Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Late Payment thinking that is back to front'

I spoke at a conference organised by the AFDCC (the French equivalent of the ICM) last Friday in Paris. It was a good event held in a very impressive venue and about 150 delegates assembled to hear about and debate, amongst other things, the new EU Directive on Late Payment. One of the keynote speakers was Barbara Weiler MEP, an architect and key driver of the new Directive. Her passion for the benefits on business of improving payment terms is not in doubt and her energy has clearly been instrumental in getting the Directive adopted.

The recent survey of ICM members conducted by Equifax showed that 65% of respondents believe the Government should do more to protect small businesses from the negative impact of late payments, and there can be no argument that the existing legislation has not worked in the way intended. Businesses, and particularly small ones, are either ignorant of the law, don't know how to use it, or are afraid to do so for fear of losing a customer. There are exceptions of course; I know credit professionals who use it very successfully and mitigate the cost of financing extended credit by so doing, and I know others who generate a late payment 'charges and interest' invoice to accompany the first collection letter very effectively.

Primarily, the real financial benefit comes when legal action is taken and the late payment charges and interest are added to the principal debt and can significantly increase the amount recovered. But that was never the point of legislation - it wasn't intended to make for better recovery at the end of the food chain; the idea was to improve payment behaviour from the start!

Unfortunately, politicians often seem to miss the point of what happens in the real business world and this is no exception. The Directive states that, if payment terms are not agreed in the contract, then the assumed terms shall be 30 days and - if payment terms are set out in the contract - they cannot be 'grossly unfair'. The definition of 'grossly unfair' is unclear but, in any event, how many small companies would be willing or able to take legal action to argue the case and get remedy? The inclusion of a clause allowing a supplier to recover reasonable actual debt recovery costs (in addition to interest) rather than just the current standard late payment charge is positive but is again a back-end benefit, not a front-end incentive to change payment behaviour.

For me, the most encouraging thing in the whole conference was Barbara Weiler saying that the Directive is as much about changing the culture of payment through soft issues as it is about introducing hard legislative measures. The UK has been lauded for its Prompt Payment Code (administered for BIS by the ICM of course) and educational activity like our Managing Cashflow Guides are also recognised as leading the field. As credit professionals we have more opportunity than most - and should use it - to influence that change of culture by adopting credit management best practice. We can and should be more powerful and effective than a Directive and if the Directive gets more attention and visibility for the importance of cash-flow management and the value we add to businesses, then - for that reason alone - I welcome it.

The Prompt Payment Code

Institute of Credit Management Press Releases

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'A positive route to growth'

So the latest Project Merlin figures have been released and they show that, in the third quarter, new lending to business was £57.4bn, of which £18.8bn was to SME's. Let's remember that the full-year targets are £190bn and £76bn respectively with £157.7bn and £56.1bn being achieved so far. Simple arithmetic tells me, assuming nothing much changes, that the total lending target will be achieved and the SME target will probably fall a trifle short. Not surprisingly, the data has generated the usual and expected clamour for banks to be forced to lend more to small businesses.

Regular readers will not want me to reiterate my view with regards the fallacy of 'forcing' banks to lend, and they will have seen my blog last week talking about some basic errors made by start-up businesses. I believe my observations then support my contention that lending decisions should be based on rational - rather than political or emotional - criteria.

I was privileged to be a contributor to the BIS/UKTI-organised UK Growth and Finance Fitness event in London last Thursday, and the subject of SME growth and finance was a recurring theme in Lord Green and David Cameron's opening speeches. Vince Cable also took up the theme in his address, as did Doug Richard, and early Dragons Den guru and an angel investor, who expressed his views clearly and articulately.

The reality of course is that not all SMEs want or need to borrow; indeed a recent SME Finance Monitor report showed that 47 percent never use external funding ('never' defined as neither now nor in the past five years). What we need, therefore, is an environment in which SMEs want - and feel confident - to grow, and one way to achieve that would be through a growth in exporting.

Two statistics in David Cameron's speech struck me in particular: firstly, only one in five SMEs export but if that figure was increased to one in four, Britain's trade deficit would be wiped out; secondly, Britain exports more to Ireland than to Brazil, Russia, India and China combined; the BRIC countries therefore represent a huge potential market.

So why don't more SMEs export, and, perhaps connected, why don't more SMEs want to obtain external funding? I've said in a number of forums with government and others that the key to SME growth is less about obtaining funding, and more about building confidence. Increased confidence would deliver more willingness to introduce new products and services, more willingness to enter new markets either at home or overseas, and more willingness to take on additional staff.

