Dear insolvency practitioner: Chapter 26: Companies Investigation Branch

The message we have received from insolvency practitioners and meetings of the Disqualification Stakeholder Group, which comprises members of the profession, Recognised Professional Bodies and other regulators, is that practitioners would welcome access to current data with regard to our investigation and enforcement activities.

There is also an appetite, from both sides, for more active engagement and communication about our investigation and enforcement work.

Our Investigation and Enforcement Services Division is launching this new Chapter of Dear IP to provide up to date information and to acknowledge your contribution to the director disqualification regime, as well as to invite input and encourage dialogue.

Please tell us what information you would like to see us provide in future issues as it is important to us that we provide you with the information and content that you want to see.

86% of Section 6 CDDA disqualifications were obtained by Undertaking during 2013-14.

For every company director that The Service disqualifies, there is a net benefit to the market of around Ł100,000

The average period of disqualification during 2014-15 currently stands at 5.6 years.

Since April this year, The Insolvency Service has visited six insolvency practitioner firms, addressing more than 40 staff in order to provide guidance and engage in discussions regarding:

· the Red Tape Challenge and what that means in terms of upcoming changes to the D return process

o mitigation of the risk of matters of unfit conduct becoming stale or evidence becoming harder to obtain

o early commencement of investigations to ensure completion within the statutory timeframe, thereby avoiding the need to issue proceedings protectively which can be an avoidable drain on financial resources

The feedback from our outreach visits is invariably positive, with practitioners reporting that they find the insight in relation to our decision making extremely useful and that they welcome the chance to meet face to face to discuss issues that matter to them.

If you would like to invite us to visit your offices or attend any events, to discuss any targeting, investigation or any other enforcement matters, please contact Mark.Danks@insolvency.gov.uk

Over the past couple of years, where cases have been rejected for further investigation following receipt of a D1, we listened to your feedback and have been improving our responses to your D1s by including fuller explanations as to how we reached our targeting decision.

We are keen that, where you still disagree over the targeting decision or where you have uncovered further evidence, that you pick up the phone to discuss the case with us. The contact details for discussing cases are always included on our correspondence and we do listen to what you have to say – reversing targeting decisions does happen! In addition, we will also be looking to call practitioners to discuss cases more often and we hope that, by working together, we can make sure we target the right cases.

We value and reply upon the work that insolvency practitioners put into cases that we carry forward for investigation and disqualification and how the professionalism and diligence of you and your staff ensure that, together, we achieve positive outcomes.

Below are examples of the invaluable contribution that practitioners and their staff have made to recent successful disqualification cases.

On 20 May 2014 a disqualification order was made against Thomas Cushley for a period of 8 years as a result of his unfit conduct as director of Chapelgate Healthcare LLP which had gone into CVL on 3 October 2011.

The Insolvency Service’s solicitors in this case, Burness Paull LLP, singled out Mr Wallace for special praise, noting:

“I found the IP to be incredibly helpful and this was particularly in light of the fact that he had all but retired and this was one of the very few cases that he had left. Despite that, he was still more than happy to meet with me and he spent a whole morning providing me with a statement, going through documents with me and producing copies of whatever I asked for. He was also quite happy to appear in court as a witness and attended at court on 20 May in order to do so.

I appreciate that this was all part and parcel of the IP's "job" as liquidator of the company but he engaged with us without complaint and was keen to assist in whatever way he could.”

IPs – Colin Wilson of Baker Tilly, London and Timothy Dolder of Begbies Traynor (Central) LLP, London

Judgment was handed down in the case of The Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills v Daren Michael Williams and a disqualification order was made against Mr Williams for a period of four years.

In the Approved Judgment, Mr Registrar Baister made particular mention of the practitioner’s staff member, Charlotte Teresa Campbell, who appeared as a witness in this case. The judgement notes that:

“Miss Campbell was an exemplary witness. She had carefully read her written evidence and she answered questions thoughtfully and honestly. She stuck to her guns where she was sure of her position but was ready to accept that there were matters about which she could not be sure”

In future issues of Dear IP, we intend to provide more in-depth analysis of disqualification data highlighting any trends and emerging issues on a real time basis as well as continued updates on investigation and enforcement matters as they arise. Do please let us know what else you would like to see and we will do our best to provide.

