First of all I have to apologise for having been off-line for so long. Sadly, I haven’t been having a wonderful vacation. We have painters in the house – and I know from bitter experience that I’m allergic to the chemicals in the paint. Whilst the ladders and the pots and the blokes with the radios have been working in the office and surrounding rooms the cat and I have been hibernating upstairs and in the garden. It saves on Kleenex, misery, and getting paint off a a long-haired black cat (don’t ask!) but it doesn’t help to get any work done. And yes! I do need a lap-top …
Ever since I started on this blog I’ve been preaching the virtues of self-sufficiency and DIY, but just recently I’ve had outsourcing and ‘virtual employees’ pushed under my nose so often that I think it’s worth talking about outsourcing because it seems that it could be such a time and money saver for the average small or medium sized businesses.
Practically every function can now be outsourced - and bearing in mind that people who are running their own outsourcing business have the expertise and the motivation and the attitude that one would expect from a person who is ‘in business’, outsourcing is surely worth looking at. Outsourcers expect to be paid, of course -but they don’t expect rewards or benefits packages, and if they don’t feel well I suspect that they tend do as I do (and as you you probably do yourself): get as much done as possible and then get back into bed as soon as possible afterwards.
In the past people tended to outsource just one or two functions – bookkeeping was a favourite, along with payroll, receptionists and personal assistants, but these days people seem to be going much further and ‘virtualising’ everything they possibly can. And that, of course, includes credit control.
According to the June issue of the ICM magazine: “Research indicates that organisations that outsource…achieve higher profitability than those do not”, primarily (but not solely) because they get access to higher levels of expertise that they would not be able to get in-house. And, of course, they reduce their overheads.
I haven’t done a lot of research, but I think The UK Association of Virtual Assistants might be a good place to at least begin do some investigation of your own. Ms. Curtis has a great deal to say - and for once it’s all worth reading. I was impressed.
Obviously outsourcers are not ‘one size fits all’ (or at least they shouldn’t be!) and the outsourcers you chose need to be flexible, and understand your organisation and your needs – and, of course, they need to be the answer to improving your results, reducing your outgoings, giving you more time to concentrate on building your business, and be good value for money.
By the way: Yes, we are credit management outsourcers - and no, we aren't the sort of outsourcers that can ‘virtualise’ your whole credit management function for you. We only do what we do - and you can see what we do on Our Website. Contact the The Institute of Credit Managment for more advice and information on full service credit mangement outsourcers.
THE RATS TALES: Credit Management news, views and opinions - some of them unpopular...
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Government Top-Up Scheme for Credit Insurance
From May 1st to December 31st this year UK businesses will be able to buy six months top-up insurance under the Working Capital Scheme.
Under the scheme, suppliers will be able to buy Government-backed insurance either to restore cover to the original level, or to double the amount they are able to obtain from the private sector, or £1 million, whichever is the lower. The qualifying window is going to be back-dated to include reductions of insurance cover since the 1st of April, and the Government will be consulting as to guaranteeing letters of credit.
Credit insurers Coface, Atradius , and Euler Hermes are backing the scheme and will offer it to all customers who meet their criteria.
Interestingly, Fabrice Desnos, the UK CEO of Euler Hermes stated, inter alia, that “We don’t expect the take-up for the scheme to be very high…”
Not too surprising. According to Lord Mandelson this is a transitional scheme designed to "provide a much needed breathing space for businesses suffering as a result of the reduction in trade credit insurance", but like most Government schemes it hasn't been very well advertised.
Considering the problems that the withdrawal of credit insurance already has - and will continue - to cause, one would have hoped to see a well-organised publicity campaign. As it is you can find more information on page 8 of the June issue of The Journal of the Insitute of Credit Management than practically anywhere else.
Under the scheme, suppliers will be able to buy Government-backed insurance either to restore cover to the original level, or to double the amount they are able to obtain from the private sector, or £1 million, whichever is the lower. The qualifying window is going to be back-dated to include reductions of insurance cover since the 1st of April, and the Government will be consulting as to guaranteeing letters of credit.
Credit insurers Coface, Atradius , and Euler Hermes are backing the scheme and will offer it to all customers who meet their criteria.
Interestingly, Fabrice Desnos, the UK CEO of Euler Hermes stated, inter alia, that “We don’t expect the take-up for the scheme to be very high…”
Not too surprising. According to Lord Mandelson this is a transitional scheme designed to "provide a much needed breathing space for businesses suffering as a result of the reduction in trade credit insurance", but like most Government schemes it hasn't been very well advertised.
Considering the problems that the withdrawal of credit insurance already has - and will continue - to cause, one would have hoped to see a well-organised publicity campaign. As it is you can find more information on page 8 of the June issue of The Journal of the Insitute of Credit Management than practically anywhere else.
Monday, July 6, 2009
What’s in a Name? How about Reputation, Goodwill, & Profit?
A couple of weeks ago I posted a New Legislation Notice about existing forthcoming changes to the Companies Act due to take place in October this year. I laid special emphasis in that particular post on the fact that – come October – new companies intending to register a similar name to existing companies are going to need the consent of those companies before being allowed to register the name.
I want to revert to that subject now, because when I was browsing the Companies House site yesterday, I came across a perfect example of exactly why the new legislation is important and necessary.
