never removed his name from the payroll.

[rudutch]

Oct 26, 9:24 PM (ET)

SOMERVILLE, N.J. (AP) - An Illinois man has admitted banking more than $470,000 in paychecks from a New Jersey company he never worked for. Anthony Armatys, 35, of Palatine, Ill., pleaded guilty Monday in New Jersey Superior Court to one count of theft as part of a plea bargain.

Prosecutors say Armatys accepted a job with Basking Ridge, N.J.-based telecommunications company Avaya Inc. in September 2002, then changed his mind. But the company's computer system never removed his name from the payroll.

Paychecks were deposited into his bank account until February 2007, when Avaya auditors discovered the mistake.

Prosecutors are recommending a six-year prison term and restitution. Sentencing is scheduled for Jan. 8.

[Stonefreefuzz1]

That ain't to far from me...

[hippiebob01]

looks like they found the leak in the petty cash account

[rudutch]

not sure what legal precedent would apply here.. They sent the checks to him for 4+ years, he was negligent in reporting that -
but they have some responsibility here

I assume repayment or depletion of his $470k is in the near future

[Stonefreefuzz1]

not sure what legal precedent would apply here.. They sent the checks to him for 4+ years, he was negligent in reporting that -
but they have some responsibility here

I assume repayment or depletion of his $470k is in the near future

Yeah I was thinking that as well, He is in the wrong for not reporting it...but they are to blame also, I'm curious as to how this one turns out.

[rudutch]

where is PC when we need him?

[pc]

If the question is moral, I'll leave that up to the individual readers.

If the question is legal, then there is no question at all. The fact that he applied for the job then never took it means that he'd heard of the company. Thus he knew (under the legal definition that requires "knowingly") that he was getting money that wasn't his. He kept it. That means he stole it.

There is a tenuous argument to be made that if money was just showing up in his account from some place he'd never heard of before that there was an excuse for his behavior. A reasonable person would probably believe it was a mistake and they couldn't keep it, but perhaps one could assume there was a "hidden" trust from an estate or something and that the money was theirs.

That wasn't the case here. He'd heard of the company and knew damn well he couldn't keep the money. The 6-year prison recommendation struck me as harsh but on thinking about it, he probably spent nearly all the money and can't simply pay it back.

Don't get me wrong, the company here is so negligent that it's laughable--but that's civil negligence where heads ought to roll on behalf of the stockholders or owners. It isn't a defense to this guy's theft/receiving charges that the company was obviously run by utter morons.

[rudutch]

well that clarifies that, Bad Idea #1868

[pc]

I mean the least he could have done is immediately transfer each payment offshore and claim he never touched it, then bring it back in via a shell-corporation making blind-trust payments to a separate checking account at a different bank in his wife's name.

Er... I mean, uh... never mind. It was illegal.

[boobtube21]

to a separate checking account at a different bank in his wife's name.

You mean all that trouble just to end up with 4,000 pairs of women's shoes?

[Stonefreefuzz1]

You mean all that trouble just to end up with 4,000 pairs of women's shoes?

Can't forget all that new closet space to horde all of those shoes!

[elicross]

I wonder if there'll be any repercussions for the person at Avaya whose responsibility it was to know that they'd been paying a six figure salary for almost four and a half years to someone who didn't work there.

[Iowegan]

There was a lady in Des Moines that pilfered a couple million by creating excessive payments to insurance agents that were no longer active with the company. The company was keeping track of agent compensation on Excel spreadsheets. Uh, yeah.

[rudutch]

Oct 30, 3:57 PM (ET)

SOUTH BEND, Ind. (AP) - A woman mistakenly tipped $29,000 by the University of Notre Dame in her catering paycheck will return more than half of the money in $50 monthly payments over the next 28 years.

Notre Dame sued Sara Gaspar of Granger to return the money because she should have been paid only $29.87 but a clerical error resulted in a check for $29,387 in April.

Under a settlement filed in St. Joseph Circuit Court, Gaspar agrees to pay back nearly $17,000 in the monthly increments. She put up as collateral a 2002 Volkswagen Jetta she bought with the money. Gaspar also agreed to pay Notre Dame's attorney fees.

Gaspar has said she tried three times to tell Notre Dame about the overpayment but university staffers didn't return her calls.

[boobtube21]

$50 monthly payments over the next 28 years...to pay back nearly $17,000 in the monthly increments. She put up as collateral a 2002 Volkswagen Jetta she bought with the money.

Jeez, where else can you get an auto loan like that? 28 year loan, super low monthly payment, and you don't have to pay back the whole thing.

[Franklin]

What a dumbass.

"Gee, I don't think they'll figure this out. I'm golden"

Wow.


On a similar note, I was given a raise and promotion a few jobs ago. Later the same day I got it, there was a hiring freeze that came down from corporate -so I was not given the promotion. However I did get the raise.

I mentioned it, but only after several months. Since they basically had me managing the newly created department anyway, minus the title, well I figured I deserved it.

My boss and the director were like "Opps, wink, wink, nudge, nudge". Even though they did not know that had happened, they said "Don't worry about it. Maybe the hiring freeze prevented you from getting the promotion but somehow the raise must have been processed through HR the same morning we gave you the promotion".....

I was laid off 8 months later anyway..