Name and shame website launch for non-payers

Frustrated by outstanding invoices, sole trader Trevor Tierney has established a website for SMEs to 'name and shame' customers who do not pay up within agreed or standard payment terms.

Tierney says he wanted to help other businesses after his cash flow was adversely affected by constant late payments.

Continued...

» Register now

The full article is available to registered AccountingWEB members only. To read the rest of this article you’ll need to login or register.

Registration is FREE and allows you to view all content, ask questions, comment and much more.

Comments

Fantastic idea!

AnonymousUser | | Permalink

Just had a look at www.60days.com
Yes, its a great idea (in fact, not one hour ago I faxed a "final notice" to someone, and I stated on it "we share info on whoever we take to court, among a wide range of contacts in our industry" etc).

www.60days.com

rpMobile | | Permalink

I agree with "Not so sure". Also, what happens in the case of supplier which does not supply an invoice with the goods and/or delivery note but posts it with no guarantee of it reaching the destination. Do not go the route of Recorded/Special Delivery. Royal Mail deliver to addresses not individuals or companies. Unfortunately, some companies insist on wasting 21/28p per envelope when they probably could send via fax/email direct from their PC's. Similarly some companies will only process invoices received via post because they KNOW that they can use the Royal Mail as an excuse for supposed non-receipt. However, I digress. In "Not so sure"'s example of the disputed invoice could this lead to a case of libel?
The solution would be to "tit for tat" if one could obtain the co-operation of the offender's customer's or put the offender on a "Cash on collection" basis for stock items or 100% deposit for non-stock items for a period of 6 months to 1 year. That is, if one is sure that the competition is no-competition. The latter works!

Doesn't sound that great to me

Anonymous | | Permalink

Whilst I have no argument in the general purpose of naming and shaming consistently late payers, what happens when someone raises a disputed invoice? Does that person then deserve to be named and shamed and have their credit rating affected because they haven't received the goods or services agreed, or something is seriously wrong with the work?

This could be got around if a late payment couldn't be recorded until at least three suppliers say had reported them. That way injustices are less likely to be made.

Then again it would be good if Trading Standards also worked in a similar manner so that traders with persistently dodgy practices were actually stopped instead of supported by the system this wouldn't be a problem.