Effectiveness of the DGCCRF's "Name & Shame

The latest publication of the DGCCRF has been released:

It concerns its activity of control of the payment periods of the Companies.

Legalcity questions the effectiveness of the DGCCRF 's "Name and Shame".

The DGCCRF is the only one able to practice what is commonly called "Name & Shame

Here is the latest publication that provides an update on its actions:

www.economie.gouv.fr/files/files/directions_services/dgccrf/presse/communique/2022/CP-DGCCRF-Delais-de-paiement-bilan.pdf?v=1660032857

One of the missions of the DGCCRF is to control the payment behaviour of companies.

Its controls include companies that have benefited from State Guaranteed Loans (SGP).

It is clear that the same companies are still involved and that the dissuasive effects of an external communication and a fine do not seem to have much effect.

Is the "Name and Shame" of the DGCCRF effective?

Indeed, if the fine can be dissuasive, provided that it is severe, the publication of the names of the Companies does not allow to change the behavior. Even worse, it stigmatizes and, taken out of context, does not allow to know the reasons of the sanction.

In addition, the targeted companies may well have long since corrected their supplier payment practices.

The temptation is great for the amicable and judicial collection firms to quote the names of the debtors with whom it intervenes.

Therefore, you have to be very careful about the source that indexes bad payment behavior to GOOGLE.

Since its creation, LEGALCITY, like the Mediator of Companies, wishes to promote good payment behavior and resilience. Thus, promoting good payment behaviors and valorizing the acts of virtuous companies cannot harm the action of the DGCCRF.

The "Name & Shame" of the DGCCRF coexists with the promotion of virtuous practices under the concept of "Name & Fame"!

This is why LEGALCITY has been fighting against this concept since its creation.

Thus, some firms do not hesitate to index the names of "bad payers" on Google. The result is, in our opinion, catastrophic and not in phase with the reality at the time of publication.

Thus, if you are the victim of an unpaid invoice, the best thing to do is, in the first instance, to follow up amicably.

Thereafter, in case of failure, it is the amicable collection by a Cabinet that must be privileged.

LEGALCITY also preserves your client relationship by adopting a positive attitude.

Also, in case of failure, he is able to accompany you throughout the legal process.