A dispute raised after service needs a prompt evidence review. Do not assume that the demand remains appropriate simply because it has already been issued.
Corporate Recovery Partners
01 / 06
The debtor has raised a documented dispute
A creditor serves a statutory demand and receives a solicitor’s letter alleging a genuine dispute and an offsetting claim. The business owner wants to ignore it because the invoice is overdue. The right next step is to compare the objection with the records and obtain advice before committing to further cost.
Keep the letter and attachments with the original demand and service evidence. Identify each disputed amount, alleged defect or offsetting claim. Note any court document or deadline mentioned.
Ask the lawyer handling the demand to confirm what requires a response. Do not assume the debtor is merely delaying. Equally, an allegation alone does not establish that every part of the debt is invalid.
Match the objection to contracts, delivery evidence, complaints, payments and credit notes. Prepare a short chronology and identify what is missing. Give the lawyer documents that weaken your position as well as those that support it.
A clear review may reveal a bookkeeping error, a narrower dispute or a substantial issue. Each suggests a different commercial response. Avoid adding new assertions that the contemporaneous evidence cannot support.
The Federal Court recognises genuine disputes and offsetting claims among statutory-demand challenge grounds. Obtain advice on the actual merits and the consequences of continuing, withdrawing or negotiating.
Do not rely on a general belief that a supplier should be paid as a substitute for the legal test. Ask about the costs of the next stage and how any proposed agreement should be documented.
If a different procedure is appropriate, preserve the claim evidence and obtain a plan for it. If the parties negotiate, specify the amount, payment and treatment of the demand and any application.
Keep instructions and outcomes in writing. The objective is a proportionate route to the debt’s resolution, not defending the original tactic at any cost because money has already been spent.
