contract-law human-rights payment netherlands
What are my rights if my boss paid me 600 euro too much for 2 years long?
<p>My little brother, lets call him A for now, came to me today and said his boss, call him B, came to him and said that he (B) had been paying him (A) 600 euro too much for 2 years long. Ofcourse B wants the money back but he is not sure yet how and will come back to A after talking with the money manager (I guess accountant). A does not want to pay 14.400 euro at once, and getting paid 600 less each month for 2 years will bring him bankrupt (though we could probably figure some things out).</p>
<p>My question is: What are A his rights? Does he <em>have</em> to pay the money back? Must it be all at once? All the two years? And what happens if he leaves the company right now? Is he even able to?</p>
<p><strong>Some details about A and B and how this happened:</strong></p>
<p>A started working for B almost 3 years ago (he was 16). 2 years ago some software of B its company, that made sure payments happen automatically, stopped. But the payments did not (idk how exactly this happened or worked). The idea was that B pre-paid A (and all other employees) 150 each week. And substracted in week 4 the 600 (4 weeks * 150) from the monthly wage. Because B it's company stopped the software something went wrong and did not substract this 600 for 2 years. A is the only employee this happened to, A says. The company falls within the <a href="https://www.fnv.nl/cao-sector/bouwen-wonen/bouw-infra/cao-bouw-infra" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Bouw &amp; Infra CAO</a>.</p>
<p><strong>A works in the Netherlands, therefore I would like an answer about the rights in NL.</strong></p>
<p><strong>As reply to comment:</strong></p>
<p>I dont know how much A has been spending. Though he told me he could technically pay it. So he has 15k. To be clear btw, A never knew he got paid too much, he really didn't. He does not check those things.</p>
<p>A should have been receiving his normal month wage each month minus the 600. Because the 600 is already paid each week within the month (4 / 600 = 150 a week paid). What he got is his normal monthly wage + the 600. They never substracted it.</p>
<p>&quot;loan&quot;? Sorry bad translation on my part, corrected it. It means wage/wages.</p>
<p><strong>What happened on payslip:</strong>
Normally what should happen is A his normal wage should be shown as pay-out but also -600 &quot;pre-paid&quot; should be shown. What actually was shown on the payslip was the normal wage without the -600 pre-paid. Making it look like a normal payslip.</p>
<p><strong>How A and B in the end handled the situation:</strong>
A and B agreed to each pay 1/3 of the money. So A pays back 1/3 of the money. B pays 2/3 and the accountant of B pays 3/3. I don't know why exactly the accountant pays 3/3.</p>

<p>It also depends on the state of mind. If your brother's salary was €4,000 a month, but €4,600 was paid <em>and your brother believed that was the correct salary</em>, then he would have relied on that. He wouldn't have asked for a raise because he was happy with the salary. He wouldn't have left for another job paying €4,600 because he would have believed that isn't an improvement.</p>
<p>So if the company made your brother believe that the salary was €4,600 a month, they are very much at fault as well. They didn't just hand over the cash, your brother would also have received a payslip. And the payslip is an official document, that you would have used to calculate your taxes for example, that you need to be able to rely on. If I had to check what my salary is, the payslip would have been what I refer to.</p>
<p>It would be a different situation if the money he was owed according to the payslip and the money being paid into his bank account were different. It may be different if the payment suddenly went up for no reason.</p>
<p>If this is what his payslip says: He should tell the boss that he remembers quite clearly negotiating for the higher salary. And that he checked his first payslip, and if that payslip had been lower than he would have known that the company wants to pay less, and either negotiated some more, or left immediately. Paying him from month 1 means that they agreed to this payment. Asking him after 24 months is entirely unfair since he was under the impression that the salary would be higher, and that is why he didn't ask for a raise or leave the company.</p>

<p><a href="/questions/tagged/germany" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="germany-container">germany</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Does he have to pay the money back?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, based on §812 German Civil Code, since there was no legal ground for the extra € 600 per month.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(1) A person who obtains something as a result of the performance of another person or otherwise at his expense <strong>without legal grounds</strong> for doing so is under a duty to make restitution to him. ...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Only when your brother didn't notice the extra sum when it was paid out <strong>and</strong> spent it (no longer enriched), would §818(3) come into effect.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Though he told me he could technically pay it. So he has 15k.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Since the sum (24*600=14400) is available, it must be paid back.</p>
<p>The employer can require him to pay back the whole sum at once since it is available.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>And what happens if he leaves the company right now?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Your brother would still be liable for his debt.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Is he even able to?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes.</p>
<hr />
<p><strong>Sources</strong>:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/index.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch BGB)</a>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#p3473" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§812 - Claim for restitution</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#p3476" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§818 - Scope of the claim to enrichment</a></li>
</ul>
<blockquote>
<p>(3) The liability to undertake restitution or to reimburse the value is excluded to the extent that the recipient <strong>is no longer enriched</strong>.</p>
</blockquote>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#p3478" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§819 - Increased liability in case of knowledge and breaches of law or public policy</a></li>
</ul>
<blockquote>
<p>(1) If the recipient, <strong>at the time of receipt</strong>, knows of the defect in the legal basis <strong>or if he learns of it later</strong>, then he is obliged to make restitution from the moment of receipt or of obtaining knowledge of the defect to make restitution as if the claim for restitution had been pending from this time on.</p>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ul>
