On 28.04.2013 r. come into force new Act on payment terms in commercial transactions relating to the relationship between businesses and between businesses and public entities. This is good news for transport companies, as the new rules may to some extent help to reduce general transport market practice setting kilkudziesięciodniowych terms of payment for transportation made.
How it used to be
Under the old rule - Act of 12 June 2003 r. of commercial transactions - The parties were able to determine any long payment terms, however, the creditor was entitled to statutory interest for the period from 31 on the fulfillment of their services and to provide the debtor to pay the invoice to the date. Typically, during the parties' interests were not enforced, but the collaboration ended when the entrepreneur, which forces the excessive payment deadlines, had the opportunity to considerable amounts as interest. On the other hand for the delay were the interest as a creditor for tax arrears. So, for example,, if the deadline set in the contract payment 45 days, and the payment was made after 60 On, creditor can charge statutory interest for 15 days (from 31 do 45) and interest as a tax arrears for more 15 days (from 46 do 60).
60 days to pay
Currently, the previous regulation was strengthened. Just like in the old Act, determine if the payment period longer than 30 days, the creditor is entitled to statutory interest for the period from 31 th day of the fulfillment of their services and to provide the debtor to pay the invoice to the date.
In addition, the new law provides for, that payment period may not exceed 60 days, counted from the date of delivery of the invoice or account debtor, confirming the execution of the service. However, the Act allows the parties to establish a long term, as long as it does not conflict with the socio-economic objective of the agreement and the rules of social interaction, and it is objectively justified, taking into account the characteristic of the goods and services.
The exceptions are transactions with public entities, where the rule is to be no longer than 30-day maturity. However, since the carriers perform transport primarily to private entities, This adjustment will be less important for them.
Interest - when and how?
According to the new rules will benefit the creditor interest in three cases:
a) when fixed in the contract payment period is longer than 30 days - the creditor is owed statutory interest for the period from 31 th day of the fulfillment of their services and to provide the debtor to pay the invoice to the date
b) when fixed in the contract payment period is longer than 60 days, and not the conditions for the application of the extended deadline - will be part of the interest as a creditor for tax arrears from 61-th day of service invoice confirming execution of the service
c) in case of delay in payment - the interest as arrears will be entitled for the period from the day following the due date.
A significant difference in comparison with the general is, that the delay of the creditor are entitled to interest as a tax arrears (unless the parties have agreed to the higher interest). These percentages are set out in Article. 56 § 1 Tax Code and are twice the sum of the base of the lombard rate set by the National Bank of Poland and 2 %, while it may not be less than 8 %. Currently, therefore, the rate is 11,5 % (2 x 4,75 + 2). It is therefore less than the rate of statutory interest 13 %.
It appears at this point the question, or the creditor will be able to claim statutory interest pursuant to Article. 481 k.c. rather than as a percentage of tax arrears under the terms of the Act on payment in commercial transactions? I do not think. Provisions of the Act clearly define, creditor is entitled to interest for the delay in this respect are special provisions to control Codex.
It is impossible to understand the, why the legislature decided to discriminate against companies doing business with other entrepreneurs, giving them a lower interest rate than for example. entrepreneurs pursuing claims against consumers. This is even more surprising, late payments between companies forming the so-called. payment backlogs are a big threat to the economy and it would seem, that the legislature should be applied in this case, higher interest rates. What is interesting, in support of the bill, legislature has introduced a solution to be beneficial, as at the date of preparation of justification interest for tax arrears were 14,5 %. Knowing, however, the algorithm for calculating the interest, he could have predicted, as a result of lower interest rates, the situation can be changed to the detriment of creditors.
Reimbursement claims investigation
Reducing the length of payment terms clearly serves the interests of creditors, but the best for them, change is in my opinion, granting them the right to claim reimbursement of recovery costs and it's very convenient for the creditor terms.
First, if the debtor has delayed the payment of, creditor shall have the right to charge without notice lump-sum compensation for recovery costs in the amount of 40 Euro converted into gold at the rate of the average NBP last working day of the month preceding the month, cash benefit which has become due.
Secondly if recovery costs exceed the value of the 40 Euro, You can claim the full amount of, although in this case, these costs must be documented.
Appear, therefore, may have some doubts. Is the amount 40 Euro will be calculated on a call, one invoice and one contract can? I think it applies to each separate provision, so for each unpaid invoice within the creditor shall be entitled to 40 Euro.
