Husband lost his job. His fault but he had good intentions. We are both deeply upset. Please help.

[user1471433754]

My husband's boss phoned him a fortnight ago, and told him to stand down and to hand his laptop in to HQ the following day. My husband was so shocked, we didn't know what was happening. We were in a distressed state as he's contract and won't get paid either.
After over a week, of not sleeping, eating, desperately worried, we received a very aggressive lawyers letter from the company. It accused him of downloading documents to his private e mail to read. Husband did do this, they weren't sensitive but he did do it so he could read them at night, and deleted them right after. He honestly didn't realise he was doing wrong. He was doing his best to help his team and get the work done. He's always known for getting jobs done and been told he's a great asset.
Back story to this is, I've been very ill the last year. I nearly died, also lots of illness on my part, mental breakdown, 2 operations, serious illness. He was trying to look after me and do his job at the same time in the evening. He's now been dismissed. Looks like we are going to have to pay both sides legal fees, but he has no job, I can't work. We speak to a lawyer tmro.
He has been foolish, but he did it with the best of intentions to get the work done. We are early sixties and so distressed, I'm worried he will have a heart attack. He's cried non stop, he is horrified, ashamed, embarrassed. Please be kind x

Yes, and saying he must be lying to her to cover a far more serious crime.

So much for MN supporting women in distress!

Thats absolute nonsense. I make no comment on whether OPs husband may or may not be on the spectrum but its nonsense that someone who is ASD always 'follows the rules' and never tells lies

That’s really emotive language and doesn’t help the op; it is much better she is sure of the truth, instead of people saying there there Dear I’m sure it’s all a bit heavy handed.

the facts of this are clear.

he sent a lot of data to himself.
the sheer volume of it is an issue
some of it contains sensitive data , at least some of it.
the company have immediately terminated his contract
they have threatened legal action as they wish to check his tech to check what’s happened to that data, where it has went.
he has a side line which is a conflict of interests. She hasn’t said if he’s declared that. Or if this data can be used to help with that side line. It does read like it might.
if ir does, could it be used to improve or monetise his side line.

now people can beleive he sent a lot of data to download to his personal computer so he could do work in bed, and he needed that much data, and it doesn’t feel like he’s working if it’s his own laptop.

or people can prepare the op and advise her to have a conversation qirh her husband to get to the bottom of this, because if this is what it looks like it is, there is worse to come and she doesn’t need that, she’s better to be prepared than shocked.

there is no way he didn’t know he couldn’t send it to himself but assuming he didn’t know and he’s that incompetent and that he does feel like he feels like he’s not working if not on his own laptop, and that’s why he did it. Then as long as he hasn’t sent or used that data he will be fine. It is likely he didn’t realise his emails were being monitored.

but the excessive crying, rush to a lawyer, would indicate there is much more to this and he’s down played ir to her.

Well, perhaps... but the only "getting to the bottom of this" that remains to be done will unfold gradually and will probably focus on providing the company with adequate, professionally validated reassurance that no further harm will be done.

He's not an employee. For the self-employed, boundaries between work and home life can get quite fluid/blurred. I don't find it inconceivable that he emailed something to his laptop, even if it wasn't necessary to do so.

You may think it's helpful to paint him as incompetent and promise that "worse is to come," but I don't.

Your interpretation of his distress is a very narrow one. You don't know this man, why are you jumping to such damning conclusions about him? "Rushing to a lawyer" is the only option he has in these circumstances. It is perfectly sensible and practical, not evidence for deeper culpability.

I too am sorry @user1471433754 is going through this particularly on top of everything else she has gone through recently.

Like you shuffle I cannot believe that Op's husband was in any way unaware that you do not transfer company documents to personal devices, the reasons for not doing so are blatantly obvious.

There is no sense to the best of intentions excuse. To say that working on his own laptop in bed rather than the company laptop was better for him psychologically just doesn't fly.

You have literally no idea of the facts of this. None of us do, including the OP, to the best of our knowledge.

or people can prepare the op and advise her to have a conversation qirh her husband to get to the bottom of this, because if this is what it looks like it is, there is worse to come and she doesn’t need that, she’s better to be prepared than shocked.

Pure speculation based on entirely incomplete information, which I would assume your daughter the lawyer would tell you is worth nothing. How has what you've said prepared or advised the OP in any way? It hasn't. It's inflammatory and alarming and if it turns out this is the worst case scenario, nothing you're telling her here is useful in preparing her in any way.

Have you even read the ops posts. Or are you just attacking, as everything I wrote she has said,

I have read both the OP's posts and yours. Hers are very light on detail, yours sound very firm but are completely based on very heavy speculation and supposition.

You've stated that if the termination was just an excuse there would be no legal letters. This is wrong. Most companies or organisations or civil service department are swimming in lawyers. Sending a legal letter can be a paper trail and an arse covering exercise just as much as it can mean anything.

You've jumped to a conclusion about the amount of data. None of us has any idea how much is involved.

You've assumed his sideline, whatever it might be, is a conflict of interest. That's complete assumption/supposition on your part. You've also assumed he didn't disclose. Again, complete assumption/supposition on your part.

You've stated he sent all the info to the lawyers and didn't keep a copy. Again, we don't know that. When last updated, he was sleeping and the OP didn't know if he'd kept a copy.

You have no idea what the information he sent to himself is. It could be private medical data, it could be nuclear secrets, it could be a trademarked recipe for fluffy pancakes. There are material differences between the three.

You've said if he used it to benefit himself or if it causes them issues, he will face legal action. Again, you have no idea. Legal action is time consuming, expensive, risky and can be embarrassing. There are many instances in which it could potentially happen but doesn't.

You've said if he’s used the data he is likely going fo face a civil suit, and it will be costly. Again, you have no idea, nor do I.

You've said, it makes no sense that he would send himself lots of data so he could do his job on his own laptop in bed, it makes more sense he sent it to himself to use it for his side job. Again, you're supposing. You have no factual basis for this. People do all kinds of inexplicable or difficult to understand things.

You've said, if he’s done this, he’s not going to get work in this field again. If it was a ten year contract and it was nuclear secrets, probably not. If it was a six month contract and it was some kind of tech stuff, the odds are pretty good the company or organisation will be very happy for it to disappear without a trace.

You've said they will take all their assets when it comes to pay the bill. What bill? For legal action that hasn't taken place and might never commence? The OP's husband would have to either have really done something awful or have a lot of assets for it to be worth their while.

You've said the level of crying he’s done indicates he’s been caught in something bad. You don't know the man.

You’ve said she has no idea who else was involved and that you would assume plenty as they knew he’d taken the data. That's flagged up by the system in most companies. What does this have to do with anyone else?

They wouldn't start with a legal letter. Especially if he is a contractor.

Good grief.

I expect like me lots of us would like to know how things are going. Hope you are getting some good advice and that the situation is not as bad as you first thought.

There might be a name for it - 'Mumsnet tumbleweed' perhaps?

More likely the OP has uncovered that the root of the problem very much was her DH and a hell of a lot has emerged since the thread that means all the unemployment law etc is no longer relevant because @user1471433754 now knows the dh was as sketchy as hell

Or maybe things are quietly working out... I hope so.

Then why not update the thread and say so?

Or maybe this thread wasn't particularly helpful?

OP has contributed over thirty posts to their thread, engaging with PPs constructively and with interest. Hardly looks unhelpful.