24 C.F.R. § 17.105

Procedures for salary offset: methods of collection

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. A debt will be collected by deductions at officially established pay intervals from an employee's current pay account, unless the employee and the Secretary agree to alternative arrangements for repayment. The alternative arrangement must be in writing, signed by both the employee and the Secretary.

(b) Installment deductions. Installment deductions will be made over a period not greater than the anticipated period of employment. The size and frequency of installment deductions will bear a reasonable relation to the size of the debt and the employee's ability to pay. However, the amount deducted for any period will not exceed 15 percent of the disposable pay from which the deduction is made, unless the employee has agreed in writing to the deduction of a greater amount. If possible, the installment payment will be sufficient in size and frequency to liquidate the debt in 3 years. Installment payments of less than $25 per pay period or $50 a month will be accepted only in the most unusual circumstances.

(c) Sources of deductions. The Department will make deductions only from basic pay, special pay, incentive pay, retired pay, retainer pay, or, in the case of an employee not entitled to basic pay, other authorized pay.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1988–1989 · leading case: Hous. Auth. of Cnty. of King v. Pierce, 711 F. Supp. 19 (D.D.C. 1989).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hous. Auth. of Cnty. of King v. Pierce, 711 F. Supp. 19 (D.D.C. 1989). · cites it 2× “HACK reiterated, but with substantially more detail, its opposition to HUD’s proposed actions, and made a specific discovery request pursuant to 24 C.F.R. § 17.105 . The request sought materials which HACK regards as necessary to formulate its opposition to HUD’s position.”

Hous. Auth. of the Cnty. of King v. Pierce, 701 F. Supp. 844 (D.D.C. 1988). “, HACK requested a hearing in Washington and the production of relevant documents pursuant to 24 C.F.R. § 17.105 . In response to inquiries into the status of its request for a hearing and the production of documents, HACK initially received only a letter from HUD, dated May…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.