Berkmann Wine Cellars Limited was incorporated as Company Number 02190816 on the 10th of November 1987. It is a private limited Company, has a registered office at 10-12 Brewery Road, London N7 9NH, and the nature of its business is given as “(SIC(03)) 5134 – wholesale alcoholic and other drinks".
On the 27th of May 2009, Berkmann Wine Cellars UK Limited was incorporated as Company Number 06915798. It, too, is a private limited company. It has a registered office at 56 Sherston Court, Newington Butts, London SE1 6SG, and the nature of its business is also given as “SIC(03))".
I was curious enough about those entries to make some enquiries.
Berkmann Wine Cellars Limited – as you will discover for yourself if you visit http://www.berkmann.co.uk - is a family owned company that was originally founded to supply Mr. Joseph Berkmann’s group of restaurants with bordeaux, burgundy and Beaujolais wines.
Berkmann Wine Cellars UK Limited, on the other hand, has a single Director whose name is Rivero and not Berkmann and who is apparently in no way related to the Berkmann Family – just as the new Company is no way related to Berkmann Wine Cellars Limited.
Which brings me to the knotty legal problem of ‘passing off’.
The legal definition of ‘passing off’ is: “to misrepresent that one's business is that of, or connected with another, in a way likely to cause damage”, or: "a misrepresentation made by a trader in the course of trade to prospective customers of his or ultimate consumers of goods or services supplied by him, which is calculated to injure the business or goodwill of another trader (in the sense that this is a reasonably foreseeable consequence) and which causes actual damage to a business or goodwill of the trader by whom the action is brought or will probably do so."
The definition of ‘misrepresentation’, incidentally, is simply “a representation that is untrue." ‘Goodwill’ is an intangible business asset which includes a cultivated reputation and consequential attraction and confidence of repeat customers and connections. In many cases, the word ‘goodwill’ is used interchangeably with the word ‘reputation’.
Obviously, I’m not in a position to speculate as to why the sole Director of ‘Berkmann Wine Cellars UK Limited’ chose a company name that might be so easily confused with that of a pre-existing, well-established, and reputable company – and I’m certainly not accusing that person of having any intention of ‘passing off’. Ms. Rivero may, after all, never have heard of Berkmann Wine Cellars Limited.
On the other hand, the name was an unfortunate choice on her part, and she (or her professional advisors) should have done their homework before settling on a name for the new company. Moreover, were I a Director of a pre-existing, old-established, and reputable company faced with this situation, I would be concerned enough to try to ensure that there could be no confusion – because, in all the circumstances, confusion would certainly seem to be ‘a reasonably foreseeable consequence’.
I want to revert to that subject now, because when I was browsing the Companies House site yesterday, I came across a perfect example of exactly why the new legislation is important and necessary.
Berkmann Wine Cellars Limited was incorporated as Company Number 02190816 on the 10th of November 1987. It is a private limited Company, has a registered office at 10-12 Brewery Road, London N7 9NH, and the nature of its business is given as “(SIC(03)) 5134 – wholesale alcoholic and other drinks".
On the 27th of May 2009, Berkmann Wine Cellars UK Limited was incorporated as Company Number 06915798. It, too, is a private limited company. It has a registered office at 56 Sherston Court, Newington Butts, London SE1 6SG, and the nature of its business is also given as “SIC(03))".
I was curious enough about those entries to make some enquiries.
Berkmann Wine Cellars Limited – as you will discover for yourself if you visit http://www.berkmann.co.uk - is a family owned company that was originally founded to supply Mr. Joseph Berkmann’s group of restaurants with bordeaux, burgundy and Beaujolais wines.
Berkmann Wine Cellars UK Limited, on the other hand, has a single Director whose name is Rivero and not Berkmann and who is apparently in no way related to the Berkmann Family – just as the new Company is no way related to Berkmann Wine Cellars Limited.
Which brings me to the knotty legal problem of ‘passing off’.
The legal definition of ‘passing off’ is: “to misrepresent that one's business is that of, or connected with another, in a way likely to cause damage”, or: "a misrepresentation made by a trader in the course of trade to prospective customers of his or ultimate consumers of goods or services supplied by him, which is calculated to injure the business or goodwill of another trader (in the sense that this is a reasonably foreseeable consequence) and which causes actual damage to a business or goodwill of the trader by whom the action is brought or will probably do so."
The definition of ‘misrepresentation’, incidentally, is simply “a representation that is untrue." ‘Goodwill’ is an intangible business asset which includes a cultivated reputation and consequential attraction and confidence of repeat customers and connections. In many cases, the word ‘goodwill’ is used interchangeably with the word ‘reputation’.
Obviously, I’m not in a position to speculate as to why the sole Director of ‘Berkmann Wine Cellars UK Limited’ chose a company name that might be so easily confused with that of a pre-existing, well-established, and reputable company – and I’m certainly not accusing that person of having any intention of ‘passing off’. Ms. Rivero may, after all, never have heard of Berkmann Wine Cellars Limited.
On the other hand, the name was an unfortunate choice on her part, and she (or her professional advisors) should have done their homework before settling on a name for the new company. Moreover, were I a Director of a pre-existing, old-established, and reputable company faced with this situation, I would be concerned enough to try to ensure that there could be no confusion – because, in all the circumstances, confusion would certainly seem to be ‘a reasonably foreseeable consequence’.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)