Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Changing the mindset of start-ups'

I've had some interesting meetings this week with BIS officials and Ministers, and other organisations, talking about late payment. No doubt you'll have seen David Cameron's announcement in October that a consultation was going to be launched looking at the issue, and I mentioned it in this blog column a few weeks ago.

One of the meetings was a round table involving a large number of organisations looking for practical steps that might help SMEs to manage their cashflow better. There's no doubt that the required change in culture that I often refer to is needed throughout the supply chain. Big businesses need to take a responsible approach in dealing with their suppliers, and smaller businesses need to apply basic good credit management principles.

Therein though lies the challenge. For many micro businesses, cashflow only becomes important when it runs short, and that's no surprise. If I'm trying to start a business, I'm bound to be more worried about finding customers and delivering my service or product than I am about such things as agreeing payment terms, invoicing accurately and promptly, and chasing unpaid amounts.

But this is what needs to change - we need to make the mindset of start-up businesses one that recognises the importance of cash from day one, that applies the basic principles that credit professionals understand so well. Unless that happens, too many businesses will never grow beyond the micro stage and too many businesses will fail. So what's the answer? I am not sure I know - I wish I did - but I'm glad to be engaged in the debate and to be working with others in looking for solutions.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - Facing facts'

I've been following the recent furore about Tesco's trial of face-scanning technology in its 450 petrol stations with interest. Apparently, the technology allows the camera to identify the customer's gender and approximate age and then deliver an appropriately targeted advert.

The targeting of adverts on web sites based on previous surfing history is well documented, the monitoring of spending through loyalty cards allowing targeted promotions has been around for several years, and the offering of free Wi-FI to facilitate the capture of data and routes to market is becoming ubiquitous. For a long time we've been told that the average person is viewed on CCTV an estimated 70 times each day even if the awareness falls into our subconscious.

This somehow seems to be a step further but is surely no surprise in an age of ever increasing technological sophistication and complexity. Just this week, I realised I'd left home without putting my pen in my suit pocket. Did I panic? No, I realised that almost all my note-taking, planning and writing is on my iPad and I rarely use a pen these days. I'd never have believed that would be the case even a couple of years ago but I genuinely couldn't imagine anything different now.

And so it is with credit management. I was at the ICTF conference recently which brings together credit professionals from across Europe. One of the sessions there was a workshop looking at the use of technology and how to identify and source the best solutions. As I travel around talking to credit people I'm made aware of the advances in the software and tools being used and, equally importantly, of its integration into legacy systems, processes and procedures. In most cases, it's about more than being increasingly efficient or saving cost, it's about being more effective and adding more value to the business.

Whether we like it or not, the evolution will continue and - to some extent at least - we have to embrace it if we want to maintain our position as individuals and organisations. Do I care if Tesco is working out my age and gender so that it can show me an advert I'm more likely to be interested in? When I think about it rationally, not really!

Weekly blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Sharing the golden nuggets!'

I spent a day this week at the ICM's Quality in Credit Management Best Practice Conference in London. The event was for organisations that have achieved, are on the journey towards achieving, or aspire to achieve the Quality in Credit Management accreditation award. What a great day.

 

I'm not going to bang on about the benefits of the Quality in Credit Management Award accreditation scheme (though clearly I could) but rather I'm keen to talk about the benefits of sharing best practice. When you get a group of people in a room who are at the top of their game - either personally or from an organisational perspective - it's amazing what comes out.

 

At the conference, we heard a series of speakers sharing their experiences and giving examples of best practice. Of course, what works for one organisation might not work for another, but hearing and filtering ideas is a great opportunity to improve, and helps meet one of the objectives of QICM, that of facilitating continuous improvement for people and organisations.

 

Some of the ideas were incredibly simple and others far more sophisticated. For example, we heard about the huge impact of introducing very simple and cheap 'music on hold' which made a great positive impression on both customers and the internal organisation.

