--- title: "Sharing a collections case with an accountant: defining appropriate access" canonical: https://www.billabex.com/en/blog/sharing-collections-case-accountant-access/ lang: en alternate: https://www.billabex.com/fr/blog/partage-dossier-relance-cabinet-comptable.md alternates: fr: https://www.billabex.com/fr/blog/partage-dossier-relance-cabinet-comptable.md en: https://www.billabex.com/en/blog/sharing-collections-case-accountant-access.md es: https://www.billabex.com/es/blog/compartir-expediente-de-recordatorio-con-despacho-contable-definir-accesos.md updated: 2026-10-26 index: https://www.billabex.com/llms.txt --- # Sharing a collections case with an accountant: defining appropriate access Your accountant asks for the records behind two customer cases. You could grant access to the entire receivables portfolio, forward an email chain or prepare a restricted case file. Each option gives the recipient a different picture and different opportunities to act. Start with a specific question: what decision do you want the accountant to help you make? Checking an outstanding balance does not automatically require permission to send a reminder. Reviewing missing evidence does not necessarily justify access to every customer's commercial correspondence. Equally, sharing only the original invoice, without payments or credit notes, can leave your adviser working with the wrong amount. A useful handover limits its scope while preserving the information needed to understand the case. ## Define the engagement before assigning permissions For French accounting professionals, [Article 151 of the decree governing the profession](https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000046882378) requires a written agreement defining the engagement and the parties' rights and obligations. It also addresses the mandate where one exists. An invitation to a software workspace does not, by itself, describe the professional's assignment or authority. Establish whether the accountant will reconcile payments, review a correction, prepare a recommendation or contact the customer. A limited assignment might be: “Confirm the balances of the five attached invoices and identify missing supporting documents.” That does not necessarily include negotiating an extension or granting a discount. Our article on [separating an accounting firm's fees from its clients' receivables](https://www.billabex.com/en/blog/accounting-firm-fees-client-invoices-mandates/) explains why these activities need a clear boundary. Identify the authorised recipient, the internal person who will answer questions and the date on which access will be reconsidered. If the assignment changes, reconsider the documents and permissions as well. Access should not continue simply because nobody remembers why it was granted. For businesses elsewhere in Europe, check the professional and contractual rules that apply to the particular adviser. ## Restrict the portfolio without breaking the calculation Consider an explicitly simulated example. An SME has 120 customer accounts. It asks its accountant to review two customers with five invoices originally totalling EUR 18,400 including VAT. Payments of EUR 4,000 and credit notes of EUR 1,400 have already been allocated. The balance to explain is therefore EUR 13,000: 18,400 minus 4,000 minus 1,400. A useful extract contains those five invoices, their due dates, allocations, credit notes and the correspondence explaining unresolved questions. It identifies the creditor entity and the date of the statement. Excluding credit notes because the accountant asked only for “unpaid invoices” would incorrectly suggest that EUR 14,400 remained to be collected. Data minimisation should not remove evidence necessary to calculate the balance. Sharing two accounts instead of 120 reduces the breadth of the portfolio disclosed. It does not demonstrate a proportional reduction in security risk: document sensitivity and the permissions granted also matter. Two customer files might contain a bank statement revealing transactions involving many other parties. Prepare a relevant extract where appropriate, ensuring any redactions preserve the payment information needed for the review. The checks described in [reviewing unallocated credit notes](https://www.billabex.com/en/blog/unallocated-credit-note-balance-check/) help establish the starting position. Flag transactions still awaiting reconciliation. Your accountant needs to distinguish a confirmed balance from a working assumption without reconstructing every transaction in your accounting system. ## Separate viewing, commenting and acting The French data protection authority, [CNIL, recommends assigning access according to the needs of the task](https://www.cnil.fr/fr/securite-gerer-les-habilitations). Translate that principle into practical questions. Can the invited person view documents, add comments, download copies, change a status, send a message or export other customer accounts? Those abilities have different consequences. In the simulation, viewing documents and commenting may