Any enquiries regarding this article should be directed towards Sallie Rose, IES Business Development Team, 4 Abbey Orchard Street, London SW1P 2HT; telephone: 020 7596 6130; email: Sallie.Rose@insolvency.gov.uk

The average length of disqualification for 2014-15 currently stands at 5.5 years with 8.7% of directors being disqualified for in excess of ten years.

We continually hear positive feedback about the successful outcomes we achieve as a result of our collaborative working with insolvency practitioners.

Due to ongoing disqualification proceedings, we cannot always name the individuals and the cases involved, however we can highlight areas where we have received particular praise about insolvency practitioners and their staff recently, including:

On 9 July 2014, a disqualification order was made against Marc John McKibbin for a period of 13 years for misappropriating company funds of Ł830,534.

Our Investigator commented upon the helpfulness of Alex Lower, with whom she primarily dealt during her investigation, and how by working collaboratively, we obtained an excellent result.

“There were three issues of unfit conduct reported in the D1 Return and further details and enclosures were provided.

“The IP had collated the majority of the relevant documentation into three files which had been fully indexed. These were copied in their entirety. Due to their indexing system, it was straightforward to cross reference to the remaining working files and identify any additional material I required. This obviously saved a great deal of time and duplication of effort. The IP kept me fully updated regarding their recovery actions. They and their solicitors conducted an excellent investigation and provided good supporting documentation.”

So far this year, the Insolvency Service has also made 131 criminal referrals to prosecuting authorities as a result of criminality identified in both live and insolvent companies. The majority of our criminal referrals are made to BIS Criminal Enforcement (“BISCE”) and, to the end of August 2014, BISCE have successfully prosecuted 65 defendants as a result of referrals from the Insolvency Service.

A number of the referrals and prosecutions cited above came as a result of insolvency practitioners acting as liquidators or supervisors of voluntary arrangements, under their legal obligations set out in the Insolvency Act 1986, reporting criminality to us.

Criminal prosecutions are an extremely valuable tool in tackling serious misconduct in insolvency cases, and the referrals that are sent to us from insolvency practitioners are instrumental in us working together to ensure that directors are pursued and punished where appropriate.

The average period for disqualification, across all sections above, is currently 5.7 years.

Around 10% of disqualifications are currently for periods in excess of ten years, reflecting the seriousness of the unfit conduct set out in the disqualification reports.

As at the end of November 2014, we had made 16 disclosures to other regulators for investigation and enforcement action and we continue to work closely with both insolvency practitioners and other regulators to ensure that the market place is protected from individuals who are demonstrably unfit to run a company.

We have also submitted 286 criminal referrals to prosecuting authorities. The majority of these referrals (225) were made to the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills. We are keen to see practitioners continue their hugely valuable work in identifying potential criminal offences and ensuring that they are reported to us so that we can all work together to ensure that the right cases are investigated.

To continue the theme of criminal referrals, it was particularly pleasing to receive a glowing report from one of the investigators over at BIS Criminal Enforcement (“BISCE”), John Pearson, and BISCE’s counsel on a case, Mr Galloway.

John Pearson took pains to point out that they found Mr Allen’s evidence to have been pivotal in securing the conviction and, given the time that had passed since Mr Allen’s appointment as office holder in respect of the company, his invaluable contribution to the criminal case is certainly worthy of mention.

“Mr. Allen was the liquidator for Solent Management Ltd based at Exmouth, Devon which went into liquidation in July 2006 with creditors owed over Ł750K.

The company dealt in yacht sales and brokerage, the liquidation was a complex process.

“The two directors of the company, Andrew John Bowden and Paul Randle were charged with Fraudulent Trading. Mr Bowden pleaded guilty, Mr Randle pleaded not guilty. Mr Randle appeared at Exeter Crown Court in November 2013 for trial and the result was a hung jury.

“A re-trial was held in September 2014 and Mr Randle was found guilty after 50 minutes of deliberation by the jury.

“Mr. Allen gave evidence at both trials. He was cross-examined at some length and in some detail by defence counsel on both occasions. It was continually put to him in various different ways by the defence counsel that Mr Randle had assisted the liquidation process and done everything he could to save the company.

