litigation and disputes resolution

Debt collection – done right

HomePrivate: BlogLegal insightsDebt collection – done right

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Reading Time:

3–5 minutes

There are many effective ways in which you can seek to recover a debt.  That is not the problem. The issue that we often encounter is the presumption that a genuine debt, which is due and payable at law, exists to begin with.  This must, naturally, always be the first question to be asked and unless you can answer it in the affirmative (which is not always easy, and this is precisely the message we are hoping to deliver in this article), you may find that you will be throwing away good money after bad. 

Today, in our complex business environment, there are literally an infinite number of reasons and events that may render a seemingly due and payable debt into one that is not so recoverable, at least not in the conventional way (whereby you issue a short form letter of demand to the debtor which asserts, without explanation, that because “x” number of invoices have been issued to the debtor, that “x” number of dollars must be due and owing to the creditor). This approach may work if you’re dealing with a debt of couple of hundred dollars, (where the debtor will just pay the debt to spare themselves the headache of a dispute) but if you’re dealing with a debt of several thousands of dollars, or tens of thousands of dollars, you can rest assured that the debtor will not make his or her decision to pay so lightly.

We have seen debtors raise a thousand interesting excuses (some legitimate, some not so much) as to why the debt is not due and payable, or they automatically engage legal representatives, in which case you have an entirely different situation on your hands. Even worse, you may have a case where the debtor will seek to frustrate the claim by concealing or destroying documents, records and other physical or intangible property, the subject of your claim, which will make your claim difficult or impossible to prove. Or you may have a debtor that simply disappears of the face of the earth once he or she learns that they are being pursued for a debt, but not before they’ve managed to liquidate their assets, empty their accounts and wire the resources to some offshore account.

Basically, and the moral of the story is this, if you wish to recover a debt, and the debt is for a larger sum of money, you want to ask yourself some of the following questions right at the outset?

Does a debt exist to begin with?

What is the amount of the debt? Is this amount certain or arguable? Why is it due and payable now, and not at some time in the future?

Can I prove that a due and payable debt exists?

Do I have evidence in writing, or was it a handshake agreement?

What are my legal options for recovering the debt?

Do I need to commence Court proceedings? Do I have any effective out of Court options that I can use?

Who is the debtor?

Am I dealing with a company or an individual? What is their trading history, their reputation, their financial health and ability to meet financial commitments? Is the company presently insolvent or in administration? Is the individual a bankrupt or subject to creditor compromise agreements?

Does the debtor have a defence, a set-off or a counterclaim to my claim for payment?

What can the debtor raise as an argument about the quality or fitness for purpose of the goods or services supplied?

What can I do to preserve the debtor’s assets whilst my debt is being recovered?

If you are experiencing difficulty, or uncertainty, in answering some of these questions, and you wish to determine your prospects in recovering your debt, it is always advisable to seek legal advice right at the outset.

Further Information

At Dundas Lawyers, we can undertake a preliminary assessment of your claim, advise on its relative strengths and weaknesses and options you can adopt to advance your claim in the right way.  If you would like further information on the best way to recover your debts, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:


Related insights about commercial law

  • ACCC publishes guidance on cash acceptance industry codes

    ACCC publishes guidance on cash acceptance industry codes

    From 1 January 2026, new cash acceptance obligations have commenced under industry codes applying to supermarkets and fuel retailers, overseen by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).  In March 2026, the ACCC published guidance on these newly enforced regulations, reminding retailers to consider their obligations before penalties apply on 1 July 2026.

    Read more …

  • ESS vs ESOP – what’s the difference?

    ESS vs ESOP – what’s the difference?

    Employee share schemes (ESS) and employee share option plans (ESOP) are commonly used by corporations to incentivise employees and align performance with company growth by providing them with an interest in the company.  While the terms are often used interchangeably, they have distinct legal and structural differences under Australian law.  This article explains the key…

    Read more …

  • Disputed ESOP – Selak v National Tiles Co Pty Ltd

    Disputed ESOP – Selak v National Tiles Co Pty Ltd

    In the case of Selak v National Tiles, the Vic Supreme Court considered whether a company breached an option agreement governed by the terms of an Employee Share Option Plan (ESOP) by requiring an option holder to execute an undisclosed shareholders’ agreement as a condition of exercising vested options.  

    Read more …

  • Bill to allow victims of AI deepfakes to sue for emotional damages

    Bill to allow victims of AI deepfakes to sue for emotional damages

    On 24 November 2025, Senator David Pocock introduced a private Senator’s bill, the Online Safety and Other Legislation Amendment (My Face, My Rights) Bill 2025 (Cth) (Bill) to amend the Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth) (Online Safety Act) and the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (Privacy Act). 

    Read more …

  • Can a unit trust be wound up by the oppression remedies

    Can a unit trust be wound up by the oppression remedies

    The Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corps Act) grants the Courts the power to award remedies under section 233, specifically designed to address situations of oppression within corporate entities under section 232.  These remedies, also known as the “Oppression Remedies”, aim to resolve situations where a company’s conduct unfairly prejudices its members or shareholders.  While primarily…

    Read more …

  • Business Lawyer

    Business Lawyer

    Business Lawyer, commercial and contracts and advisory lawyer, 4-10 years PAE, and $ negotiable performance based, depending on experience.

    Read more …

  • Directors’ obligations to comply with Accounting Standards

    Directors’ obligations to comply with Accounting Standards

    Directors are personally liable for ensuring their company operates in accordance with corporate governance and accounting standards.  Obligations contained in part 2M.2 and 2M.3 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act) outline obligations for companies to keep financial records and prepare annual financial and director’s reports.  Sections 180 and 344 of the Corporations Act…

    Read more …

  • OAIC publishes new guidance for under-16s social media ban

    OAIC publishes new guidance for under-16s social media ban

    On 10 October 2025, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC), led by Privacy Commissioner, Ms Carly Kind, released a twenty-nine (29) page Privacy Guidance on Part 4A (Social Media Minimum Age) of the Online Safety Act 2021 (New Guidance).  This New Guidance details the privacy obligations for Age-Restricted Social Media Platforms (Restricted Platforms)…

    Read more …

  • Aust Clinical Labs fined $5.8mil for failing to report data breach

    Aust Clinical Labs fined $5.8mil for failing to report data breach

    On 8 October 2025, the Federal Court published the judgement of Justice Halley in the case of Australian Information Commissioner v Australian Clinical Labs Limited (No 2) [2025] FCA 1224 (AIC v ACL).  Australian Clinical Labs Limited (ACL) was ordered to pay $5.8 million in civil penalties in relation to a 2022 data breach.  This…

    Read more …


Posted

in

,
Send this to a friend