The second question may be entitled to a refund value for recovery costs to be reimbursed for legal representation in court. It seems, that the regulation of the law will not affect the amount adjudged representation costs, but if the party shows, that incurred in the process of reasonable costs exceeded the value of the awarded costs of legal representation, in a separate process, it will be possible investigation under the Act relevant difference.
Probably because the carriers will soon benefit from a new power, be aware of one – the new law applies only to commercial transactions concluded after its entry into force. The other is to apply the rules so far.
What do the courts?
Of course, time will tell, what will be the practice of law. The current does not inspire optimism special, because the courts generally do not apply the provisions of the old law requiring the creditor to grant a delay interest as a percentage of tax arrears, instead of the statutory. This practice is so widespread, that some time ago gave up its claim to interest on tax arrears, if the courts could therefore refuse to issue an order to pay, Recognizing the, that such percentages are not. I wonder, whether the new law will change something in the habits.
On the other hand, for those, that actually want to conveniently establish maturity longer than the statutory, have no choice, how to use the bill to payment 🙂
I fully agree, verify that only practice, whether the courts will apply the rules on interest or not.
But I am more curious, will be assessed as a matter of additional recovery costs, referred to in Article. 10. paragraph. 2. Act and whether it is in no “toss” invoice for consultation and request for payment, or placing the debtor in the KRD. Perhaps these additional costs will only include official fees, such as requests to departments reported data? The courts will have to deal with it all the more quickly, that reference to this provision will result directly from Article. 485. by. 2a k.p.c.
My practice is not the most encouraging, but it certainly does not, I will insist in their own affairs, as if interest for tax arrears are lower than the statutory. And as for the additional costs, I think, that is included in all reasonable costs associated with enforcing claims. The directive explicitly talk about salary or business debt collection lawyer subject to, that it is a reasonable compensation. It therefore seems, that if someone is not exaggerating to pay lawyer, Rather, it will not be a problem with planting.
In my view, the terms of payment and how much we should pay a company to determine among themselves, not the state. But it is said that the free market which we. G **** right…
@ Denis
It is just the implementation of the EU Directive, So the state had little to say, but I can not agree by the end of. In the situation of the economic advantages of one party to the contract, can impose very restrictive agreements, which is controlled eg. in agreements with retail chains. They have such a strong negotiating position, that several months payment terms are impossible to push. Directive and, consequently, the law is therefore to just use the economic position to impose another unfavorable payment terms.
Hello,
I see that the thread is over a year old now and I do not know if anyone I ever answer the question bothering me. But I'll try. What to do if a counterparty, With these you will charge a flat-rate 40 euro because of the delay in the payment of principal payments (and, of course, to issue a document that is relevant. note book and deliver it to him by registered mail) and he that amount we will pay what then. We can go straight to court if you first have to still send your request for payment yet to witness an attempt “amicable” settlement of the matter.
@ Michal
This issue is not regulated by the provisions of, but it is assumed, it does not give grounds for referral to the court a person, whose behavior indicates, that would comply with the provision without having to apply to the court. In any case, so it is better to refer a request for payment after the payment falls due.
@ Paul Judek
Thank you for the information – therefore I will do so, as is customary.
Although, so down to earth seems, that extra call to pay a flat fee, which is a kind of “criminal charge”, which follows directly from the application of the law writing seems a bit strange. But this is probably not the first and not the last strange question of, functioning in the sphere of our rights.
I greet
Michael
Hello again continue the case, by which I asked in the post of 22-07-2014.
As prompted, I sent a request for payment 40euro. Coins not received within the specified time, So I made a claim on: the principal(2500zł) interest and the said fee (ok.165zł)
The case for me successfully completed, although the warrant issued me a little surprised, because the defendant undertook to pay the amount 2665zł together with interest from the date indicated in the lawsuit. A little weird, because the amount claimed in the lawsuit that 2665zł, while the interest were to be counted from 2500zł.
The defendant paid 2665 zł + court costs. Interest is not paid and do not know what to do with it now, or go to the bailiff or give up, because if you have to pull it further, is the amount by which they would have to assert.
Is in compliance with the order of 2665zł, or, as in my opinion it should look properly, that is, from 2500? Please hint, because I'm lost in this.
I greet
Michael
@ Michal
Bailiff can only go with this, as a result of a writ of execution. If the court has not ruled on interest – probably found, that the interest of this fee does not include – This can be requested by separate petition, but rather, it does not make much sense, for it is literally about ten dollars per year.