“Mr. Allen not only rebutted the defence argument but was able to say that Mr Randle had hardly been present at the premises during the administration/liquidation process and if anything had hampered the process.

“Malcolm Galloway, prosecuting counsel, commented after Mr. Allen had given evidence that he wished all witnesses were so clear and unequivocal when presenting this kind of professional evidence.”

Both defendants were sentenced to two years imprisonment, suspended for two years. Mr Randle was also ordered to carry out 240 hours of unpaid community work.

Mr Bowden and Mr Randle had already been disqualified for seven and eight years respectively following an Insolvency Service investigation into the affairs of Solent Management Limited.

This was a great result and demonstrates the value of reporting criminality for further investigation and enforcement.

We are still interested to hear what you, the readers, think of this chapter of Dear IP and what sort of content you would be interested in reading. Do please send any ideas to sallie.rose@insolvency.gov.uk

*In our last article, it was stated that there had been one disqualification under s8 CDDA during Q3. Following a review of the data, it has been noted that proceedings were actually taken under s6 CDDA and the table above has been amended to reflect that result.

Approximately 10% of disqualifications are currently for periods in excess of ten years, reflecting the seriousness of the unfit conduct set out in the disqualification reports.

This was a serious case where allegations of fraud were made against a director who was a Chartered Accountant.

The director caused the company to enter into a number of carefully planned transactions shortly prior to the cessation of trade designed to put assets beyond the reach of creditors and to his own personal benefit. He then produced false and misleading documents to the administrators. This was a deliberate and dishonest scheme by an accountant, with over twenty years of directorial experience and the then current holder of a county Entrepreneur of the Year award.

Bond Dickinson, acting on behalf of the Insolvency Service, received assistance from the administrators and their team. In particular, the insolvency practitioner arranged online access, via his solicitors, to relevant documents to assist with the investigation and the building of the case on behalf of the Secretary of State. Ultimately, the director confirmed that he did not want to contest the proposed disqualification and offered an undertaking for 11 years which was accepted by the Secretary of State.

Between November 2014 and February 2015, the Secretary of State accepted disqualification undertakings against the four directors of Vinance plc which had gone into administration on 16 November 2012.

Vinance plc offered wine investment services to its customers. The investigation involved a large amount of analysis relating to client transactions, wines purchased (or not, as the case may be) and establishing the shortfall between the wine the company had agreed to purchase against the stock actually held. Client claims against Vinance plc totalled nearly Ł14,000,000.

Kevin Phillips the Insolvency Service investigator in this case, praised the cooperation of the joint administrators, Nicky Fisher and Chris Herron, as well as Louise Turner with whom he primarily dealt. Mr Phillips said:

“The Insolvency Practitioners were particularly helpful in the case. I primarily dealt with a member of staff called Louise Turner but the Joint Liquidators, Chris Herron and Nicky Fisher, were also willing and available to talk to me when Louise Turner was unable to assist. I believe I made at least 4-5 visits to their office and exchanged many emails. I also had a number of telephone conversations with Louise Turner who was willing to discuss and explain any information that the Joint Liquidators had provided to me. Of particular note, the Joint Liquidators were willing to give us access to the company’s records and their files at short notice, and on occasions would pull out documents that I needed; this saved me the time of looking through files that were more familiar to the Liquidator.

“The case required a significant amount of analysis of accounting records; this analysis was completed by both the Joint Liquidators and the Insolvency Service. The Joint Liquidators had completed analysis of the company’s records and records obtained from third parties with whom the company had dealings. This was primarily related to the repatriating of stock to customers and agreeing creditor claims as part of their Administrator and Liquidator functions. The Liquidator shared that analysis with me to save a duplication of work and was willing to clarify points relevant to my investigation. A substantial amount of time was saved by the Joint Liquidators sharing their analysis. The sharing of information, general assistance and provision of information specifically for our investigation by the Liquidator was crucial to the successful outcome of our Investigation.”

Three of the directors were disqualified for nine years and one for ten years for causing or allowing Vinance plc to trade with undue risk to clients by failing to procure wine which it had agreed to purchase on behalf of its clients.