 

More than one presenter talked about their plans to educate customers to improve their own credit management processes and procedures on the basis that, if they were more effective at collecting cash, they'd be better able to settle invoices promptly. A good example of sharing best practice with the wider business community and particularly with SMEs and micro-businesses who may lack relevant experience and expertise.

 

We saw some impressive dashboards and an explanation of how they can be used to best effect. Letting commercial people understand the value of overdue debt in terms of a number of new salesmen or replacement delivery vehicles, for example, is not a new idea but is very powerful.

 

Afternoon presentations addressed how to energise and motivate teams through periods of change and how to make step changes in performance. Some innovative and invigorating ideas on how to create a culture that is focused, cohesive and driven. The case studies came from large organisations but contained concepts that could be adopted in a variety of environments.

 

What's even more interesting about events like this is that people can contribute more than they realise. Participants turn up expecting to learn from the wisdom and experience of the presenters without realising how good they are themselves, and what nuggets they also have to share. Whether we call it networking or by some other grand name, sharing what we know, what we do, and what we've learnt is one of the most powerful business tools, and we should do more of it.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'End of term report: could do better'

Last week Professor Russel Griggs, Independent Reviewer of the Banking Taskforce Appeals Process wrote a guest blog and I'm grateful to him for sharing his thoughts ahead of the publication of his second annual report. It was an interesting blog and has prompted me to return to a theme I've written about more than once before: the need for greater awareness of the appeals process.

 

Despite the assurances I hear from senior bankers at government forums and elsewhere that the independent appeals process is being drawn to the attention of businesses who are declined loans, I hear too many examples where that clearly isn't the case. Not so long ago, I listened to a presentation by a regional bank executive who seemed unaware of the process at all and, more recently, one of our own ICM members shared his experience with me. After a 37 year relationship with his High Street bank, he was told that his overdraft facility was being withdrawn because it had decided to discontinue its relationship with all customers in that particular sector. He approached alternative banks and raised the issue with the Financial Ombudsman Service, several MPs, the OFT, and government ministers. Neither his nor the other banks, nor one of these parties pointed him towards, or made him aware of, the independent appeals process.

 

I've always said that banks must be free to make their own lending decisions and I've resisted all the voices suggesting that banks must be 'forced' to lend. I stand by that view. The appeals process was intended to create an environment in which businesses could be assured that a loan declined had been declined fairly or provide an opportunity for such decisions to be reviewed and reversed when appropriate.

 

I expect Russel Griggs' report to show the process is working well when it is used and this should be applauded, but it can't work if people don't know about it. The banks, and government, aren't doing enough to bring it to the attention of customers and the wider business, financial and political community. They must do better.

 

Guest Blog by Professor Russel Griggs OBE - 'Leave to appeal'

Twelve months ago I published a report as the independent external reviewer of a Banking Taskforce initiative into the new ‘appeals process’ – a process by which small businesses (up to a turnover of £25 million) could appeal if declined lending from their bank.

 

In the first year of the process there were 2177 appeals and 39.5% of decisions were overturned. (An overturn is where the bank and the customer reach a satisfactory conclusion to a lending application.) This does not mean that the business has received exactly what they asked for initially, but that they have reached a lending agreement with which both parties are satisfied.

 

At the time I was quite satisfied with the numbers, given that the process was still in its infancy. I said then that banks and all other parties and bodies involved in working with SMEs needed to do more to ensure that their business customers knew that the right to appeal was available, and that the true effectiveness of the scheme would be apparent only when the process had been more widely promoted. I said also that the banks needed to make sure that those who lend are properly qualified and trained to do so, and that the reasons why a loan may be declined need to be properly communicated and understood.

 

Next month I will publish my second Annual report and while further progress has undoubtedly been made, there are clearly still issues with the extent to which the appeals process is being promoted, both externally and within the banks themselves.

 

The ambition with the process was to encourage and engender a better dialogue between customers and the banks, and my report will show to what extent this is now being achieved. My report will also look at the key reasons why loans are being declined – both through credit scores and issues of ‘affordability’ – and what progress is being made to better understand the banks’ scoring system and the role of external credit reference agencies.

