Pay on account, please
Trade buyers expect payment terms. A restaurant group, a building contractor or a school business manager does not want to pay by card at checkout; they want an account with thirty days. So your marketplace offers terms. Every week, dozens of buyers apply. Your finance person looks each one up, pulls a credit report if the buyer looks big enough, and sets a limit that feels right. Smaller buyers wait days for a decision and many place their first order with a competitor instead.
Meanwhile, a buyer approved last year with a generous limit has started paying late, and nobody has looked at their account since approval.
Why credit decisions pile up
Offering terms on a marketplace means taking on, or arranging, the risk of buyers not paying. Some marketplaces carry that risk themselves, some use a trade credit or buy now pay later provider, some pass it to suppliers. Whichever model you use, someone has to decide who gets terms and how much. That decision is your credit policy, set with your advisers.
The policy is usually clear enough on paper. What is missing is the process: gathering the data for each application, applying the rules consistently, and reviewing limits as buyers trade.
| Input to a credit decision | Where it comes from |
|---|---|
| Company status and age | Companies House or equivalent |
| Credit score and filed accounts | Your credit reference provider |
| Trading history on the marketplace | Your order and payment records |
| Requested limit and expected spend | Buyer's application |
| Sector and order pattern | Your platform data |
What slow or inconsistent credit costs
Slow decisions lose first orders. Inconsistent limits create unfairness between similar buyers and leave some over-exposed. Limits never reviewed after approval are where bad debt builds up. And a finance team doing every decision by hand has no time to chase the accounts that actually need attention.
Buyers notice the inconsistency too. A contractor refused terms while a smaller competitor down the road was approved will ask why, and without a written rule behind each decision, the answer is hard to give.
The credit decision flow we build
- Application form: buyers apply in the marketplace with their company details, expected spend and requested terms.
- Data gathering: company status is checked with Companies House, a credit report is pulled from your chosen provider through its API, and any existing marketplace history is attached.
- Policy rules: your credit policy is written as rules, such as minimum trading age, score bands and starting limits by band, which your finance lead can change without a developer.
- Suggested decision: each application gets a suggested outcome, limit and terms, with the reasons listed; clear cases can be approved automatically if your policy allows.
- Referral queue: borderline and high-value applications go to a person with all the data on one screen.
- Ongoing review: limits are reviewed on a schedule and on events, such as late payments, a big jump in orders or a change in the buyer's credit report, with suggested changes for approval.
If you use a trade credit provider, the flow passes applications to them and records their decision, rather than duplicating it.
Credit decisions afterwards
Straightforward buyers get a decision quickly and can place their first order on terms. Your finance team spends time on the referrals and on accounts showing warning signs, with the reasons in front of them. Every decision is recorded with the data and rule behind it, which makes it easy to explain to a buyer or an auditor.
Is buyer credit a bottleneck for you?
- Buyers wait days for a decision on payment terms.
- Credit limits are set by feel rather than by written rules.
- Limits are not reviewed after approval.
- Late payers are spotted only when they are well overdue.
- Your finance team checks every application by hand.