Let’s talk about disputed invoices.
In contract negotiations, a common buyer markup to payment terms is the addition of “undisputed” before the word “amounts”. It seems harmless at first glance—why should a customer pay an invoice they believe is incorrect? However, from a seller’s perspective, this small tweak can introduce significant risks, including indefinite withholding of payment, cash flow disruptions, and legal ambiguity.
If your contracts allow customers to delay payments on disputed invoices without clear boundaries, you may find yourself caught in a cycle where disputes (even weak ones) become a tool for strategic delay. This article explores why sellers should be cautious about such clauses and how to structure payment terms to balance fairness with financial protection.
The risk of “undisputed” in payment clauses
Many contracts state:
“Customer shall pay all invoiced amounts within 30 days of invoicing.”
However, customers frequently revise this to:
“Customer shall pay all undisputed invoiced amounts within 30 days of invoicing.”
At first, this appears reasonable. If a customer genuinely believes an invoice contains errors, they should have the right to contest it before paying. However, this seemingly minor edit can have unintended consequences:
Ambiguity in what constitutes a “dispute”
Without clear contractual standards, customers could dispute invoices for trivial or unrelated reasons—delaying payment indefinitely without being in breach.
Lack of resolution mechanisms
If a contract simply says disputed amounts are not due, it may leave no process for determining when they do become due. Without a defined resolution timeline, disputed payments could remain outstanding indefinitely.
Undermining default payment rules
In contract law, payment is typically conditional on performance. If a vendor doesn’t deliver, the customer has a legal right to withhold payment. However, explicitly allowing disputes in the contract—even for minor issues—gives customers a shield against nonpayment claims.
How to draft payment terms that protect sellers
If you’re a seller with negotiation leverage, consider structuring your payment clause to limit the risks while keeping terms reasonable for customers. Here are three effective techniques:
1. No right to withhold & serious consequences for nonpayment
If you want the strongest protection for cash flow, make it clear that nonpayment is a material breach with immediate consequences.
Example: “Seller may immediately suspend its performance if buyer fails to pay the fee by the deadline. Failure to pay by the deadline is a material breach.”
This approach prevents buyers from using disputes as an excuse to delay payment indefinitely.
2. Require seller’s approval for nonpayment
A more balanced approach is to allow temporary withholding, but only for a short, defined period, with the seller retaining control over extensions.
Example: “Buyer may withhold payment of disputed portions of the fee for up to 10 days during discussions with seller but must pay the entire fee by the end of that period unless seller approves otherwise.”
This ensures that disputes must be resolved quickly and that customers cannot withhold payments indefinitely.
3. Narrow the types of disputes that justify withholding payment
Limit dispute-based nonpayment rights to clerical or billing errors—not service dissatisfaction or unrelated claims.
Example: “Buyer may withhold payment of the disputed portions of the fee only if buyer reasonably believes there is a clerical error; provided, however, buyer must submit the correct accounting prior to the due date.”
This prevents customers from using disputes as a tactic to delay payment over unrelated concerns.
The ideal payment clause: balanced yet protective
For a well-balanced approach that safeguards both parties, consider this refined payment clause:
Payment terms
- Buyer must pay all subscription fees specified in the order form by the due date using the stated payment method.
- If buyer disputes any portion of an invoice in good faith, they must:
- Provide timely notice – Notify seller in writing before the due date, explaining the dispute and supplying supporting documentation.
- Pay the undisputed portion – Undisputed amounts remain due by the due date.
- Engage in active resolution – Work diligently to resolve the dispute within [X] days of raising it.
- Limited withholding rights – Buyer may only withhold payment for clerical or billing errors (e.g., incorrect pricing, duplicate charges, or unapproved fees). Disputes based on service dissatisfaction or unrelated claims do not justify withholding payment.
- If a dispute is not resolved within [X] days, the disputed amount becomes payable in full unless the seller agrees otherwise in writing.
- Failure to comply with these requirements does not relieve buyer of their payment obligations. If payment is not received by the deadline, seller may suspend services and consider nonpayment a material breach of the agreement.
Defining a good faith dispute
A dispute qualifies as good faith if:
- it’s raised before the due date.
- it’s based on a reasonable, documented claim, not speculation or delay tactics.
- buyer actively participates in resolving it within a reasonable timeframe.
- buyer does not use the dispute to withhold payment as leverage for unrelated issues.
Finding the right balance
While customers should have the right to challenge incorrect invoices, sellers must protect their cash flow by preventing abuse of dispute provisions. The best approach is a clear, structured clause that:
- Requires timely notice and documentation for disputes.
- Allows temporary withholding only for clerical errors—not service-related complaints.
- Ensures disputed amounts become payable after a defined period if not resolved.
- Gives the seller enforcement rights, such as suspending services or terminating for breach.
By using these techniques, sellers can reduce financial risk, encourage prompt dispute resolution for disputed invoices, and maintain strong customer relationships—all while ensuring they get paid on time.
How ITLawCo can help
At ITLawCo, we specialise in drafting and negotiating contracts that protect your business without alienating customers. Whether you’re a vendor looking to secure your cash flow or a buyer seeking fair dispute resolution terms, we can help you:
- Develop enforceable payment clauses (including disputed invoices) that prevent abuse while maintaining flexibility.
- Draft clear and fair dispute resolution mechanisms that ensure issues are resolved quickly.
- Review and negotiate contracts to identify and mitigate hidden risks.
- Implement best practices for invoicing and payment structures to reduce disputes.
Our expertise spans IT contracts across hardware and software supply chains across multiple industries. If you need strategic contract advice that balances legal protection with commercial sensibility, reach out to ITLawCo today.
