Alternatives
Alternatives to traditional debt-collection agencies.
Five honest options when in-house chase isn’t working any more — with the trade-offs, costs, and recovery rates each one usually delivers.
“Debt-collection agency” is the default Australian answer when an invoice goes past 60 days, but it’s rarely the best one. Below are five real alternatives, in rough order of complexity. The right answer depends on debt size, volume, and the customer relationship.
1. Keep chasing in-house, but better
Tighten the cadence: reminder before due, polite chase at +3, firmer at +14, formal at +30. Use email and SMS rather than phone for the first three touches — written, asynchronous, low friction. Most accounts that pay externally will pay in-house if the chase is calibrated.
Suits: low debt volume (under ~50 overdue accounts), debts where the customer relationship is high-value.
Cost: finance-team time. Roughly 5-10 minutes per overdue account per cycle.
Doesn’t suit: high-volume long-tail receivables, or accounts where in-house has already given up.
2. Lawyer’s letter of demand
A formal demand on solicitor’s letterhead. Often shifts a debtor who has been ignoring informal chase, because the letterhead changes the perceived seriousness.
Suits: single large debts ($5k+) where the cost is justifiable. Disputed-amount debts where you want a paper trail.
Cost: typically $200-$500 per letter, possibly more.
Doesn’t suit: high-volume small balances; the per-debt economics are bad.
3. Tribunal / small claims action
NCAT, VCAT, QCAT, or magistrates’ small-claims jurisdiction. Self-represented works for straightforward matters. Filing fees from $80-$400. Hearings 2-4 months out.
Suits: debtors who have assets and refuse to pay. Single debts where the tribunal’s monetary cap covers your amount.
Cost: filing fees plus your time.
Doesn’t suit: debtors who can’t pay (no point getting a judgment against an empty wallet); high volumes.
4. Software-led debt recovery (platforms)
Self-service debtor portals, automated outreach calibrated to the ACCC contact rules, and Stripe-based payment flows. Recovery happens without phone calls in 80%+ of cases. Compliance posture and hardship workflows are encoded in the platform.
Suits: high-volume receivables, customer-relationship-sensitive industries (telco, healthcare, SaaS), small balances where 25-40% commission destroys the economics.
Cost: contingency-only. Adeva Pro charges a percentage of recovered amounts only, materially below the 25-40% range commercial agencies still charge.
Doesn’t suit: single very-large debts where bespoke human conversation is the difference; international debtors outside the platform’s coverage.
5. Traditional debt-collection agency
The default. Phone-based recovery operators on contingency, typically 25-40% of recovered amounts. Often add per-letter / per-call charges. Some still send physical letters as their primary tool.
Suits: very-large single debts where bespoke human conversation moves the needle; established commercial relationships where trust matters.
Cost: 25-40% commission, plus retainers / per-debt / per-letter charges.
Doesn’t suit: high-volume small-balance receivables; customer-relationship-sensitive industries; modern brands that can’t afford the reputational drift of aggressive third-party recovery.
Which is right for your portfolio?
Most modern Australian receivables books are best served by some combination of (1) tightened in-house chase + (4) platform recovery, with (2) and (3) reserved for the long tail of large or contested debts.
Get a portfolio review