friends and then claimed payment for working for that hour , then that is fraud.

using company property for personal gain would be theft/fraud as well.

its stretching it a bit but fraud it is.

Godge

Unless a disciplinary procedure was used properly to fire her with that charge as the main reason, the company cannot state that she was dismissed for fraud. Pity she was there less than a year as the EAT wouldn't stand for that sort of dismissal without procedure.

Best bet would be a solicitor's letter warning them to desist from unsubstantiated allegations.

Godge

Another point that employers fall down on time and again is the lack of a clear telephone usage policy. Without her having been informed of company policy and then breaking it, they wouldn't have a leg to stand on. And if she paid up promptly when challenged, a warning would be considered sufficient.

Shelflife

Godge, if she used the phone for personal use and didnt pay for that cost straight away then that is theft (again its stretching the point) but theft would be an instant dismissal situation.

but as you said a warning would usually suffice. in most cases id imagine it would be not working when they should as opposed to the actual cost of the calls.

leeroybrown

The issue of warning or dismissal is largely irrelevant. Since they hadn't been employed too long the employer could get rid of them fairly easily which they did. The real issue is that the former employer is essentially making allegations of a criminal offence to third parties. If I went around accusing someone of fraud where a criminal offence hadn't been proven I'd expect to get in hot water for it eventually.

mountainyman

Godge wrote: »

Best bet would be a solicitor's letter warning them to desist from unsubstantiated allegations.

Why send the letter. Your friend has been libelled and the remedy is compensation.

mountainyman

Shelflife wrote: »

Godge, if she used the phone for personal use and didnt pay for that cost straight away then that is theft (again its stretching the point) but theft would be an instant dismissal situation.

but as you said a warning would usually suffice. in most cases id imagine it would be not working when they should as opposed to the actual cost of the calls.

No it is neither theft nor fraud. At most it is contrary to a written policy document signed by the OP on telephone usage. No usch document exists. Reasonable use of the work phone is always allowed. The definition of reasonable varies from workplace to workplace.

The OP should sue for libel.

Shelflife

mountainyman wrote: »

No it is neither theft nor fraud. At most it is contrary to a written policy document signed by the OP on telephone usage. No usch document exists. Reasonable use of the work phone is always allowed. The definition of reasonable varies from workplace to workplace.

The OP should sue for libel.

If you take something without permission, it is theft pure and simple. if that is the reason she was fired then it is a fact and therefore not libel.

if i was to take your phone and use all your credit without your permission then that is theft. if you told someone that i stole your credit then that is a fact and not libel.

Godge

Shelflife wrote: »

If you take something without permission, it is theft pure and simple. if that is the reason she was fired then it is a fact and therefore not libel.

if i was to take your phone and use all your credit without your permission then that is theft. if you told someone that i stole your credit then that is a fact and not libel.

i would be with mountainyman on this. Generally most companies have a phone usage policy. OP needs to check this.

Some employers have all-in deals with phone companies where all calls to mobiles and landlines in Ireland are covered by a flat charge. In those cases, calling a mobile shouldn't be a problem. A premium service is a different matter.

LegacyUser

Technically it is fraud. Besides €10 a week in the first few weeks of a new job is alot of calls! (its only about 20c/min to ring a mobile) I started a new job recently and I wont even go onto a webpage unrelated to work until I get a good feeling for what is acceptable practice in the company!

Having said that I would challenge the company on it. (I also wouldnt get payment protection as its just a money making racket that in most cases doesnt give much extra protection anyway. Just spread the loan over a longer period if your afraid of missing payments)

InReality

The point is theft and fraud are legal terms. The OP would have had to be found guilty in a court. Everyday definitions of what theft is, are not relevant - as was pointed out earlier in the thread !

A company would never claim a high-paid CEO was guilty of fraud, if he/she abused a phone privilege , they would be sued for millions in libel damages.

Jo King

Most phone policies are an urgent local call may be made and long distance calls ( including mobile) can be made with prior approval. There was a average of €2 per day in this case. That goes far beyond an urgent local call or two a day. It is clear that the employee was either making long distance calls or was spending a lot of time on local calls. She would be an idiot to try and sue for defamation. He would be able to plead justification in his defence. It appears tp me that the employee was a dosser and the boss got fed up of her. Most would have given the employee a chance after the money was paid back. Most would have said something milder on the form if they liked the employee at all.

IsThatSo?

The point is that they should not have used the word "fraud". They could have said too much time on the phone, or not motivated, or a lot of other things, but fraud is an accusation that can't just be bandied about. These things stick!!!

The person paid for the calls and possibly made them in lunch hour (which is unpaid)........................

I would not let that go myself, I would contact my Solicitor. What happens if this person wants a reference for another job???

Jo King

IsThatSo? wrote: »

The point is that they should not have used the word "fraud". They could have said too much time on the phone, or not motivated, or a lot of other things, but fraud is an accusation that can't just be bandied about. These things stick!!!

The person paid for the calls and possibly made them in lunch hour (which is unpaid)........................

I would not let that go myself, I would contact my Solicitor. What happens if this person wants a reference for another job???

Without seeing the details of the calls ie times frequency and duration and any phone use policy in place there is no knowing whether the use of the word fraud is justified or not. Are you seriously suggesting someone ran up a bill of €2 per day on local calls during lunchtime. The reality is the there were probably calls at all times of the day to numbers, chatting to friends, booking holidays etc. It sounds to me like there is one very pissed off employer. A solicitor will charge several hundred euro for a consultation that may well go nowhere.