Company car payments

[MJG]

I am asking on behalf of a colleague. They have this agreement for this vehicle with the employer. They may be leaving the employer next year. Just curious to find out if they will lose all the instalments that were recovered from their salary? The vehicle is in the business name.

 

[Lawnchairman]

Well is this a valid higher purchase agreement in terms of the National Credit Act?
Is there provision in the employment contract? In theory he should not lose out on all the payment deductions but this could become very difficult if the employer chooses to do so on his exit.

 

[Rayne]

No he is not getting it back what made him think he will be getting it back?

 

[The Darkness]

Looks to me like the company will be framing the employee's payment as coverage of the 'personal use' part of this. Is the employee's monthly payment for the full installation or part thereof?

 

[MJG]

Looks to me like the company will be framing the employee's payment as coverage of the 'personal use' part of this. Is the employee's monthly payment for the full installation or part thereof?

For part thereof.

 

[MJG]

No he is not getting it back what made him think he will be getting it back?

He didn't know either way. Hence the post.

 

[Rayne]

No he is not getting it back what made him think he will be getting it back?

I get that but rule of thumb when it comes to rep vehicles and you leave the company :

Reps own vehicle : Handshake + well wishes + unclaimed expenses
Company vehicle : Handshake + well wishes

Him taking it home after working hours was a benefit to him, not a benefit to the company.

 

[Hemi300c]

WTF

 

[Pho3nix]

Why would anyone have signed this? So he is paying for a car he doesn't own?

 

[FiestaST]

I hope this is some sort of “prank”.

Poor oke getting Pollsmoor shafted with no lube.

 

[The Darkness]

For part thereof.

Company contract is clear - car is theirs. Employee's contribution is to cover the non-work-hours benefit. If the employee has been paying more than the reasonable value of the personal use portion, one could argue unjustified enrichment. That would require numbers proving the employer recovered more than its true cost for the private-use benefit. This is rare and very hard to win, and this contract wording makes such a claim even harder.