New approa­ches to accounts receiva­ble manage­ment — fast, cost-effec­ti­ve, final, legal­ly com­pli­ant

The expan­si­on of risk manage­ment can beco­me vital for cre­di­tors. Alter­na­ti­ves in the manage­ment of pay­ment risks are indis­pensable.

Start­ing point

In recent years, inter­nal and exter­nal influen­ces have cau­sed las­ting and pro­found fra­gi­li­ty in the Ger­man eco­no­my, par­ti­cu­lar­ly as a result of the trans­for­ma­ti­on pro­ces­ses initia­ted by the legis­la­tor. Along with fal­ling ear­nings, the eco­no­my is incre­asing­ly suf­fe­ring from incal­culable risks and uncer­tain­ties. Small and medi­um-sized enter­pri­ses in par­ti­cu­lar, which are focu­sed on our dome­stic mar­ket, are loo­king for­ward with gre­at con­cern to a long peri­od of irrepa­ra­ble cracks and dis­tor­ti­ons.

Most cre­di­tors are awa­re that soo­ner or later a wave of slug­gish pay­ment beha­vi­or, inclu­ding pay­ment defaults and insol­ven­ci­es, can ine­vi­ta­b­ly over­whelm almost any com­pa­ny. It is the­r­e­fo­re high time to rea­lign inter­nal deb­tor manage­ment.

Pro­blem ampli­fiers for cre­di­tors: Sta­RUG, ESUG, Insol­ven­cy Code

The main dri­ver of this deve­lo­p­ment is the poli­ti­cal­ly desi­red expro­pria­ti­on of cre­di­tors legi­ti­mi­zed by the legis­la­tor and dri­ven for­ward step by step by inte­res­ted par­ties. Many entre­pre­neurs con­sider it an unac­cep­ta­ble under­mi­ning of the pro­per­ty rights enshri­ned in the Ger­man Basic Law if they are unin­ten­tio­nal­ly cal­led upon to reor­ga­ni­ze and res­truc­tu­re their defaul­ting deb­tors by means of ongo­ing amend­ments to debt law such as the Sta­RUG, ESUG and the Insol­ven­cy Code. This is also per­cei­ved as unfair if not even the impli­ed pro­mi­se is kept that cre­di­tors will at least retain the res­truc­tu­red deb­tor or its busi­ness model as a cus­to­mer after the end of the insol­ven­cy pro­cee­dings.

In prac­ti­ce, howe­ver, com­pa­nies that are no lon­ger sol­vent are res­truc­tu­red by means of chan­ge manage­ment and then released back onto the mar­ket, often with a com­ple­te­ly new busi­ness model. The bene­fi­ci­a­ries of this sys­tem are the con­sul­ting indus­try, inte­rim mana­gers, insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tors and their spe­ci­al­ly instal­led and some­ti­mes owned liqui­da­ti­on com­pa­nies. The pos­si­bi­li­ty of insol­ven­cy under self-admi­nis­tra­ti­on opens the door to moral hazard.

Alter­na­ti­ve cour­ses of action: Pled­ges of rights to secu­re receiv­a­bles

In their risk manage­ment, for­ward-loo­king SMEs are now using new­ly deve­lo­ped instru­ments to secu­re receiv­a­bles in the case of lar­ger cre­dit expo­sures or trade receiv­a­bles. The basis for this is the use of con­trac­tual­ly agreed pled­ges of rights. This pro­vi­des addi­tio­nal plan­ning secu­ri­ty and opens up the oppor­tu­ni­ty to react imme­dia­te­ly at the first sign of a default on a con­tract. Secu­ring receiv­a­bles via agreed pled­ges of rights to com­pa­ny shares or other rights (licen­se rights, trade­mark rights, domains, IP rights, patents) is par­ti­cu­lar­ly advan­ta­ge­ous.

By draf­ting the con­tract accor­din­gly in advan­ce (by a lawy­er spe­cia­li­zing in this area), the cre­di­tor puts hims­elf in an advan­ta­ge­ous posi­ti­on vis-à-vis the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor in the event of insol­ven­cy. It has been estab­lished by the Supre­me Court that the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor has no right to rea­li­ze rights of any kind under sec­tion 166 (1) InsO. In the case of non-per­forming loan com­mit­ments, infor­ma­ti­on defi­ci­ts and loss of con­trol occur time and again, some­ti­mes even dri­ven by cri­mi­nal ener­gy. Trans­pa­ren­cy and new opti­ons for action vis-à-vis the pre­vious manage­ment, also with regard to pos­si­ble cri­mi­nal mis­con­duct, ari­se when chan­ging from cre­di­tor to acti­ve owner. This can be com­pen­sa­ted for by the time­ly, com­ple­te take­over of the bor­ro­wers by way of a public auc­tion, which the len­der is entit­led to do in accordance with Sec­tion 1239 of the Ger­man Civil Code (co-bid­ding by cre­di­tors and owners).

The acqui­si­ti­on of pled­ged com­pa­ny shares incurs mana­ge­ab­ly low cos­ts for the cre­di­tor. Con­trol is obtai­ned by acqui­ring the debtor’s shares by public auc­tion. The cre­di­tor can off­set the purcha­se pri­ce cal­led in the auc­tion against his pro rata cla­im to repay­ment of his cla­im, i.e. he does not have to pay the purcha­se pri­ce as long as his bid does not exceed the cla­im. A fidu­cia­ry model is also con­ceiva­ble if the cre­di­tor wis­hes to obtain con­trol indi­rect­ly and not acqui­re the shares hims­elf.

Deut­sche Pfand­ver­wer­tung — Spe­cia­list for the pledge of shares

It is very important to have the right part­ner on board for the time­ly and legal­ly com­pli­ant auc­tion of pled­ged com­pa­ny shares.

The publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eers of DEUT­SCHE PFAND­VER­WER­TUNG are spe­cia­li­zed in such sales. For many years, we have suc­cessful­ly con­duc­ted auc­tions of all kinds of rights such as GmbH shares or other com­pa­ny shares as well as secu­ri­ties, patents, IP rights, trade­mark rights and domains. As gene­ral­ly publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eers, we are aut­ho­ri­zed by the Ger­man sta­te to car­ry out this sove­reign act as an organ of the admi­nis­tra­ti­on of jus­ti­ce.

In the event that the cre­di­tor does not wish to take over the com­pa­ny shares pled­ged to him, DEUT­SCHE PFAND­VER­WER­TUNG has cont­acts to inte­res­ted risk inves­tors.

If you have a spe­ci­fic case, plea­se cont­act us at > using the cont­act form

Video — Ins­truc­tions for cli­ents: > How it works

Pic­tu­re cre­dits: koc­tia, Licen­se H29R8TXDLK, enva­to ele­ments

Share post:

Facebook
X
LinkedIn

Further contributions: