A wholesale distributor of commercial kitchen equipment and supplies, operating from a warehouse facility in the Greater Toronto Area, had built a reliable revenue stream over 8 years by extending credit terms to restaurants, catering companies, and institutional food service operations across southern Ontario. The business model depended on relationships with repeat customers who ordered equipment and consumable supplies on 30-day or 60-day payment terms, accumulating receivables that typically turned over smoothly as payments arrived and new orders shipped.

One of the distributor's largest accounts was a regional catering company that had grown rapidly over the preceding 3 years, expanding from a single commercial kitchen to 4 production facilities serving corporate clients, event venues, and institutional contracts. The relationship had started modestly, with orders of a few thousand dollars at a time, but by the current year the catering company's outstanding balance regularly exceeded $180,000, representing roughly 12 percent of the distributor's total accounts receivable at any given time. The credit terms had been extended informally as the relationship deepened, moving from 30-day to 45-day and eventually to 60-day payment windows without formal amendment to the original supply agreement signed when the account was opened.

Over the past 6 months, the distributor's accounts receivable manager had noticed a pattern. Payments from the catering company that once arrived within the agreed window began slipping to 75 days, then 90 days. Partial payments replaced full settlements. Phone calls about invoice discrepancies became more frequent, with disputes raised over charges that had previously cleared without question. The catering company requested extended terms on 2 occasions, citing cash flow timing issues related to a large institutional contract that had allegedly delayed payment. The distributor continued shipping product, reasoning that the long-standing relationship and the size of the account justified patience.

The original supply agreement between the parties, drafted when the account was new and the credit exposure modest, contained standard payment terms and a basic retention of title clause but had never been updated to reflect the expanded credit relationship. No financing statement had been registered under provincial personal property security legislation when the agreement was signed or at any point afterward. The distributor held no personal guarantee from the catering company's principals and had not required financial statements or other ongoing disclosure of the customer's financial condition as a condition of continued credit.

The distributor now faces decisions about how to protect its position while the customer remains operational, what remedies may be available if formal insolvency proceedings commence, and how to maximize recovery from what has become its single largest credit exposure.