Deloitte LLP: John Charles Reid and Brian William Milne: Joint Administrators (Peter Mackie and Lien Ngo assisting)

The main allegation in this case was that the director had transferred approximately Ł11million of book debts, which were subject to a charge, to a series of associated companies for collection, thereby putting the proceeds of recovery beyond the reach of the charge holder and the creditors of the company. Bond Dickinson, acting on behalf of the Insolvency Service, received assistance from the administrators and their team throughout, including the transfer of records to a local office for ease of inspection and full access to relevant solicitors’ papers and extensive post appointment inter-company ledger work.

This was a serious case and an undertaking of 11 years was accepted by the Secretary of State on 14 March 2014.

Post undertaking, third parties have continued their attempts to collect the book debts and the Insolvency Service, Bond Dickinson and the Joint Administrators have worked together to halt this improper attempt to collect those assets.

984, over 80%, of Section 6 disqualifications were settled by the director signing a disqualification undertaking during 2014-15.

In the final quarter of 2014-15, the average length of section 6 disqualification orders was 6.8 years, against 5.4 years for an undertaking.

In view of the new official experimental statistics on Insolvency Service Enforcement Outcomes, we are no longer able to provide up to date, month by month or quarter by quarter breakdowns of disqualification data in this chapter of Dear IP. Such data will only be able to be published following the publication of the official statistics.

We are keen to ensure that you find information of interest in this chapter, so any suggestions as to what other information you would like to see included here should be sent to sallie.rose@insolvency.gov.uk

We have received a couple of queries as to how the case studies are selected for inclusion in our special mentions section.

To clarify, these case studies are examples that have been notified to the Business Development Team where the investigators themselves believe that the contribution of the office holder or their staff warrants acknowledgement.

These are generally cases where the investigators feel that the cooperation or collaborative efforts of the insolvency practitioner have significantly contributed to the efficient and effective investigation into a particular case leading to a successful enforcement outcome.

Of course, this chapter is all about recognising the benefits of working together so, if any office holders or their team members would also like to make a contribution to this chapter, all submissions should be sent to sallie.rose@insolvency.gov.uk

Donald Shanks, Senior Manager – Middlebrooks Business Recovery & Advice, Edinburgh

This was a case where the allegation of unfit conduct related to a breach of fiduciary duty in relation to the companies tax affairs, whereby the director knowingly instructed the submission of a VAT return to HMRC which was under-declared in the sum of Ł5,000,000, following which the director gained personal benefit in the sum of Ł1,650,000.

Sandra King, Senior Investigator at the Insolvency Service, stated that Donald Shanks deserved special mention as he had been very proactive during the course of the investigation. She stated that he had:

The result of this collaborative working was that the director signed a disqualification undertaking for a period of 11 years.

This case saw the director sign a disqualification undertaking for a period of five years.

Gary Moffat of Burness Paul LLP (dealing with the case on behalf of the Secretary of State) stated that Derek Forsyth and his team at Campbell Dallas were always polite and quick to respond to our requests for information. They also willingly assisted us in pursuing a third party for the company’s accounting records as this was proving problematic. Although the records themselves were not provided by the time the report was submitted for consideration by the Insolvency Service’s Authorisations Team, Campbell Dallas helped create a chain of evidence demonstrating attempts to obtain the records and verify the true level of corporation tax due. This added strength to our case. There was also a regular flow of information from Campbell Dallas throughout the course of the investigation. For example, they provided us with details of discovered bank accounts and new correspondence with the director without being prompted to do so.

The strength of our case helped the undertaking to be achieved within 1 month of the s16 letter being sent and despite the director living in South Korea. The insolvency practitioner’s pressure eventually resulted in the accounting records being delivered up at around the time of the undertaking. Had disqualification proceedings been commenced and defended, those records would have demonstrated that the corporation tax assessments were reasonable.

[1] All data taken from Insolvency Service Enforcement Outcomes – January to March 2015 – Tables https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/insolvency-service-enforcement-outcomes-january-to-march-2015

6. ENFORCEMENT OUTCOMES – September 2015

Director Disqualification Update ^[1]

Section under which action taken	Directors Disqualified
	2013-14	2014-15	Quarter One 2015-16
S6 CDDA	1216	1145	302
S2 CDDA following conviction of indictable offence	63	64	7
S8 CDDA following Companies Act investigation by the Insolvency Service	3	0	0
Total directors disqualified	1282	1209	309

256, over 80%, of Section 6 disqualifications were settled by the director signing a disqualification undertaking during the first quarter of 2015-16.

