30.04.2018 Views

CM magazine May 2018

The CICM magazine for consumer and commercial credit professionals

The CICM magazine for consumer and commercial credit professionals

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

EDITOR’S COLUMN<br />

More band-wagon jumpers<br />

than a John Wayne Western<br />

Sean Feast<br />

Managing Editor<br />

THERE has been a great deal<br />

of noise in the news recently<br />

(indeed does it ever go<br />

away?) about the issue of late<br />

payment. What strikes me<br />

most is that there are more<br />

band-wagon jumpers than a John Wayne<br />

Western.<br />

Wearing a PR hat, perhaps I can’t blame<br />

them. Arguably I would be advising the<br />

same, especially if I were representing a<br />

cashflow solutions provider and needed<br />

to sell product, or a business organisation<br />

that needed to flex its muscles to show its<br />

members how strong it was. I don’t mind<br />

any of it, but I do mind when they get their<br />

facts wrong or make swingeing statements<br />

without proper research.<br />

The easy target for unwanted attention,<br />

like the chap with National Health glasses<br />

in the playground, is the Prompt Payment<br />

Code (PPC). Headlines that scream that<br />

the Code isn’t working or worse, that it has<br />

failed, fail in themselves to understand<br />

what the Code was for and what is has<br />

achieved thus far.<br />

One of its principal objectives was to<br />

bring late payment to the fore as a topic<br />

of debate, to create a dialogue between<br />

clients and their suppliers, and highlight<br />

that the culture of late payment had to<br />

change. Thus the hysterical subsequent<br />

commentary is really rather ironic. Far<br />

from meaning that the Code has ‘failed’, it<br />

means completely the opposite, that the<br />

Code is in fact working.<br />

Can the Code be better? Yes of course.<br />

Could it be strengthened further? Yes<br />

indeed and it should be. But the real<br />

problem with the Code is not the Code<br />

itself, or how it is administered, but rather<br />

how it is promoted. Some commentators<br />

were quick to point fingers after the<br />

Carillion collapse that the construction<br />

giant was a signatory to the Code. As<br />

such, they argued, it demonstrated that<br />

the Code was worthless. Really?<br />

Had any of those same commentators<br />

raised a challenge in recent times?<br />

Had they used the challenge process<br />

to demonstrate that Carillion was not<br />

treating its suppliers fairly? Are they<br />

aware, for example, that the Code has a one<br />

hundred percent success rate in resolving<br />

every payment dispute challenge that has<br />

ever been made, including those levelled<br />

against well-known High Street names?<br />

No. I thought not.<br />

But it’s perhaps not their fault. The<br />

problem is that the challenge process is<br />

not widely enough known or publicised,<br />

and in my opinion that’s where the<br />

Government, business organisations and<br />

the media, should focus their attentions.<br />

If they did that, it would help make the<br />

Prompt Payment Code the beacon of best<br />

practice that it set out to be.<br />

The Recognised Standard / www.cicm.com / <strong>May</strong> <strong>2018</strong> / PAGE 4

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!