I have absconded from a reputed company after 7 working days before signing any offer letter. What could be the consequences?

Question

I joined a reputed company in India, and worked there for 7 days. They did not provide me any offer/appointment/joining letter until that time. I haven't signed any document stating the notice period policy.

I absconded from the company after sending them a decent email from my personal mail, without serving the notice period. They replied to my mail with the due amount of notice period salary. They do not have a probation period.

I don't expect any wages or documents from that company since I have no need to put in on my employment record.

I believe the company should not take any legal action, and their mail is just an empty threat, since I haven't signed any letter with the notice period clause.

What can I do to minimize my risk in this situation?

Possible duplicate of What is a relieving letter? What are the consequences of not having one? — IDrinkandIKnowThings, Jul 17 '18 at 14:19
@IDrinkandIKnowThings The OP explicitly states that he doesn't want a relieving letter, so definitely not a duplicate. — Masked Man, Jul 17 '18 at 14:28
@MaskedMan - The duplicate is what are the consequenses of not having one... — IDrinkandIKnowThings, Jul 17 '18 at 14:51
@IDrinkandIKnowThings ... and what has that got to do with this question? The OP isn't asking for the consequences of not having one. — Masked Man, Jul 17 '18 at 14:53
A lack of familiarity with culture is not a reason to close. — Old_Lamplighter, Jul 17 '18 at 15:10
This question is either an legal opinion (Are the likely to sue) which is already answered well by Masked Man, or A duplicate. Since the answer has already been accepted linking this question to the other is a good thing. It helps more people find the information they need. — IDrinkandIKnowThings, Jul 17 '18 at 15:13
This question has nothing to do with relieving letters and therefore isn't a duplicate of that question. — Monica Cellio, Jul 17 '18 at 16:55
@MonicaCellio - I like the edit... but risk of what needs to be clarified I think before I would want to reopen it. I think that what can be identified, but I am drawing a blank on what it should be. — IDrinkandIKnowThings, Jul 18 '18 at 20:22
You should be talking a lawyer like yesterday. Besides not having signing anything there might be clauses of n days to repudiate a contract, even a implicit one, that allows you to dodge a bullet more easily. — Rui F Ribeiro, Jul 27 '18 at 01:16

score 17 · Accepted Answer · answered Jul 17 '18 at 13:57

Anyone can sue anyone for any reason. However, it makes no practical sense for them to "recover" an amount worth two or three months of your salary by pursuing legal action, which will carry on for ages and likely cost them hundred times more in legal and court fees.

Additionally, in your case, you have not signed any document which proves your employment or that you agreed to pay anything, so the court will most likely throw out their case in the first hearing.

Their email is not an empty threat but a scam. They are just hoping to make a quick buck by threatening you. Don't respond further and forget about them.

gnasher729 · Answer 2 · 2018-07-17T13:50:50.733

3

This being in India, not exactly an employee-friendly country, with many stories of vengeful behaviour, it is not unlikely that you would get sued. And the fact that you worked for seven days means that you accepted an employment contract. If these terms are usual for employment contracts, then it isn’t unlikely that you would lose.

(Difference to U.K.: The company would say “Good riddance” and not sue, even if they could. And the implicit contract means the company has to pay for seven days of work.)

edited Jul 17 '18 at 13:50

answered Jul 17 '18 at 13:43

gnasher729

169,032
78
316
508

7

it is not unlikely that you would get sued - This statement would be greatly improved if you could reference an objective source to support this statement. – IDrinkandIKnowThings Jul 17 '18 at 14:56
1

Also can you back up the second sentence specifically within the context of Indian employment law? That seems like a fair assumption in the west but might be jumping to conclusions there. – Myles Jul 18 '18 at 20:50
1

"the fact that you worked for seven days means that you accepted an employment contract" I don't know Indian law very well, but I don't think this is correct. – Glen Pierce Jul 20 '18 at 14:31
1

This answer could be improved by providing differences to the 180-odd other countries. Given the OP isn't asking about UK, if difference to UK is an important ingredient of this answer, then difference to other countries should also be equally important. – Masked Man Jul 21 '18 at 00:42
@MaskedMan are you trying to troll the answer here ? IMHO This is perfectly common practice here that while answering people often provide a relative local reference to their countries. Isn't it ? – Amit Jul 25 '18 at 18:06
@Amit The OP explicitly said that he doesn't want to know about US or UK or any other country. I am not aware of any such practice, besides that doesn't add much value. – Masked Man Jul 25 '18 at 18:15
@MaskedMan I guess question was edited after that since I don't get any US/UK reference in question. Thanks for explaining your intent. I understand your point now. – Amit Jul 25 '18 at 21:31
It is highly dependent on local law whether the fact you work in some place you accepted a contract. In the old days in my country, it would happen, nowadays it is mandatory you sign a countract. – Rui F Ribeiro Jul 27 '18 at 01:14
@AmitDwivedi: except the answer is saying that in the UK it would never happen, which if true wouled make it useless. But it's not true, what is true is no legitimate company would sue in that case, an entirely different situation, which is remarkably like the accepted answer.... – jmoreno Aug 01 '18 at 02:06

I have absconded from a reputed company after 7 working days before signing any offer letter. What could be the consequences?

2 Answers2