credit checking

[sweetandsour]

Is that £18K overall, or per contractor. If they've a hundred contractors, that'll be £180 each...

The checksure reports give you a "riskiness rating" and also a maximum recommended amount outstanding that you should allow them to have at any one time.

Of course, that is not a lot of help if you invoice monthly and the figure they give you is less than your monthly invoice.

[NotAllThere]

...
One agency I was using for a while had a rating of about 54, and a maximum credit exposure of £18,000 but I know for a while it was touch and go whether they could pay the invoices and they were frequently a few days late.

Is that £18K overall, or per contractor. If they've a hundred contractors, that'll be £180 each...

[expat]

Hmmm, I'm afraid it doesn't mean a lot to me either.

Are there any CCJs against the company? I understand what they mean.

No unsatisfied CCJs.

The Days Beyond Terms (DBT) section says

DBT for 07/2009
No. of experiences 2
No. of references 1

and then shows DBT Table
and the 2 "experiences" are "Within Terms"
so I guess that means the credit agency only have 2 reports, and both are OK. Amount is 2,000 so it doesn't say much anyway.


I guess that what I have is:
1. no explicit evidence of not paying.
2. High risk rating from Checksure, but I don't know how bad that is.
3. company ran at a small loss in 2007, on big turnover. Don't know if that's a bad sign.
Large "Other Current Liabilities", don't know what that means.

Conclusion: be cautious. But it's not screaming "Jump". Is it?

[sweetandsour]

I've had a look but I'm no expert. It looks like an agency that is doing business. Sales £17.5M, would that be 80-100 contractors? On that, they report a net loss of 700k, could be just business, not sinking IMHO. But the latest reported figures are 2007, I was doing pretty well myself then.


Latest Balance Sheet (12/2007) shows
Total current assets £4.5M
incl. Trade Debtors £4.2M
.....this is presumably clients due to pay.

and
Total Current Liabilities £6.3M
incl Trade Creditors £1.1M (presumably contractors)
and Bank overdraft £0.6M
and Other Current Liabilities £3.7M

Now what is that, "Other"?

Net Assets/(Liabilities) -£1.7M.
Share Capital + Reserves -£2.3M
... does that mean that the directors have set up the company so that it owes them a shedload of money? Which they may be thinking of extracting??


The Profit and Loss account 2007 shows
Sales £17.5M
cost of goods sold £14.1M
Gross Profit £3.3M

General admin costs £3.7M
Wages and Salaries £2.9M

-------------
I see no reason to think that the company is in trouble, am I missing it?
I don't quite get the "Other Current Liabilities £3.7M".

Hmmm, I'm afraid it doesn't mean a lot to me either.

Are there any CCJs against the company? I understand what they mean.

[expat]

Can you build up your own view of the company from the other information in the Checksure report other than just the rating numbers?

I've had a look but I'm no expert. It looks like an agency that is doing business. Sales £17.5M, would that be 80-100 contractors? On that, they report a net loss of 700k, could be just business, not sinking IMHO. But the latest reported figures are 2007, I was doing pretty well myself then.


Latest Balance Sheet (12/2007) shows
Total current assets £4.5M
incl. Trade Debtors £4.2M
.....this is presumably clients due to pay.

and
Total Current Liabilities £6.3M
incl Trade Creditors £1.1M (presumably contractors)
and Bank overdraft £0.6M
and Other Current Liabilities £3.7M

Now what is that, "Other"?

Net Assets/(Liabilities) -£1.7M.
Share Capital + Reserves -£2.3M
... does that mean that the directors have set up the company so that it owes them a shedload of money? Which they may be thinking of extracting??


The Profit and Loss account 2007 shows
Sales £17.5M
cost of goods sold £14.1M
Gross Profit £3.3M

General admin costs £3.7M
Wages and Salaries £2.9M

-------------
I see no reason to think that the company is in trouble, am I missing it?
I don't quite get the "Other Current Liabilities £3.7M".

[sweetandsour]

Can you build up your own view of the company from the other information in the Checksure report other than just the rating numbers?

When I checked my own company (as you do) it got a low rating and a £100 limit, but then there wasn't much information in the public domain about it.

One agency I was using for a while had a rating of about 54, and a maximum credit exposure of £18,000 but I know for a while it was touch and go whether they could pay the invoices and they were frequently a few days late.

[DiscoStu]

How does your "18" agency pay, is it OK?

I'm new to checking, for all I know agencies are all like that. The low score may come from a short history, no cash on hand, etc, all things that are not abnormal for an agency.

My thoughts would be to go with it (ask for weekly but go with it even if it is monthly) and operate zero tolerance. Once 1 month+ in and useful to the client, there is some leverage.

Haven't got to payment terms yet. I guess I won't accept any worse than 1 week following month end.

Considering the market, the alternative is probably another month on the bench so what's the difference?

They're paying me weekly, and haven't messed me about yet (although I'm only 4 weeks in).

In my case, the crap score is from short history - agency only started August last year and hasn't filed any accounts yet.

I think PCG Plus may cover your for agencies going tits up so it's worth looking into, but if you're benched anyway it's not that much of a risk to take (unless you're going to be paying travel/accommodation costs etc).

[tino]

How does your "18" agency pay, is it OK?

I'm new to checking, for all I know agencies are all like that. The low score may come from a short history, no cash on hand, etc, all things that are not abnormal for an agency.

My thoughts would be to go with it (ask for weekly but go with it even if it is monthly) and operate zero tolerance. Once 1 month+ in and useful to the client, there is some leverage.

Haven't got to payment terms yet. I guess I won't accept any worse than 1 week following month end.

Considering the market, the alternative is probably another month on the bench so what's the difference?

I'd go with it however I'd also innocently get timesheets signed and store them weekly.

Far more chance of getting your money that way

[expat]

Agency I'm with got 18

Being paid weekly in arrears is probably the best plan, and be ready to ditch them if they start arsing about with payment.

How does your "18" agency pay, is it OK?

I'm new to checking, for all I know agencies are all like that. The low score may come from a short history, no cash on hand, etc, all things that are not abnormal for an agency.

My thoughts would be to go with it (ask for weekly but go with it even if it is monthly) and operate zero tolerance. Once 1 month+ in and useful to the client, there is some leverage.

Haven't got to payment terms yet. I guess I won't accept any worse than 1 week following month end.

Considering the market, the alternative is probably another month on the bench so what's the difference?

[tino]

Finally may have a contract. Still being interviewed etc.

Ran Checksure check on agency. Score 30 of 100 ("High Risk"). Credit Limit £100.

Is this do-not-touch-with-bargepole, or what?

Doesn't look good to be honest - what's the contractual payment terms?

[DiscoStu]

Finally may have a contract. Still being interviewed etc.

Ran Checksure check on agency. Score 30 of 100 ("High Risk"). Credit Limit £100.

Is this do-not-touch-with-bargepole, or what?

Agency I'm with got 18

Being paid weekly in arrears is probably the best plan, and be ready to ditch them if they start arsing about with payment.

[expat]

Finally may have a contract. Still being interviewed etc.

Ran Checksure check on agency. Score 30 of 100 ("High Risk"). Credit Limit £100.

Is this do-not-touch-with-bargepole, or what?