 

The ultimate objective is to make the lending environment for SMEs operate as smoothly as any lending environment ever can or has. We will soon see how far we have travelled in reaching this objective.

 

Professor Russel Griggs OBE

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'The power to make a difference'

I was privileged to chair the 5th National Consumer Debt Conference, organised by Utility Week, in Birmingham on Tuesday. It was a full and interesting day with the order of subject matter judged exactly right.

 

The first section focused on the economic landscape looking at issues around ability to pay, the implications of the current welfare reforms including Universal Credit, and the mechanics of the government's Green Deal scheme. The second section looked at customer management including the use of analytics to identify the most vulnerable in our society, and a cross section of good practice examples of customer-driven strategies. The final part of the conference addressed billing and collections, exploring areas as diverse as fraud and meter-tampering, landlord web-portals, risk management strategies, and smart metering.

 

You'll probably guess from some of the subject matter above that the delegates were largely from the utility and energy sectors where there are some particular credit management issues. The water industry's problems arising from the obligation to supply, and difficulty in identifying customer details, particularly in tenancies, for example, are well known and equally well documented.

What always strikes me at events like this, however, is just how many themes are common across industries and sectors. While each has its own peculiarities, trends, and concerns, the principles and elements of good credit management practice are largely shared.

 

At the end of the conference day, I hosted an interactive workshop where we discussed, amongst other things, what best practice looks like. One of the common themes that emerged was the need to drive professionalism within organisations through the engagement and development of credit professionals within them.

 

Driving that professionalism is one of the key objectives of the Institute of Credit Management and I'm always proud to hear examples of where we're succeeding, and to be playing a part in raising standards and performance as a result.

 

 

 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Falling on deaf ears'

I was interested to see the ICAEW (Institute of Chartered Accountants in England & Wales) quoted by James Hurley in the Telegraph last weekend making the same point the ICM had made in its submission to a government consultation in March this year. The consultation related to the implementation of 'Simpler Financial Reporting for Micro-Entities'. The Telegraph article is here and the changes include a reduction in the amount of information filed with Companies House and the opportunity to mix two different types of accounting – the traditional ‘accruals’ approach and so-called ‘cash accounting’.

 

The government claims that the measures will reduce red tape for small businesses making it easier for them to do business. We believe, however, that it will reduce the availability of credit and stifle the economy rather than the claimed positive alternative. Our argument focuses on four key issues. Firstly, to abridge or abbreviate accounts – or indeed any document – you first need to have the full version to work from. Filing less information does not, therefore, reduce the preparation time, indeed if anything it will increase it. Secondly, the presentation of prepayments and accrued income, and accruals and deferred income is vital to understanding the true financial position of a business and to being certain that it is solvent.

 

Thirdly, the absence of reported information will encourage suppliers to simply refuse requests for trade credit rather than go to the trouble of seeking more detailed information from the potential customer, particularly when the amounts involved are small. It is these modest transactions that accumulate into real economic activity and potential growth. Our final argument is that by categorising a business that turns over £440,000 and employs ten people in the same way as a genuine micro-business that might trade solely on a cash basis is ludicrous. What is worse is that the turnover and net assets limits have been substantially increased since the original discussion paper was published in August 2011.

 

Another example of unintended consequences resulting from a failure to listen adequately to the voices of those who live in the real world, I fear.

 

 

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 -'An added perspective'

I wrote in my blog last week about the danger of imposing prescriptive maximum payment terms on UK businesses and mentioned, by way of example, the reported offering by Canon and Nokia of favourable credit terms in their bid to keep Jessops' shops open as a route to market. 

This weekend the press suggested that the music and entertainment industry is falling over itself to keep HMV outlets open with The Sunday Times carrying the headline: "Music giants rush to keep HMV alive". The report ran: "The world's biggest music labels and film studios are assembling a multi-million pound rescue package to prevent HMV from going out of business. Universal Music, Warner Music and Sony are set to cut the price of CDs and DVDs, and give the retailer generous credit terms……."