I've also expressed my view that many SMEs don't consider exporting because they see it as a 'dark art' and are afraid of the unknown. I'm delighted ECGD announced at the event that it is changing its name from 'Export Credits Guarantee Department' to 'UK Export Finance' and is going to work much more closely with UKTI. I believe that even such a cosmetic change will make SME's less apprehensive or uncertain as regards what the former ECGD does - and the help it can provide.

A recurring theme also came from the panel of small businesses who are successfully exporting. They started exporting because they were in a desperate situation and it was their last hope of keeping the business alive...and it worked. What we need is more businesses embracing exporting as a positive route to growth rather than a last resort and act of desperation.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Wake up and smell the coffee'

When I stay in London, I often use a hotel near Swiss Cottage. It's on the Finchley Road, located in a typical suburb of the capital, its street lined with shops. Over the last few years, I've noticed something that was brought home to me on Monday.

Within about half a mile, there are a number of fast food establishments, some long established cafes and restaurants and a couple of Costa Coffee shops. There are also a couple of independent coffee shops with the usual comforts. One of these closed down a few months ago and was emptied; it has now been replaced by another one that - if you hadn't seen the empty shop in the interim - you could mistake for what was there before.

Further down towards Swiss Cottage Station, it happened again - a new shop replacing one that has closed down. Then more recently, I noticed that that too has now closed down, having been open for no more than a handful of weeks.

Now I know nothing about these businesses or their owners but, from using them, I get the impression there is an individual who has fulfilled a dream by opening the premises and is clearly intent on giving customers a good experience. They work hard and want their enterprise to succeed. But, in all but one case so far, they've failed.

The obvious question that occurs to me is why - when a coffee shop has failed on a particular site - you would think it a good idea to open another? It's not just about location, but also about the clientele, the volume of turnover that can be generated, and the business model of competing operations. And this is obviously not a problem unique to Finchley Road; how often do we see businesses opening where the owners clearly haven't given enough thought to whether they've chosen the right place for them?

I said at an event hosted by Vince Cable, Mark Prisk, and Francis Maude over a year ago that one of the issues arising from the rationalisation of the Civil Service (and, indeed the private sector) would be people receiving a large redundancy payment and using it to fulfil their lifetime dream of starting a business, only to see that dream turn into a nightmare. This is one of the reasons why I believe we have still to see the peak of insolvencies and why business education is so vital. Scenarios like this can be heart-wrenchingly sad and avoiding them would be good for all of us and for the economy.

We are pleased, therefore, to be actively engaged in the BIS Finance Fitness Event and Campaign being launched in London today with the aim of making new businesses and existing ones better equipped and able to survive. We will be continuing to provide advice through our Credit Management Helpline and Managing Cashflow Guides (www.creditmanagement.org.uk) and we're also launching an SME Collections Toolkit as part of ICM Online Services that will provide very practical advice and tools with templates, video role-plays and more.

Those of us supplying and talking to small and start-up businesses could do worse than point people to advice like this; after all, if they get paid, we're more likely to get paid too!

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Men behaving badly'

The ITV 'Exposure' programme aired on Monday night used covert recording of a bailiff behaving very badly indeed. Shocking revelations that - in many respects - beggared belief. What was even more surprising was the assertion that no complaints had been received by his employers during the three years he had worked for them. Was this because the people he called upon didn't know their rights or what standards of behaviour they could expect? Or was it because they felt that any complaints they did raise would simply fall on deaf ears?

If the Tribunal, Courts and Enforcement 2007 had been fully implemented, the bailiff concerned would have been subject to an enhanced certification process that would have included aspects such as diversity awareness and conflict management; both would clearly have been useful, and complaints would have been dealt with by the Courts. As events have unfolded, the Act was only partially implemented and a parallel consultation proposing regulation instead by an independent body was never taken forward either, even though the enforcement industry would have welcomed such an additional regulation (my thanks to Chris Bell of Shergroup for his validation of the facts here).

I've been involved in meetings with various bodies and the Government for several years discussing the proposals and alternatives interminably but - as has frequently been highlighted in the credit press - no progress has been made and the issues remain. I don't believe the problems are endemic, but it only takes one bad apple to spoil the whole barrel and damage the reputation of the entire industry. The reality is that bailiffs are only acting to recover money that is the subject of a warrant issued by the court and is rightfully due, yet that fact gets lost in the noise of behaviour and attitudes that can't be condoned. They also get confused with the world of 'Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrel's' that is as far away from professional enforcement as it is possible to be, but make for a good photo-caption!

Self-regulation is not a viable option unless and until it is carried out in a much more rigorous way. I've been encouraged by recent initiatives like the 'video recording badges' being piloted by some Marston High Court Enforcement Officers. I don't know how feasible such measures would be on a widespread scale but technology like this would allow for closer monitoring of activity and would help rebuild confidence. The last thing we need is a belief that enforcement of warrants is unfair.