Woodworth & Frisella

I’ve been having an interesting conversation over at Below the Beltway about juries. The VIOXX case raises some longstanding issues about the competence of jurors to understand complex scientific evidence. In the wake of the verdict there is some talk about these cases warranting a jury of experts, rather than lay people. So far I’m not convinced.

First of all, I’m not convinced a lay jury can’t understand scientific evidence if it is presented properly. Every trial lawyer struggles with simplifying the evidence so that the jury gets it. I’ve spent hours upon hours searching my brain for the proper analogy, to illustrate something I am trying to prove to a jury. A good analogy is worth 100 scientists in my book.

Secondly a jury of experts sounds like an invitation for a fist fight. An expert, by definition, thinks that he is right. I can’t imagine that a battle of 12 experts would ever render a unanimous verdict.

Finally in a case like VIOXX, experts are not the plaintiff’s peers. The sixth amendment guarantees a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury. It would be nearly impossible to find 12 impartial experts. Empaneling a jury could take months.

Trying a case to a jury is always a roll of the dice. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply fooling himself. A jury takes the case out of the control of the parties, and the lawyers and puts the decision in the hands of 12 people you have never met. As is so often repeated, it’s the worst system in the world, except for all the others.

UPDATE: Belder talks more eloquently than I about juries. Other than the gentle slam against personal injury lawyers, I agree with him completely.

If there was ever a time to get moving on your overdue receivables it is now! It is impossible to predict what is going to happen in this fragile economy, but most suspect it will get worse before it gets better. Now more than ever it is important to get your bill to the top of the pile. But how do you do that?

The trick is, knowing how to create urgency in the debtor to pay your bill first, or at least before the money runs out.

There are many ways to create urgency – none of which include sending a second invoice as a reminder. Direct contact is essential – the debtor needs to hear from you or your representative directly. And you need to communicate that you are under pressure to collect this money now.

If you can’t or are unwilling to do that, it is time to send the bill out to someone who can create that urgency.

BTW there is no reason to be nasty about it. In times of scarcity, people pay people they like, first. And that includes the people you hire to collect debt for you.

I’ll was recently a guest on Rita Schiano’s blog talk radio
(http://www.blogtalkradio.com/rita),
talking about commercial debt collection.

Listen in on the conversatation.
(http://www.blogtalkradio.com/rita/2008/08/12/Talk-To-MeConversations-With-Creative-Unconventional-People-with-host-Rita-Schiano)

Let me know what you think.

I got a call from a client in the food business today and he reported that his suppliers have started calling customers if they are one day late paying their invoices.

Grace periods have been tightened. An invoice due in 30 days a year ago, is now due in 15. If the invoice is not paid, the customer goes on COD terms.

I told my client he should be doing the same thing. Communication with your customers is always a good thing. Remind the customer that payment is due, and use the opportunity to make another sale.

One of the things that has always bugged me about the debt collection business is that the players often make it instantly adversarial. It doesn’t have to be. You truly do get more flies with honey. It’s important to remember that a company that is struggling isn’t necessarily a bad company.

We get some business from collection agencies which refer cases to us in MA after their collection efforts have failed. Most of these agencies do a great job. On occasion though, the collector has made things so adversarial that the debtor refuses to pay the bill “on principle”. That is simply a dumb situation to get into. I can think of four or five matters over the years where a debtor has agreed to pay the bill instantly, saying that the only reason for the delay is that the collector was so rude to him. We all have our off days. But if you are feeling angry, do not call a debtor. (Then again, it’s an easy victory for me!)

When the tech bubble began to burst eight years ago, it quickly was apparent that those companies who pursued their receivables quickly and skillfully could and did recover monies owed to them. Those who waited, hoping for a turnaround, lost out.

The climate for commercial debt collection remains fairly robust, although I often encounter debts owed by previously healthy companies who are simply not collecting their own receivables which in turn, makes it difficult for them to meet their payables. The trickle down effect is clear.

Now more than anytime over the last eight years it is important to pursue monies owed, quickly and skillfully. Failure could be catastrophic.

The debt collection business cranks up in an economic downturn, and as a result is a bellwether for future events. At Woodworth & Frisella we are experiencing a mild up-tick in business, which appears to be gaining steam on a daily basis. More telling is the fact that most failures to pay are not about disputes but about cash flow.

In these times it is important to remember that whoever gets there first often is the one who gets paid. This is not the time to sit on your accounts receivable.