Thinking on this reminds me of the wider role that credit professionals play in their businesses beyond risk mitigation and cash collection. When I address 'credit' audiences, I frequently remind them of the value they add to their businesses by contributing to, and in many cases even driving, the sales effort and activity. I refer to examples in my own career when I used a variety of tools and tactics (perhaps archaic by today's standards!) available to me at the time ranging from a credit reference agency to identify and pre-approve business customers for a number of mobile phone connections as a way of driving sales, to creative financial packages to allow my employer (a computer manufacturer) to supply product. We had a network of dealers, few of whom were good – on a credit basis – for any supplies on open account terms at all. Escrow accounts, back-to-back deals, end-user guarantees and many more solutions enabled us to ship product that would otherwise have remained unsold in the warehouse.

And this is where credit management comes into its own; where we can demonstrate real value. It is why credit management is such a challenging and rewarding career. In my 34th year as a credit professional I still get a huge kick out of it and even greater pleasure from leading an organisation of which I'm so proud and which remains committed to delivering the vital support our members need to deliver the cash.

Weekly blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM -'Maintaining forward momentum'

 

I've received some criticism of my comment about payment terms quoted in the Telegraph last Sunday. Coverage of the Prompt Payment Code (PPC) included my assertion that the drive by many for a prescriptive maximum 30 days credit terms is misguided. 

I make no apology for my comments and stand by them; my position is clear. Payment terms are one aspect of a trading relationship and, as such, should be open to negotiation in the same way as other factors such as price, quality, service levels, delivery arrangements etc already are. If maximum payment terms are stipulated, then one differentiator is removed. 

I remember in a previous role as Credit Manager of a computer manufacturer using very long payment terms as a carrot to persuade retailers to take obsolete printers that would otherwise have been discarded and destroyed. Offering longer payment terms can be a way of gaining business or obtaining a better price, while shorter terms can help mitigate against higher risk or compensate where competitive pressure demands lower prices.

By way of example, the Sunday Times last weekend reported that Canon and Nikon had offered favourable credit terms to Jessops in their attempts to keep it in business and maintain their vital shop window into the British retail market. I concede that their efforts spectacularly failed but, if maximum payment terms were introduced, they would not even have been able to try.

The day payment terms can't be negotiated between a supplier and customer is the day that a nail is hammered into the coffin of free market trading. I'm not for a minute suggesting that it is acceptable for large customers to exploit their suppliers, and especially smaller ones, by imposing unreasonable payment terms. That is unacceptable, just as refusing to pay a reasonable price for the products being purchased would be unacceptable.

The Prompt Payment Code was intended to drive a change in culture where good practice and paying on time, and to the agreed terms, becomes the norm rather than the exception. It is intended to get us to the point where suppliers have certainty about when to expect payment. It's great to see the increased momentum and visibility, and the increasing number of organisations signing up to the Code, but let's make sure that the debate continues to move us forwards and not back.

To become a signatory visit http://promptpaymentcode.org.uk

To read previous blogs visit http://www.icm.org.uk/home/ceos-blog
 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'A Christmas wish'

I asked a question on the ICM Credit Community group on LinkedIn recently and have had some interesting responses.

 

The question was: if Father Christmas were to bring you one gift that would really help you and/or your team be more effective in 2013, what would it be? There's still time for you to respond at http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=94851&trk=hb_side_g but posts so far can be split into three broad categories: practicalities; economic outlook; and professionalism.

 

The first comprises a wish-list including such things as: a crystal ball; a dictionary and thesaurus; more time; a cure for arthritis; better management systems; paying clients; sight of customers' management information; and a tool to force people to tell the truth! The second includes a wish for a steep economic upturn and a positive, optimistic view of the world. And the third, professionalism, covers: the desire for more networking; investment in the recruitment, retention and development of good credit people; and the resulting improvement that such investment delivers.

