Some suppliers get paid early and some late for no reason

This is one cause behind related problems such as Salaries, EMIs and tax dues fall on the same week. No payment rule, so terms are uneven and key suppliers lose patience. The checks below concentrate on this cause rather than repeating the full symptom diagnosis. A gap in the day-to-day record can be easy to miss. No payment rule, so terms are uneven and key suppliers lose patience. The risk grows when teams use different versions of what was agreed.

What it looks like

• The accountant with the owner has to search the bank statement, supplier ledger and payment calendar before answering a routine question.
• No payment rule, so terms are uneven and key suppliers lose patience.
• Staff cannot locate cleared bank transactions, approved bills and due dates for the latest case.
• People spot the gap after a routine payment crowds out wages, statutory obligations or essential supply.
• The open case has no documented owner, due date or proof of closure.

Why it happens

The specific failure is left unchecked. No payment rule, so terms are uneven and key suppliers lose patience. If there is no recorded owner for that condition, the effect travels to the next team.

The work and its evidence move separately. Payment decisions may be made from today’s bank balance without the next set of committed outflows.

A later hand-off exposes the gap. A supplier invoice, approval and due date can remain in different records until an urgent payment request arrives.

The less obvious cause: A control may exist on paper but still fail in practice. Test whether someone actually performs this check: find suppliers advanced or delayed with no written reason.

Find the first failed hand-off before changing staff targets. A completed register alone cannot prove that physical work happened.

What to check first

1. Compare actual payments to documented supplier credit terms. Compare dates, quantities and references. Mark an unconfirmed difference as unverified. Finish the first pass in under 30 minutes and name the missing source if needed.
2. Find suppliers advanced or delayed with no written reason. Record the affected item or party and the person who can verify the detail. Finish the first pass in under 30 minutes and name the missing source if needed.
3. Check whether critical suppliers' risk differs from routine vendors. Mark each exception open, waiting for evidence or resolved, with a named next owner. Finish the first pass in under 30 minutes and name the missing source if needed.

How to fix it

1. Start with one live case. Compare actual payments to documented supplier credit terms. Keep the source reference before changing the record.
2. Make the control explicit. Publish payment priorities aligned with terms and business criticality. Put the rule in the register or sheet that staff already use.
3. Set a second guardrail. Review exceptional early or late payments in a weekly run. Keep an actual bank balance separate from likely receipts. Check tax and legal priorities with a qualified adviser.
4. Assign the next decision. The accountant with the owner records the action and its due date. A separately authorised person signs off changes affecting money, safety or customer terms.
5. Review the open list. Start with items affecting today or tomorrow. Keep third-party commitments separate from completed actions.
6. Check whether the rule holds. For four weeks, count committed outflows unsupported by confirmed available cash. Reopen repeat cases and identify where the control failed.

Copy this cash and supplier payment priority sheet into a register or sheet:

Retain the source reference and limit access to authorised staff.

A worked example

Illustrative example only. A routine ₹2 lakh supplier is prepaid while a critical ₹75,000 component bill becomes overdue. Start by locating the source that would verify these amounts or quantities. The accountant with the owner records the exact exception, gives it an owner and checks the next relevant event. This example shows how to structure the decision. It does not claim that a business achieved a saving or avoided a loss.

How you know it is fixed

• Completeness: Count committed outflows unsupported by confirmed available cash at the same time every week. Record the count and the oldest item, rather than just saying things are better.
• Timeliness: Check whether the assigned person took the next action before the agreed cut-off. Keep missed dates visible instead of replacing them silently.
• Proof of closure: Sample three closed cases and locate cleared bank transactions, approved bills and due dates. A tick without supporting evidence is still an open control gap.

When it is more serious

Unequal treatment creates essential supply disruption or legal risk. Hold irreversible decisions until the material facts are verified. For contracts, tax, wages or legal rights, retain source documents and consult a qualified adviser. Repeated exceptions after four reviews may require changing the control.

This works if someone does it every day. In most businesses, that someone is you.

Questions people ask

What should we check before taking action?

Compare actual payments to documented supplier credit terms. Keep its date and reference. Then compare it with cleared bank transactions, approved bills and due dates; if they disagree, record the difference before changing either one.

Who should own the next action?

The accountant with the owner should own the open item. The person authorised to change money, a technical standard or a customer commitment must still approve that decision.

Can we run this control without new software?

No. Start with a shared sheet or register containing the reference, owner, promised date, status and evidence. Once those fields are reliable, decide whether a system connection is worth setting up.

When is the issue serious enough to escalate?

Unequal treatment creates essential supply disruption or legal risk. Keep supporting records and get specialist help where relevant.