Hello.
The decision on the interest is, except that a little strange, because the whole amount (payment due + 40euro charge) but I understand, the bailiff will be guided by only the, which is in the order and such its content, for me is more advantageous.
If you were to have a moment for giving me the answer, I have a connection with this case are two, bothering me questions.
1. Do you have a warrant issued term of validity? The idea is, Is there a certain period of time in which you should take it to the bailiff with the final title of executive?
2. When submitting a claim, was bringing for adjudication proceedings by writ - making required in this case, the documents. However, a warrant was issued in writ proceedings. In the current situation where the debtor has already paid, for me it is no difference, but I wonder why the matter has been resolved in a different mode than was bringing and what should be done when possible, future legal suits that were resolved in the proposed mode (but I hope, that never again will there be such a need:)
Michael
@ Michael
1. The fee covered by a valid warrant expires after 10 years, with the exception of the interest, which expire after 3 latach.
2. I would be very happy, if I could answer that question, believe me 🙂 – alone I wander repeatedly, why in a given case, the court has not issued an order in writ writ only. Unfortunately, this decision is not subject to appeal and nothing it can not handle.
Thank you very much for your answers and greet.
And I have a question. I used the debt collection company, which drew for me a certain amount of money for the unpaid invoice of July 2013. The case went to court. After the judgment debtor has paid me the full amount of the court costs for attorney, and I paid the invoice for the recovery of the company – percent of the amount zwindykowanej . Is the cost of the invoice can pass on to the debtor? The lawsuit attorney came just the amount of interest and reimbursement of legal costs, There was no question of any additional compensation.
Regards.
@ Christopher
If the matter is claimed in court, reduce recovery costs claimed reimbursement of legal costs, So in this case, nothing else you would not receive. This amount may be additional compensation, the payment of the debt will be effected without litigation – then this compensation can be claimed in court.
Thank you for your answer,
or in the event that I use a debt collection agency and it as part of their service provides me with a representation in court, I have no chance of the debtor to pay the costs of recovery ? If I understand, in the case of the use of debt collection companies virtually nothing has changed for entrepreneurs. Next the creditor must pay for the recovery.
@ Christopher
Changed so much, that if the collection agency enforce debts without trial, This is a clear recipe, which allows you to recover its costs. Moreover, if the costs exceed the cost of the debt collection company process, they can be recovered – but then lost the reimbursement process.
the worst is like for the service does not want to pay usługiobioca (whether it is for large companies such as. transport or small działalnościom – and this is just a drama, how can: http://www.eporady24.pl/brak_zaplaty_za_usluge,pytania,4,47,712.html) whole recovery procedure sometimes you could put in the nose because it takes months, years, and does not always lead to success :/
W trakcie kontroli w firmie, dowiedziałam się, że nie dochodziłam kwoty 40 euro i mam to zrobić teraz. Czy mam wnieść osoby pozew o 40 euro do każdej sprawy (oczywiście do której stosuje się ustawę i rzeczony art. 10) ??? Mam zamiar wnieść pozew na formularzu, w nakazowym (upominawczym?), ale załączniki.. tu mam kłopot. Niezapłacona faktura? Większość tych należności zasądzonych jest nadal niespłacona, toczą się sprawy komornicze. Czy należność z umowy najmu też można pod ustawę podciągnąć?
@ Daria
Jeśli te należności były później przedmiotem postępowania sądowego to z reguły żadne 40 Euro nie będzie dodatkowo przysługiwać, gdyż ten koszt należy odjąć od zasądzonych przez sąd kosztów procesu. W praktyce więc o 40 Euro można wystąpić z reguły tylko wtedy, gdy dłużnik zapłaci dług dobrowolnie ale po terminie i bez konieczności kierowania sprawy do sądu.
Thank you very much.
Of course, były przedmiotem sporu sądowego. Dochodziliśmy należności głównej z odsetkami i kosztami postępowania. Niektóre długi są w dalszym ciągu niespłacone. Rozumiem więc, że nie mam już o co wnosić ponad te koszty. Dziękuję za wyjaśnienia.
@ Daria
W tej sytuacji już nic się nie da zrobić.
Hello Sir Paul
Chciałbym zapytać o poradę na temat poniższej sprawy.