 

I'm afraid the ICM's ability to deliver some of the aspirations in the first category is limited, particularly in the field of arthritis (a cure for which I would certainly welcome if it were possible) but I'm pleased that our members are able to influence the second through our contact with the business/political community. I'm even more pleased that we're able to play a significant role in achieving the desires expressed in the third.

 

As I've often said in these blogs, we are all about driving professionalism, and developing services to support this ambition. As the recognised standard in credit management, our motivation is to raise the professionalism of people working in credit management by providing them with the opportunity to develop their skills, knowledge, and expertise in such a way that credit management is seen more and more as a profession in its own right.

 

I'll share some more thoughts from the discussion next week and also the wishes of the senior management team at ICM HQ; in the meantime I'm off to prepare for the ICM's Regional Roadshow in Milton Keynes where I'm looking forward to meeting a large number of our members and learn from an excellent panel of speakers.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Doing the right thing'

I spent Monday afternoon as part of a panel of 'experts' on a Guardian Small Business Network online Q&A session addressing Effective Cashflow Management.

 

Much of the advice offered would have been no surprise to readers of this blog. Such basic tips as: know who your customer is; agree payment terms in advance and in writing; invoice promptly and accurately; and don't be afraid to ask for money that is owed to you and is rightfully yours. The usual reminders that cashflow is vital, and that payment terms should be discussed along with all elements of a deal and not as an afterthought, also prominently featured as good advice, as well as the reminder that credit should not be offered unless you are confident that the customer can repay the amount involved.

 

All of this leads me to Comet, where administrators were appointed after it became clear that the company couldn't pay for the stock it needed for Christmas after suppliers demanded payment in advance following the withdrawal of credit insurance cover. It's always disappointing when long-established high street names collapse, and the Comet situation is no exception, but I have to take issue with some of the media coverage over last weekend.

 

It incenses me when it's suggested that suppliers have caused the collapse of the business by unfairly refusing to supply goods on credit terms. Credit is not a right, it is a privilege and is one of the tools available to businesses in creating profitable sales through the provision of extended payment terms. As above, credit should only be granted when you're confident that the customer can repay the amount involved.

 

Several writers expressed concerns about Comet's survival when OpCapita bought the retailer in February. I'm not going to get into the debate about the financial engineering involved here but suffice to say unsecured creditors are likely to lose substantially more than the investor who was going to save the business, so if questions are going to be asked and brickbats thrown, let's aim them in the right direction. And there are certainly questions to be answered.

 

Credit professionals weren't the cause; they were dealing with the symptoms and, if they were reducing credit availability, they were doing the right thing for their own organisations.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Always read the label'

So David Cameron met with some of the country's largest companies this week and urged them to support their smaller company suppliers by engaging in Supply Chain Finance.  The scheme uses the creditworthiness of the big company customer to allow the smaller supplier to obtain funding at lower cost secured against invoices that have been approved for payment.  It's often called reverse factoring, and one of the biggest advantages is that - since the buyer has confirmed approval of the invoice - there is no recourse.

 

The downside is that there are significant IT and administrative costs and it will only work in circumstances where the customer/supplier relationship is ongoing with regular transactions.  Perhaps the bigger risk is that large customers will be able to dictate longer payment terms justified on the basis that they have an arrangement whereby the SME can be paid faster.  But that, of course, will cost the SME interest which flies in the face of the culture we want to see, where payment terms are set fairly, and adhered to, in a climate where paying on time is the norm rather than the exception.

 

I'm not as scathing as some commentators about the scheme - there are circumstances where it is a great solution and can work really well – but it certainly isn't a panacea, and nor a one-size-fits-all solution.  I'd like to think that, while our Prime Minister had these business leaders in the room, he also asked those who hadn't signed up to the Prompt Payment Code why they hadn't done so.  In a week when Sainsbury's is being lambasted for extending payment terms for non-food suppliers to 75 days, we need to be encouraging good practice that enables SMEs to have certainty about payment expectations.  Supply Chain Finance has its place but there's no substitute for agreeing fair payment terms and sticking to them.  We need more businesses to lead by example, and we need our leaders to put pressure on them to do so.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Measure for measure'

The Government has this week published its response to the BIS Select Committee's report on Debt Management published in March and it makes interesting reading.  The original report contained 23 recommendations and the government responds to each one in turn. The document can be found here and what pleases me is the measured and proportionate nature of the responses.