be sufficient. Accounting changes remain within the existing accounting approval process, and communications to the debtor remain with a named person. If the accountant subsequently needs to take another action, check the engagement and the relevant authority before widening access. Test what an invited user can actually see. A screen filtered to two customers may still allow searches or exports across the full portfolio. Check linked documents, notification contents and global search results too. These are questions for the supplier, rather than an assumption that every product supports the same access controls. Avoid an account shared by several members of the firm. Individual access makes it possible to identify whose permissions need removing and who can explain an observation. CNIL recommends reviewing permissions at least annually; a completed temporary assignment should not wait until the annual review before its associated access is removed. ## Establish the parties' actual data protection roles An accountant is not automatically a GDPR processor for every service. [CNIL's guidance on identifying your role](https://www.cnil.fr/fr/rgpd-comment-bien-identifier-son-role) explains that the assessment depends on actual responsibilities, including who determines the purposes and essential means of processing. Contractual labels cannot substitute for the factual assessment. For the proposed sharing arrangement, clarify each party's role, the permitted uses and the appropriate contractual framework. Who responds to requests concerning personal data? Who informs the other party about an incident? Which employees or additional service providers may become involved? You do not need to invent a legal analysis during each payment reminder, but a recurring arrangement needs a suitable framework before it becomes routine. This discussion also helps remove unnecessary information. A customer's employee being absent for health reasons, a personal assessment of that employee or a conversation unrelated to payment does not belong in a reconciliation file merely because it appears in the same inbox. Retain the facts needed for the assignment without exporting the entire internal discussion. ## Match the transfer method to the assignment CNIL's guidance on [securing exchanges with external parties](https://www.cnil.fr/fr/securite-securiser-les-echanges-avec-lexterieur) recommends protecting transmissions and restricting access to authorised recipients. For a temporary transfer, consider limited availability, recipient identification and, where a secret is required, delivery through a separate channel. HTTPS protects transport. It does not correct a mistyped address or prevent access through a link that anyone receiving it can use. Verify the recipient through an established channel and inspect the sharing settings. For particularly sensitive documents, use the secure arrangement already agreed with the firm instead of choosing an unfamiliar platform under time pressure. Make the version clear as well. If a payment arrives after the extract, send an identifiable update or use a workspace whose update behaviour both parties understand. [Preserving the history when an invoice changes](https://www.billabex.com/en/blog/invoice-changed-after-reminder-versions/) helps prevent a conclusion that was correct on Tuesday from being reused on Friday after the underlying balance has changed. ## Close the assignment with a usable result At the end of the review, obtain a result that distinguishes verified balances, missing evidence and decisions that remain yours. In the example, the EUR 13,000 should be explained invoice by invoice. A general note saying “review completed” provides too little information for the next collection action or for a colleague taking over the case. Remove temporary permissions and handle copies under the agreed framework and applicable obligations. Closing a sharing link does not mean ordering the destruction of records that the accounting firm must lawfully retain. The objective is to end operational access while respecting each party's responsibilities. A [central customer view in Billabex](https://www.billabex.com/en/product/customer-view-360/) helps your team locate invoices and context before preparing the handover. During a demonstration, ask how to produce the required scope and check the access controls available. A good sharing arrangement produces a better documented decision, an explainable balance and a clearly identified person responsible for the next action. ## Sources - [French decree governing accounting professionals, Article 151](https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000046882378), version effective from 1 January 2023. - [CNIL, managing access permissions](https://www.cnil.fr/fr/securite-gerer-les-habilitations), 13 March 2024. - [CNIL, identifying your GDPR role](https://www.cnil.fr/fr/rgpd-comment-bien-identifier-son-role), 6 June 2025. - [CNIL, securing external exchanges](https://www.cnil.fr/fr/securite-securiser-les-echanges-avec-lexterieur), 14 March 2024.