What’s on your mind?

• The borrower only recognizes that it is a distressed company late in the day
• The system of early warning signals that a borrower might become a distressed company is ineffective
• The strategy for work with borrowers does not include a restructuring stage: the borrower is either considered a standard borrower or is immediately classified within the debt recovery pile
• The functionality of the debt management division is confined to legal procedures, while the out-of-court settlement procedure is not applied extensively
• There is no methodology for assessing the financial position of „distressed borrowers“ and constructing a respective cash flow forecast. Meanwhile it transpires that the assessment methodology applied to standard borrowers is unsound
• The process for work with restructured loans during restructuring and after the recovery of solvency is set up ineffectively
• The KPI system of the debt management division is ineffective

Your questions

• How do you set up the early monitoring system to promptly identify potential non-performing loans and facilitate the proactive adoption of measures aimed at the strengthening of the bank’s position, the recovery of debt or restructuring?
• Why are the regular client risk assessment division and business unit ineffective in their work with borrowers that find themselves in dire financial straits?
• How do you avoid starting the debt recovery procedure too late or too early?
• How do you enhance the effectiveness of work with bad debt?
• How do you avoid duplicating the functionality of the debt management division with other divisions of the bank?

 

How KPMG can help?