 

The timetable for the planned review of the regulatory framework, including the transfer of regulatory powers from the OFT to the FCA, is set out with the final transfer expected to take place by April 2014.  Having a clear timetable and plan including expected consultation dates is helpful.  The more interesting aspects, however, relate to payday loans and debt management companies.

On payday loans, the Government refers to the work it has been carrying out with the four main trade associations representing over 90% of the payday loan market to improve consumer protection in their codes of practice.  These improvements together with the OFT’s review investigating levels of compliance with the Consumer Credit Act are, in my view, the right approach before any more stringent measures are considered.  Furthermore, the codes include measures to address the issues of rollover loans, affordability assessment, and continuous payment authority, and the Government has undertaken to review how best to include high-cost credit transactions in credit files.

In summary, close engagement with the trade associations to introduce enhanced consumer protections into their codes of practice and their commitment to publish a common industry-wide Good Practice Customer Charter setting out in a clear, concise and user-friendly format what customers of payday and other short-term loans should expect from their lender is positive and encouraging.  One can never condone poor practice but I believe payday loans have their place in certain circumstances and meet a particular need.

With regard to Debt Management companies, the Government is working with stakeholders to develop a Protocol of best practice for debt management plans which will cover transparency of fees and costs (particularly where they are upfront), misleading advertising, and safeguarding client accounts.  Again, in my view, working with the industry and trade bodies makes absolute sense before considering legislation and heavier regulation.

 
It's worth also noting that – in both cases – the approach being proposed will deliver faster results than would be achieved by the introduction of legislation.  Finally, as an aside, I have to mention again my particular soapbox that Debt Management Plans should be reported in the insolvency statistics so that the published numbers are a true representation of personal insolvency levels.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Fatal distraction'

So Wonga has entered the business loan market and added to what is already a fast and dramatically changing landscape.  The introduction of services such as Funding Circle and MarketInvoice have already had a big impact on how businesses can source finance and the recent Breedon Report recognised that alternative funding sources are here to stay.  Couple that with last week's Bank of England Trends in Lending report which said….. "The annual rate of growth in the stock of lending to UK businesses was negative in the three months to February. The stock of lending to small and medium-sized enterprises continued to contract….." and you can see why Wonga might sniff an opportunity.  I'm not sure Wonga is a good solution for small businesses strapped for cash but it's little different to a small business owner funding his business using a personal credit card or two, and that's been happening for years.

 

What worries me more is the suggestion touted in the media and elsewhere that solutions like MarketInvoice are a cure for late payment.  They're not.  MarketInvoice allows a business to sell invoices to a network of institutional investors and it can release the capital tied up in those invoices in real time.  In the short term it can therefore address the cash-flow problem caused by late payment but it's not a cure.  Payment still has to be obtained and, if the invoice is not eventually paid, the amount will have to be refunded to the investor.

The problem as I see it is that – having obtained funding against the invoice(s) - the business owner has removed the immediate cash-flow hole caused by non-payment and can focus attention elsewhere.  The problem hasn't gone away though, and if there is a fundamental problem preventing payment it still needs to be resolved.  Let's not forget, and let's make sure that small businesses don't forget, that the best way to avoid late payment is to get the basics right: knowing your customer, agreeing payment terms in advance, invoicing correctly and promptly, and chasing payment immediately it becomes overdue.  Anything that slows that process, or distracts from it, could lead to far more serious problems; timing is all-important in the management of cash-flow and collection of amounts due and, while attention is elsewhere, the slow-paying customer could fail and become a bad debt rather than just a late payer.

