No Comments

Credit Repair Schemes – A Magic Wand?

The Australian Securities & Investments Commission (ASIC) has just issued a press release warning consumers about the aggressive and misleading sales techniques of companies promising to wipe clean bad credit reports.

As the press release makes clear, many of these companies are making promises they cannot keep and at the same time are seeking large upfront payments. See a copy of the press release here.

Despite what you might hear in certain advertisements, there is no “magic wand” for a debtor to improve their credit rating. The only ways that a credit report can be amended or updated is if the default listing is incorrect or the debt is paid. [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

Calderbank Offers – What You Need to Know

By Andrew Behman, an Associate of Matthews Folbigg, in our Insolvency, Restructuring and Debt Recovery Group

In our earlier post about settlement negotiations “Agreement in principle” – is it binding?“, we discussed the an offer that was agreed to “in principle” and what that means.  The offer that we talked about was a Calderbank offer.

What is it?

A Calderbank offer is a type of settlement offer designed to put the offeror in a position to ask the court to make an indemnity costs order, if the offerer succeeds in the litigation beyond the amount offered. An indemnity costs order is an order that the less successful party pay a larger portion of the other party’s costs. Normally ‘costs follow the event’ – which means that an unsuccessful party  will be ordered to pay the successful party’s costs of litigation. However normally, because of the way the costs assessment process works, only a portion of the successful party’s actual costs will be recoverable. However by making a Calderbank offer, a party to litigation can improve the chances of recovering a significantly higher proportion of those costs. These offers are based on the principles outlined in the English case of Calderbank v Calderbank [1975] 3 All ER 333. [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

“Agreement in principle” – is it binding?

By Andrew Behman, an Associate of Matthews Folbigg, in our Insolvency, Restructuring and Debt Recovery Group

When you’re negotiating the terms of a contract, settlement or payment arrangement, you might hear the term “agreement in principle”.  The obvious questions are:

  1. What does it mean?
  2. If you agree “in principle” to a person’s offer, or that person agrees “in principle” to your offer, can the agreement be enforced?

These are questions that are considered in numerous cases and various situations. The Courts have historically considered such cases in the context of different categories of agreement based on the decision in Masters v. Cameron. Recently the Supreme Court of New South Wales looked at these questions again in the matter of P J Leahy & Ors v A R Hill & Anor [2018] NSWSC 6. In this matter, Mr Leahy (and his related parties) commenced proceedings against Mr and Mrs Hill to recover an amount he claimed was due for repairs to a shed and arrears under a licence agreement. [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

PRIORITY PAID?

By Darrin Mitchell, Senior Associate at Matthews Folbigg in the Insolvency, Restructuring and Debt Recovery Group.

The Australian legal system has of late become a confusing morass of conflicting judgments on the order of priority of payment of creditors of insolvent trustees from trust assets. This has a significant impact on creditors, particularly employees, whose priority payment is no longer assured, by quirk of the structuring advice given to an employer without their knowledge or consent. Well the landscape was twisted again recently with a decision today by a five member panel of the Victorian Court of Appeal. [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

DEBT COLLECTION IN A SAFE HARBOUR

Debt collection commentary by Darrin Mitchell, Senior Associate at Matthews Folbigg in the Insolvency, Restructuring and Debt Recovery Group.

Credit Managers should be aware of the reforms made to the Corporations Act 2001 (“the Act”) that attempt to create a shield for directors of companies that believe their company is in financial stress and how it affects their debt collection strategies.

Changes in September 2017 to the Act created section 588GA and deal with specific actions taken by directors in relation to debts incurred after 19 September 2017. These reforms are commonly referred to as the “Safe Harbour Reforms”. [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

AFSA Offence Referral Update

Recent updates to the Alleged Offence Referral to AFSA template now provide for the inclusion of details of any person (individual or corporate) acting on behalf of, or assisting, a bankrupt or debtor. This can include a spouse, child, friend, accountant or lawyer assisting a bankrupt in an informal capacity, as is often the case.

