Why collecting invoices through court often costs you money

Why does winning in court sometimes lead to financial loss?

Winning a lawsuit against someone who hasn't paid feels like a victory, until the final invoice from your own debt collection agency hits your mat and you lose more than you actually recovered. You might think court is the logical route to get your money, but reality is often tougher. In a ruling by the district court (ECLI:NL:RBROT:2026:13899), the judge saw an entrepreneur eventually ordered to pay high litigation costs to their own collection agency, while the debtor turned out to be untraceable.

What the court decided

In case ECLI:NL:RBROT:2026:13899, an entrepreneur hired a collection agency for an unpaid invoice. During the process, the entrepreneur received a partial payment directly from the debtor. Later, the debtor's company turned out to have been deregistered, making recovery impossible. The collection agency then claimed the outstanding costs based on their general terms, which stated that direct payments to the client also counted toward their commission. The district court ruled that the entrepreneur had to pay the agency's final statement, including litigation costs. The entrepreneur's defense regarding 'no cure no pay' was rejected because the terms clearly stated how own receipts were handled. The entrepreneur ended up with a significant debt to their own representative.

How does payment during the process create new problems?

Often, a debtor will make a partial payment after the first formal warning. As an entrepreneur, this feels like a positive step, but legally it can complicate things. Once you start a collection process, such payments fall under the 'collected' category in most contracts. The collection agency sees this as their success and charges the agreed costs. This creates a situation where you receive the money, but immediately pass it on to your service provider.

At what point do you lose control over costs as an entrepreneur?

Control slips through your fingers the moment you hand over the commercial settlement to a strict legal track. You focus on being proven right, while the actual value of the claim evaporates in court fees, legal representative salaries, and additional costs. When a business conflict escalates, the dialogue with the debtor stops and dossier management begins. This is the point where costs often exceed the original claim.

How to prevent collection costs from eating your profit margin?

Instead of jumping straight to litigation, a mediation session at an early stage could have channeled the debtor's willingness to pay. Mediation offers a path to reach a workable arrangement without the rigid boundaries of general terms and conditions. If you are still in the middle of a partnership, solving a shareholder conflict through mediation often works better than a legal battle. The goal here is not to get a court verdict, but to secure cash flow without permanently damaging the relationship.

Pros and cons

Pros:

• Preservation of commercial value in the relationship with the debtor.
• Avoiding escalation where collection costs exceed the claim.
• Creating a payment plan that works for both parties.

Cons:

• The strong presence of distrust and focus on formal terms and conditions.
• Lack of willingness among parties to deviate from strict legal positions.

Want to know if mediation leads to a better result in your specific debt collection case? Schedule a short consultation to discuss your options before sending a summons.