Cashflow keeps business in business and good credit management is vital to maintaining that cash-flow. Mixing messages is not helpful.

http://www.creditmanagement.org.uk/bisguides.htm

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Putting the lifeblood back into business'

The highly regarded Ernst & Young Item Club came out at the weekend with a forecast growth for the year of a dismal 0.4%. Although Item Club uses the same economic models as the Treasury, its forecast was much worse than the Treasury's a few weeks ago. Speaking on Radio 4 earlier in the week, its commentator attributed this largely to timing and the dynamic nature of economic factors. The Club says Britain's economic growth will remain anaemic because companies are hoarding their cash, and it will stay on the "critical list" until companies start spending again.

I talk to many businesses of all shapes and sizes and the vast majority tell me that they are struggling to find customers who are willing to spend or make significant investments. This is a feeling particularly prevalent among the SME community whose fundamental priority seems to be one of survival rather than planning for growth or expansion. We're all waiting for real signs of recovery before we can start to feel confident, and until confidence returns we won't want to spend or invest. Until we do, however, "Britain's economic growth will remain anaemic because companies are hording their cash, and it will stay on the "critical list"......" (see above). It seems like the classic vicious circle to me!

There is one thing that companies could do though that would generate cash-flow for the whole business community and would definitely aid economic recovery. Pay their bills on time! Some do, and there are examples of really good practice, but many - big and small - don't, and because of that their suppliers struggle for healthy cash-flow and in some cases fail to survive. The Prompt Payment Code hosted by the ICM for BIS was launched to help change the culture to one where paying on time and to the agreed payment terms was the norm rather than the exception. Well in excess of a thousand organisations have signed up to the Code but many more could do so.

Paying on time has many advantages: it releases money tied up in unpaid debtors; it allows business owners to focus on selling and providing a better service rather than chasing payment from tardy customers; and ultimately it helps more businesses to survive and prosper. The Prompt Payment Code can be found at http://www.promptpaymentcode.org.uk/.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Help and helping oneself'

I attended a Prompt Payment workshop last week, organised by BIS and hosted by Mark Prisk. There was clear consensus among the attendees, representing government and business organisations, that late payment continues to be an issue impacting negatively on business. No surprise there then; every week we see the results of one survey or another reinforcing the message that businesses suffer when they don't get paid promptly.

The EU Late Payment Directive coming into force in March 2013 might help but if anyone really believes it's going to fundamentally change things then they are deluded. Guidance and advice issued by numerous organisations, including the ICM whose Managing Cashflow Guides will shortly reach the 300,000 download milestone, is valuable and helpful but many small business owners are too busy trying to survive to commit time looking for advice about late paying customers even though doing so might resolve many, or even all, of their cash-flow problems. Making 30 day payment terms mandatory for all transactions (as has been proposed by one organisation) would remove one of the key negotiable elements of business transactions and would be tantamount to insisting that all goods must be sold, and services provided, at exactly the same price; that seems a bit perverse and self defeating to me, in a fee economy.

If you've been following the Global Entrepreneurship Congress 2012 in Liverpool this week (I have, but I confess only on Twitter!) you might have seen Richard Branson quoted as saying: "Cashflow is everything when getting a business started..." He is right. One of our challenges is to get advice to business before they're suffering from late payment so that they get the basics right from the beginning of any new trading relationship - basics such as knowing who your customer is, agreeing payment terms before supplying, invoicing promptly and accurately, and so on. I was speaking to a small business owner recently who was complaining he hadn't been paid on time. I asked how he advised the customer what the payment terms were. His answer: "I didn't, because he needed the material urgently". We don't always help ourselves, do we?

The workshop last week was productive and I'm delighted the Institute is going to be even more involved in helping BIS take actions forward. In the meantime, those of us who deal with SMEs could do worse than signpost them to good advice such as the Managing Cashflow Guides available at http://www.creditmanagement.org.uk/ and to encourage them to do the things that we take for granted.