As trustees are aware, they have a duty under section 19(1)(i) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 to refer to AFSA any evidence of an offence committed by a bankrupt. However, there are often circumstances where it is unclear whether there is sufficient evidence to support an offence referral. AFSA has available a Pre Referral Enquiry (“PRE”) program that is a convenient and efficient way to deal with such matters. PREs can be as simple as emailing AFSA with a summary of the circumstances and suspected offence/s and are particularly useful: [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

CREDITORS AND THE INSOLVENCY LAW REFORM ACT 2016

By Darrin Mitchell, Senior Associate at Matthews Folbigg in the Insolvency, Restructuring and Debt Recovery Group.

As the 2017 year draws to a close, creditors would be aware that both instalments of the Insolvency Law Reform Act 2016 (“the ILRA”) have come to pass.

What should creditors be aware of under the new regime?

The ILRA is an attempt to reform the insolvency law but also to provide an improvement in the confidence of the public in the overall performance of the trustees and liquidators appointed to the various estates and administrations that are commenced every day. [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

CREDITORS AND THE INSOLVENCY LAW REFORM ACT 2016

By Darrin Mitchell, Senior Associate at Matthews Folbigg in the Insolvency, Restructuring and Debt Recovery Group.

As the 2017 year draws to a close, creditors would be aware that both instalments of the Insolvency Law Reform Act 2016 (“the ILRA”) have come to pass.

What should creditors be aware of under the new regime?

The ILRA is an attempt to reform the insolvency law but also to provide an improvement in the confidence of the public in the overall performance of the trustees and liquidators appointed to the various estates and administrations that are commenced every day. [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

A matter of some interest…

By Jeff Brown, a Principal of Matthews Folbigg, in our Insolvency, Restructuring and Debt Recovery Group.

A recent Supreme Court decision serves as a timely reminder of the care to be employed when deciding whether a statutory demand requires a verifying affidavit.

Merlo Group Australia Pty Ltd (“MGA”) obtained a judgment in the District Court against GTH Equipment Pty Ltd (“GTH”). A judgment/order was entered by the Court, recording that “[MGA’s] motion for summary judgment is granted so far as the claim for $143,000 is concerned. Judgment in favour of [MGA] in the sum of $143,000 together with interest under the contract from 3 February 2015.” (Emphasis added). [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

Signing on the dotted line: making sure you bind your customer to a contract.

By Jeff Brown, a Principal of Matthews Folbigg, in our Insolvency, Restructuring and Debt Recovery Group.

We all know the importance of getting a customer “signed up”. But how do you know that the person signing a supply agreement on behalf of a potential customer has authority to do so, and does it even matter if that person does not have authority?

This issue commonly arises when we advise clients on credit collection policies and when we work with sales teams on how to cut down on errors at the point where a sales lead becomes a customer. These errors can have catastrophic effects when seeking to chase a customer who has become a bad debt. [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

Guaranteed Win?

By Bonnie McMahon Solicitor of Matthews Folbigg, in our Insolvency, Restructuring and Debt Recovery Group.

Guarantees are a vital part of any credit agreement, however enforcing them is often a major headache for creditors, especially when collecting money. It is often the case that guarantors will argue that a guarantee is invalid or was never incorporated into the credit agreement: see Singh v De Castro; Dhaliwal v De Castro; Brar v De Castro [2017] NSWCA 241 (“Singh”).

So how can debt collectors avoid guarantors trying to get around a guarantee when they are trying to recover a debt? The simple answer is by foreseeing the issues which may arise in respect of a guarantee and eliminating them now. [...]  READ MORE →

No Comments

Fresh evidence – how fresh is fresh enough?

By Hayley Hitch, Solicitor and Stephen Mullette, Principal of Matthews Folbigg in our Insolvency, Restructuring and Debt Recovery Group.

It is the stuff of the classic cop show or court room thriller. The bad guy is about to get away with the crime, until there is an application to introduce “fresh evidence”.

But how fresh is fresh enough?

In the real world, if the application is found to be just an attempt to re-hear a matter without in fact bringing new evidence before the Court, the application will be dismissed and potentially a cost order may be made against the applicant. [...]  READ MORE →