A disputed debt is not a debt. It is commercial litigation wearing an invoice as a disguise — and the difference between the two, in time and cost, is the largest single financial risk a creditor takes when issuing proceedings.
Genuine or Delaying: the Two Markers
Specificity and timing. A genuine dispute is usually specific — this item, this defect, this term, this date — and was usually raised at or near the time rather than first appearing in reply to a demand. A delaying tactic is general, unsupported and newly minted: dissatisfaction nobody mentioned when the work was done; complaints about the wider relationship that never answer whether this sum is owed; an assertion the invoice is wrong without saying how; repeated requests for documents already supplied. The test worth applying is the one a court will effectively apply on a summary judgment application: if this had to be put before a judge tomorrow, is there anything behind it? Timing is relevant but not conclusive, and it cuts both ways — people do sometimes only articulate a complaint when finally pressed, and a late-raised dispute can be entirely genuine. Assess the substance rather than dismissing it for arriving late. Set-off deserves particular attention: broadly, the right in certain circumstances to set one claim against another so only the balance is payable. Where a customer has their own claim arising from the same or a closely connected transaction, they may be entitled to set it off rather than pay in full and sue separately. The circumstances are technical, contract terms sometimes purport to exclude it, and a properly grounded set-off is among the more effective answers to a debt claim — so a creditor should identify any credible cross-claim before issuing, not after.
What to Do Instead
Once you have concluded a dispute is genuine, the question changes from how do we recover this to what is the commercially sensible outcome. Three options usually deserve consideration. Negotiate, with the arithmetic done properly: a discount accepted now frequently yields more actual money than a full judgment obtained expensively many months later against a debtor whose means are unknown. Mediate, particularly where the trading relationship still has value — litigation is designed to determine who was right and is remarkably effective at ending commercial relationships, whereas a negotiated outcome can preserve trading and produce payment terms that actually get performed. A signed mediated settlement is enforceable as a contract, so this is not a soft option; that work sits with commercialmediation.ie. Or litigate deliberately, having priced it as litigation rather than as recovery, with a view on discovery, evidence and what a trial would involve. What should not happen is issuing a summary summons and hoping the dispute evaporates. It also matters for a different reason: serving a statutory demand on a company over a genuinely disputed debt is capable of being treated as an abuse of process, with costs and exposure following.
Is It Actually Disputed?
Send what the debtor has said, when they said it, and what documents exist from the time. Distinguishing a real defence from a delaying one before you issue is worth more than anything that happens afterwards.
Call 01 5827148