Guest blog by Debbie Tuckwood, Director of Operational Strategy, Institute of Credit Management – ‘Education that sticks’

In my view many miss opportunities because they overlook people.  It’s easy to focus on process improvement and new technology for dramatic savings.  After all people development takes time and investment - both in short supply.  It’s tempting to run token training though hardly surprising when there’s limited long-term benefits.  Deep down most know that without effective people change is difficult, however is people development really achievable given cut backs in training teams and budgets?

I believe it is, given the right strategy and support.  Look at the Institute’s corporate membership scheme for large teams which involves all.  It’s set up to help secure budgets and regular support from an education specialist (20 – 30% discounts help too).  If you focus then on moving 10% through qualification programmes, whether linked to own training or an external provider, you build skills and the appetite for learning.  After all, isn’t people development more about longer cultural change and ‘education that sticks’?

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Painting a grim picture of Payday lenders'

I've been inundated with government papers over the past few weeks such as the Insolvency Practitioners Fees Review, the Review of Pre-Pack Administrations, the Simpler Reporting proposals for Micro Businesses, the Money Advice Service proposals to improve the quality of Debt Advice, HMRC and DWP debt management strategies, the Treasury and FSA consultations on the transfer of consumer credit regulation from the OFT to the FCA, the proposed EU Data Protection changes, and a host more.  As a result, I've been a bit tardy in getting to read in detail the OFT's Payday Lending Compliance Review.  Its contents are shocking.

 

Let me make it clear from the outset that I am not in the 'outlaw all payday lenders' camp; I believe that such products have their place and when offered, and used, sensibly can be useful to a good many people.  But that doesn't excuse the findings in this review.  Among the highlights, or perhaps I should call them lowlights, the review reports that 28% of loans issued in 2011/12 were rolled over at least once, with at least a third of lenders actively promoting rollover at the point of sale and a number agreeing to rollover loans even after a borrower has missed a repayment.  By way of example, staff in two large high-street firms were told that rollovers were regarded as 'key profit drivers' and that staff were encouraged to promote them. In one case, this was even written into the training manual!

 

Equally worrying to me though is the absence of affordability checks.  Most lenders asserted that they undertook affordability assessments at the initial loan stage yet the vast majority were unable to provide satisfactory proof that they had applied such assessments in practice.  Only six of the 50 lenders visited were able to provide documentary evidence that they assessed consumers' likely disposable income as part of their affordability assessments.

 

The basic premise of credit management, whether the customer is a multi-national business, a small trader, or an individual, is to determine whether the customer is 'good' for the amount of credit being extended and whether it can afford to repay in accordance with the agreed terms. Furthermore, in the case of consumers, assessing creditworthiness is a requirement of the Consumer Credit Act and OFT guidelines.

I know the majority of the inspections were carried out before revised industry codes of practice and the sector-wide Good Practice Customer Charter came into force but the revelations of the report paint a wholly unacceptable picture.  The enforcement action already started and the 12 week deadline to address all areas of non-compliance is welcome, the proposed investigation by the Competition Commission makes sense, and the expectation that the FCA will take a more rigorous approach when it takes over consumer credit regulation next April is encouraging.

 

In the meantime I hope the OFT will live up to its promise that it will not gradually fade away but will continue to act vigorously in the period until it is replaced by the FCA.  A year is a long time in the consumer credit market.

 

I'll be welcoming a couple of guest blog writers over the next two weeks. Charles Wilson, Managing Director of Lovetts Solicitors, an ICM Fellow, and a member of our Technical Committee will be writing next week, and our own Debbie Tuckwood, ICM Director of Learning & Development, the week after.  I'll be decorating over Easter so will be looking forward to returning to normality thereafter!

 

 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'New Directive leaves authorities doing the maths'

So, the deadline for transposition of the EU Late Payment Directive 2011/07/EU finally arrives this Saturday and the UK government has met the deadline and even issued a Users’ Guide that can be found here.

 

I don't want to go into great detail about the Guide, Directive or Statutory Instrument here, but one paragraph in the Guide has really caught my attention. The paragraph in question within the 'Payment between public authorities and business' section says: ‘If you are a Public Authority..........If you do not pay within the deadline, you are obliged to automatically pay the outstanding amount that includes daily interest for every day payment is late based on 8 percentage points above the Bank of England’s reference rate plus the fixed amount, depending on the size of the unpaid debt. The onus is on you to pay your supplier on time and the supplier is not obliged to remind you that payment is outstanding."

 

The public authority customer is therefore expected to proactively recognise that it is paying late, calculate the late payment charges/interest and add the amount to the remittance regardless of whether the creditor asks for the amount or not! Now, I don't want to be a cynic but what are the chances of this actually working in practice? I can see all sorts of issues and difficulties: how, for example, are authorities going to know they are expected to do this? Who is going to make the calculation and approve the additional payment? How is the increased value going to be matched to the original purchase order? I'd be interested to hear views from readers with their opinion of how they see this working. Please email me at ceo@icm.org.uk or go to the ICM Credit Community LinkedIn group, or the Discussion Forum on the ICM website members area’ and let me know.

  

Finally, I have to mention Start-Up Loans. I'm privileged to have been involved on the Board of the company since its launch and I'm incredibly proud of its success as demonstrated by the announcement this week that the scheme has exceeded expectations as 2,000 aspirational young entrepreneurs have now received support (a loan supported by mentoring) to help get their business venture off the ground. The scheme has already reached its £10 million pilot spend, and a further £5.5 million injection of funding was approved this week in Parliament to fulfill its pipeline until the end of the month. The Government has made £117.5 million available to fund the Start-Up Loans scheme up to 2015. Amidst all of the sometimes dubious schemes our government has come up with in recent times, this is one where it appears to have got it right.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Understanding the value of software'

I had an interesting meeting with our friends at Intuit last week, a company probably best known for its Quickbooks range of accounting software. But as well as producing financial software for small businesses, it also provides free small business training through its Financial Fitness workshops programme. It was this latter activity and its support for Start-Up Loans that led to our meeting.

 

I was pretty impressed by the products I saw and by the ways in which different financial activities can be integrated and monitored over a range of mobile devices as well as traditional Pcs, but I was staggered by a statistic they shared with me. I'm well aware of the 'lies, damned lies, and statistics' notion but – even if the detail is over-stated  - it's still incredible. I was told that 66% of businesses with up to 15 employees use no software at all to manage their accounts, either relying on an accountant to periodically pull together numbers from a pile of abstract pieces of paper and records, or simply muddling through with a combination of paper and/or spreadsheets.

 

I've been preparing for a presentation at the Milton Keynes Business Expo 3.0 Exhibition on 8 March where I'm addressing the topic 'Cashflow is King – Ten Top Tips', and this has made me think. Managing a business means knowing its position at any particular point in time. With a diverse range of simple and inexpensive tools available from a host of different suppliers that allow for the production of invoices, recording of expenditure, taking of payments, summarising outstanding debts, and a great deal more besides, you have to ask why any business, however small, would not use something so obvious and instantly available to make its life easier. I clearly knew there'd be a proportion of businesses that manage without any software or specific credit management tools but 66% is a real concern. I think I have just found an eleventh tip…!