In the first quarter of 2015-16, the average length of section 6 disqualification orders was 7.3 years, against 5.7 years for an undertaking.

During the same period, 16% of disqualifications were for over 10 years, with 53% over 5 years, an increase of 4% over the same quarter last year.

We are keen to ensure that you find information of interest in this chapter, so any suggestions as to what other information you would like to see included here should be sent to gay.burns@insolvency.gov.uk

A Reminder – Reporting Potential Criminal Offences

In the December 2014 edition, we concentrated on the importance of the role of the IP with respect to criminal referrals; reporting potential offences in the first place (pursuant to sections 7A, 262B, 218(3) & (4), together with s6A and s262A of the Insolvency Act) and then working with the Insolvency Service and our colleagues in BIS Criminal Enforcement to secure convictions.

Potential criminal offences identified by insolvency practitioners in bankruptcies or compulsory liquidations in England and Wales should be reported to the appropriate official receiver. In all other cases (including Scotland) reports should be sent to:

Intelligence Operations
Investigation and Enforcement Services
The Insolvency Service
4th Floor, Cannon House,
18 Priory Queensway,
Birmingham, B4 6FD

or by email to intelligence.insolvent@insolvency.gov.uk

The Intelligence & Enforcement Directorate will review the alleged offence set out the report and the supporting evidence and if appropriate forward it to the relevant prosecuting authority, usually BIS Criminal Enforcement in England and Wales or the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service for Scotland.

Special Mentions

The case study below is an example that has been notified to the Business Development Team by investigation colleagues, who believe that the contribution of the office holder and their staff warrants acknowledgement.

As this chapter is all about recognising the benefits of working together, if any office holders or their team members would also like to make a contribution to this chapter, all submissions should be sent to gay.burns@insolvency.gov.uk

Mark Beesley, Beesley & Co., Handforth

Adam Wells, Insolvency Administrator formerly Beesley & Co, and Leonard Curtis, now Menzies LLP, London

John Leatham, associate of GVA James Barr (LPA Receivers of the companies former properties) Edinburgh

Kelvic Holdings & Developments Limited

This was a defended case where the director’s failure to preserve and/or deliver up adequate accounting records for the company, which traded between 2004/2005 and June 2010 developing and selling real estate, meant that it was not possible to verify its total liabilities, an assertion that it had no debtors, together with transactions totalling nearly Ł6 million, including the disposal of fixed assets subject to finance.

Part of the Secretary of State’s evidence comprised affidavits from Messrs Beesley, Wells and Leatham and all of them attended the trial; each travelling some distance to do so. They were sworn in and answered questions put to them by the Secretary of State’s Counsel and the Deputy District Judge, who in her judgment noted that she considered the Secretary of State’s witnesses to be truthful, helpful and accurate and the evidence clear and considered.

They clearly helped to get the case made out, with the various lines of defence put forward by the Defendant being defeated, resulting on the unfit conduct of accounting records being made out and a disqualification order for eight years being made.

Your views

We are still interested to hear what you, the readers, think of this chapter of Dear IP and what sort of content you would be interested in reading. Do please send any ideas to gay.burns@insolvency.gov.uk

Any enquiries regarding this article should be directed towards gay.burns@insolvency.gov.uk

7. ENFORCEMENT OUTCOMES – December 2015

Director Disqualification Update

Section under which action taken	Directors Disqualified
	2013-14	2014-15	Quarter One 2015-16	Quarter Two 2015-16
S6 CDDA	1216	1145	302	244
S2 CDDA following conviction of indictable offence	63	64	7	8
S8 CDDA following Companies Act investigation by the Insolvency Service	3	0	0	1
Total directors disqualified	1282	1209	309	253

199, over 78%, of Section 6 disqualifications were settled by the director signing a disqualification undertaking during the second quarter of 2015-16.

