Failure to pay: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Replaced content with "{{failure to pay or deliver capsule}}"
 
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
The classic [[event of default]] in a financial {{csaprov|contract}}. There is no more profound indication that you may be unable to honour your obligations that the fact you have actually not done so.
{{failure to pay or deliver capsule}}
 
===See also===
*[[credit mitigation]]
*{{isdaprov|Failure to pay}} - {{isda}} provision
*[[event of default]]

Latest revision as of 12:09, 27 June 2019

Negotiation Anatomy™

Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

Failure to pay is the classic event of default in a financial contract. There is no more profound indication that you may be unable to honour your obligations to pay a sum of money that the fact you have actually not done so. Almost all close-outs will derive from some kind of failure to pay or insolvency — but don’t let that knowledge stop your credit department insisting on a four month negotiation about ratings downgrade triggers.

Contrast with a failure to deliver which in some contracts[1] is tantamount in outrage to a failure to pay, but in others is just one of those things that we accept, sort out, and move on with. For example, stock lending transactions, where a failure to lend Securities, or return Securities or Collateral, might be just one of those things: the result of ordinary market fluctuations, where settlement failures are common, and one often relies on someone else — or a chain of someone elses — settling the necessary Securities into you so you can settle them to your loan counterparty.

See also