Wykonałem usługę transportową i należność za wykonaną usługę została uregulowana znacznie po terminie. Oczywiście wcześniej wysyłałem wezwania do zapłaty.
Po uregulowanie przez dłużnika należności wysłałem notę obciążeniową na kwotę 40 euro ( przeliczając odpowiednio na złotówki) powołując się na art. 10 ust.2 Ustawy o terminach zapłaty w transakcjach handlowych z dn. 8.03.2013 years . Jednak firma nie chce uregulować należności. W związku z tym jakie powinienem podjąć kolejne kroki aby skutecznie wyegzekwować należną kwotę ?. Skierować sprawę do sądu ?
Kto wtedy pokryje te koszta sądowe ?
Z góry dziękuję za informację
Regards
@ Thomas
Można skierować sprawę do sądu. Koszty sądowe pokryje druga strona.
Hello,
proszę o uświadomienie.
Czy jeśli dochodząc zapłaty należności głównej w procesie oraz równowartości 40 euro np. przy pomocy pełnomocnika, to sąd w rozstrzygnięciu odejmie równowartość 40 euro od zasądzonych kosztów procesu?
Moim zdaniem nie powinien odejmować w tej sytuacji. Uszczuplenie kosztów procesu miałoby sens, gdyby wierzyciel dochodził zapłaty kosztów odzyskiwania należności ponad kwotę 40 euro, która to została uprzednio zapłacona przez dłużnika.
@ Ja
Odejmie tę kwotę od kosztów. Dlatego dochodzenie tej kwoty ma sens tylko gdy pieniądze zostały zapłacone dobrowolnie.
hello,
zleciłem windykacji odzyskanie moich należności. windykacja skutecznie zadziałała i sciągneła nalezności. wystawiła mi fv na 2000 zł + VAT. czy mogę dochodzić tej kwoty przed sądem i jeśli tak jak ona się ma do kosztów procesu?
@ Kamil
Jeśli windykacja ściągnęła pieniądze poza procesem, można domagać się zwrotu jej kosztów, jednakże nie mogą być one zbyt wygórowane. Zależy więc to od tego, jaka była kwota, którą udało się wyegzekwować.
Hello, Podjąłem zlecenie od spedycji jak się okazało spedycja ta sprzedała zlecenie z zamiarem oszustwa / wyłudzenia tj. otrzymując 800 eur wynagrodzenia za przewóz sprzedała mi to samo zlecenie za 1050 eur (z miejsca byli stratni 250 eur – o tym dowiedziałem sie później). Oczywiście w chwili gdy termin płatności upłyną okazało się że spedycja Sp zo.o. zmieniła właściciela na obcokrajowca (choć w KRS widnieje cały czas dotychczasowy prezes spółki) a w rozmowie ze mną prezes spółki stwierdza że nie ma z tym nic wspólnego bo udziały w spółce sprzedał. Co w tym przypadku mogę zrobić ? zawiadomienie do prokuratury ? z jakiego art? Dodam jeszcze że udało mi sie dotrzeć do właściwego nadawcy towaru i cześć pieniędzy nie została wypłacona oszustowi (w pore udało sie zablokować przelew). Czy mogę wnosić do właściwego nadawcy o przelanie zablokowanych środków na moje konto jako przewoźnikowi który fizycznie wykonał przewóz ? (na CMR pieczątki mojej firmy) Proszę o komentarz i podpowiedź.
@ Mirosław
It does not matter, kto jest udziałowcem, bo to prezes zarządza spółką, a nie wspólnicy. Nie ma możliwości dokonania płatności bezpośrednio na rzecz podwykonawcy. Ewentualnie można próbować zabezpieczyć te płatności w ramach postępowania karnego przez prokuraturę.
Hello, wykonaliśmy dla pewnej firmy transport, w zleceniu termin oczywiście 60 dni i małym druczkiem zapis, że w przypadku niedosłania oryginalnych dokumentów w ciągu 5 dni od wykonania transportu wydłużenie terminu płatności o kolejne 90 days. Or 150 dni od otrzymania dokumentów. Moim błędem jest, że przyjęłam to zlecenie, ale też 5 dni jest praktycznie nierealne w transporcie międzynarodowym, czy w związku z tym taki zapis w zleceniu jest zgodny z prawem?
Witam ponawiam komentarz Pani Moniki
@ Monika
Such a date would be challenged as unrealistic by the court, and by the whole clause it is ineffective.