In the second quarter of 2015-16, the average length of section 6 disqualification orders was 7.6 years, against 5.4 years for an undertaking.

During the same period, 8% of disqualifications were for over 10 years, with 47% over 5 years.

Highlighted cases

Recent disqualification outcomes include:

· In the first six months of this year, 14 directors have been disqualified for a total of 89 years for employing illegal workers;

· The disqualification, under section 2 of the Company Directors Disqualification Act, for a maximum 15 years of a director who had previously been convicted in connection with the supply of fake bomb detecting equipment;

· The three directors of a Manchester company who provided disqualification undertakings totalling 31 years after participating in over 350 fraudulent deals facilitating losses of some Ł4.5 million to HMRC; and

· The director of a land banking company, who was disqualified for 15 years for making misleading statements inducing the public to invest in the company’s land by suggesting that it would obtain planning permission when, in reality, the land was variously: in Greenbelt, in a conservation area or where planning permission had already been rejected.

Special Mention – Working Together

The case study below is an example that has been notified to the Business Development Team by colleagues in Investigation who believe that the contribution of the office holder and their staff warrants acknowledgement.

PwC team led by David Baxendale: Euromix Concrete Limited:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/director-disqualified-for-8-years-for-abusing-a-credit-facility

On 30 October, the Secretary of State accepted an eight year disqualification undertaking from David Marsh, the Finance Director of Euromix Concrete Limited for abuse of an invoice discounting facility at the risk of and detriment to the funders and ultimately, the general body of creditors.

The funders of the invoice discounting agreement became aware of discrepancies during an audit in March 2013. It then became apparent that Mr Marsh had claimed funds for non-existent invoices and claimed to have made payments to the Invoice discounters when no cheques were actually banked or were banked at a later date. This was hidden by a series of intercompany fund movements and the use of concealed bank accounts. As a result, Euromix obtained increased funding to support cash flow and built up a deficiency to the invoice discounters of approximately Ł500,000.

As both the invoice discounters and the bank were protected by fixed and floating charges on all the assets of the company, any shortfall will be suffered by the general body of creditors.

Commenting on the case in the press release, Rob Clarke, Group Leader of Insolvent Investigations North, pointed to the complexity of the case and the fact that the Insolvency Service worked closely worked closely with David Baxendale and his team to identify and evidence exactly what had happened and the scale of the fraud.

Howard Tobias, whose team dealt with the investigation, has confirmed that without David and his team’s effort “we would not have got the result we did”.

Your views

We are still interested to hear what you, the readers, think of this chapter of Dear IP and what sort of content you would be interested in reading. Please send any ideas to gay.burns@insolvency.gov.uk

Any other enquiries regarding this article should also be directed towards email gay.burns@insolvency.gov.uk

8. ENFORCEMENT OUTCOMES – July 2016

Director Disqualification Update

Section under which action taken	Directors Disqualified
	2013-14	2014-15	2015-16
S6 CDDA	1216	1145	1156
S2 CDDA following conviction of indictable offence	63	65	47
S8 CDDA Where it is considered expedient in the public interest, arising from investigative material	3	0	5
Total directors disqualified	1282	1210	1,208

In 2015/16, the average length of a disqualification was 5.9 years, up 0.3 years compared with 2014/15. The average length of an order was 7.4 years (a decrease of 0.1 years from 2014/15), compared to an average length of 5.5 years for an undertaking (an increase of 0.3 years on the previous year).
During the same period, 11% of disqualifications were for over 10 years, with 45% over 5 years.
In view of the new official experimental statistics on Insolvency Service Enforcement Outcomes, we are no longer able to provide up to date, month by month or quarter by quarter breakdowns of disqualification data in this chapter of Dear IP. Such data will only be able to be published following the publication of the official statistics.

Highlighted cases

Recent disqualification outcomes:

in 2015-16, 47 directors have been disqualified for a total of 290 years for employing illegal workers
the director of an investment company was disqualified for 14 years in March for mis-selling half a million pounds of worthless Rare Earth Metals as investments to members of the public; and
two directors were disqualified in February for 15 years each for selling worthless Voluntary Emission Reductions (a type of carbon credit) to the public at between two and six and a half times the price it had paid its supplier

We are keen to ensure that you find information of interest in this chapter, so any suggestions as to what other information you would like to see included here should be sent to valerie.martyn@insolvency.gov.uk .

