MAL33:19 MAL33 | Page 88

CREDIT MANAGEMENT The Employee Did Not Have The Authority To Sign The Contract! By Wasilwa Miriongi O ne of the most common remarks that I used to come across when collecting from customers on their advertising contracts with my former employer, was “The employee did not have authority to sign the contract.” Sometimes I ask myself could it be as a society we have become accustomed and complacent with having to read and/ or post warning signs and labels dealing with everyday applications that should be second nature to us, I refer to them as "common sense" situations. The fact that these postings are required at all causes one to assume that we have truly become a society of sheep that cannot think or perform without being told or reminded what they should or should not do along with the ramifications of their actions. Could also be our nature just to trust sales persons with contracts without reading through the dotted lines and having a clear understanding what we are committing the company to! The credit profession is not exempt from this madness. Although we are required to post notices at times concerning the debtors' rights, will we also eventually suffer the outcome of frivolous lawsuits and be required to supplement common sense and post similar dumb warnings? We hear it all the time: “We are not going to pay those invoices because the person who signed the contract didn’t have authority.” Many go on to say: “It says right in our authority levels that only a senior officer or a manager can bind the company to a contract of such a magnitude.” This tells us several things: The debtor does not want to pay; The debtor is aware of this outstanding debt; There is a good chance the debtor has the money to pay; and The debtor either does not know the law or is pretending to not knowing the law. As a debt collection agency specializing in debt collection, we know the law is on our side. But, our initial response is not about the law, but to ask questions to learn more. We want to know why they don’t want to pay, because that is the real problem to solve. In collection, unless the excuses are addressed or the so called reasons, payments will obviously delay leading to strain in cash flow position. 86 MAL33/19 ISSUE As a debt collection agency specializing in debt collection, we know the law is on our side. But, our initial response is not about the law, but to ask questions to learn more. We want to know why they don’t want to pay, because that is the real problem to solve. In collection, unless the excuses are addressed or the so called reasons, payments will obviously delay leading to strain in cash flow position. We encounter this situation most frequently with service contracts. Typically the debtor signed up for a service of some type, such as advertising, email list access, or an information database. The most frequent explanations we hear as to why they do not want to pay are: We never used the service; We did not get any benefit from the service; The service didn’t work the way we thought it would; Our business changed directions and we didn’t need the service; or Our profits declined and we just cannot afford it. Once we hear the explanation, we will ask a few more probing questions to fully understand the real issue we need to resolve. We also make sure to contact the client regarding the debtor’s actual usage of the service in case that information will help us with the debt collection effort. Then we pivot to the issue of Authority, the excuse the debtor is trying to hide behind. Under the law of agency, an Agent (employee) is able to bind the Principal (company) in a contractual relationship with a third party (customer or supplier). Business could not function efficiently if purchasing people could not order