Update on the Gazetting of Scottish disqualifications

Scottish Practitioners may have noticed that, with effect from 1 June 2016, we have stopped advertising disqualification orders obtained in Scotland in the Edinburgh Gazette. Historically, The Insolvency Service advertised all Scottish disqualification orders in the Edinburgh Gazette. However, there was no statutory requirement to do this and we do not publish disqualification orders and undertakings obtained in England and Wales in the London Gazette. Details of Scottish director disqualifications can be found on:

The Statutory Register of disqualifications , which is held at Companies house for all English, Scottish and Welsh company directors;
Detailed information about the unfit conduct which led to disqualification is published in the Insolvency Service director disqualification outcomes for a period of three months form the commencement of each disqualification.

Your view

We are still interested to hear what you, the readers, think of this chapter of Dear IP and what sort of content you would be interested in reading. Do please send any ideas to valerie.martyn@insolvency.gov.uk

Any other enquiries regarding this article should also be directed towards email valerie.martyn@insolvency.gov.uk

9. Enforcement Outcomes – Special Mentions

Below are details of two recent disqualification cases highlighted by our investigation teams in which they received invaluable assistance from insolvency practitioners and their staff.

Iain Fraser of FRP Advisory LLP in Aberdeen and his team

In the case of Impact Trading Limited, early reporting and ongoing assistance during our investigation from Iain Fraser and his case manager Graham Smith resulted in a quick turnaround in our investigation and an undertaking being obtained promptly.

They assisted greatly by identifying and extracting from the company records at least 49 fraudulent invoices, all of which appeared to relate to Ł1.1m of credit notes which were raised by the director on 31 May 2016, the date the company ceased trading.

This saved us significant time in having to identify and extract these documents from the company records, enabled us to quickly identify the potential customers as detailed on the invoices and make enquiries to determine whether they had been supplied with the goods specified on the sales invoices and to confirm whether the invoices were valid.

Following our investigation, the director gave an undertaking that he won’t act as a director of a company for a period of nine years effective from 27 March 2017.

Key dates:

Date of administration: 7 June 2016

Date of submission of insolvency practitioner’s conduct report: 13 September 2016

Date disqualification obtained: 6 March 2017

Sarah Rayment and Anthony Nygate both of BDO LLP, London

Sarah Rayment and Anthony Nygate were appointed joint administrators of five companies that operated four hotels and a holding company.

Investigations established that the directors of these companies had operated with a lack of probity which resulted in a bank suffering a loss of over Ł31million.

Working collaboratively with the administrators and their team greatly assisted our investigation; they accessed the companies’ bespoke computer system and provided analysed information to us. In addition, Mr Nygate provided a witness statement supporting our disqualification application.

Our investigation culminated in the directors of these companies, Novtej Singh Dhillon and his former wife Sarina Thiara Dhillon, being disqualified from acting as a director for eleven years and four and a half years, respectively.

Our full press release on this case can be found here.

General enquiries may be sent to: Business.DevelopmentTeam@insolvency.gov.uk

10. Enforcement Outcomes – Special Mentions

A recent disqualification case is highlighted by our investigation team in which they received invaluable assistance from the insolvency practitioner and his staff, in particular the Senior Insolvency Manager.

Mark Beesley of Beesley Corporate Solutions (“Beesley”) in Handforth

Mark Beesley was appointed as Administrator for Greentabs Limited (known whilst trading as Mumtaz Food Industries Ltd).

Donna Shaw, the Senior Insolvency Manager, worked collaboratively with us and provided invaluable assistance to our investigation by:

Arranging access to files and records upon request on a number of occasions Providing prompt replies to numerous ongoing enquiries that arose as a result of prolonged court action

Undertaking further enquiries with Greentab’s bankers and creditors on behalf of the Insolvency Service that enabled us to respond to the defence filed Regularly updating us on the progress of the liquidation

This led to the five directors being disqualified for a total of 16 years. Our press release on this case can be found here

General enquiries may be sent to: Business.DevelopmentTeam@insolvency.gov.uk