Transparency data

Insolvency practitioner sanctions: A former IPA Member 10 May 2024

On 10 May 2024 a Disciplinary Consent Order was made against a former IPA Member and Licensed Insolvency Practitioner

• From: The Insolvency Service
• Published: 7 October 2024

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Documents

Disciplinary Consent Order 10 May 2024

ODT, 39.6 KB

This file is in an OpenDocument format

This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.

Request an accessible format.

If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email [email protected]. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

Details

This Order is made in relation to the following allegations:

Allegation 1: The IP in their capacity as office holder, breached the Fundamental Principle of Professional Competence and Due Care of the Insolvency Code of Ethics, when they:

• as Liquidator of a Company A, failed to pay a dividend when funds permitted in breach of Rule 14.34(1) Insolvency (E&W) Rules 2016 (‘IR16’); and
• as Liquidator of Company B, failed to declare and pay a dividend when funds permitted in breach of Rule 14.27 IR 16; and/or
• as Liquidator of Company C, failed to progress the liquidation in a timely manner; and
• as Supervisor of Company D, a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement (CVA), failed to:
  1. take prompt action following departure from the terms of the CVA in breach of Statement of Insolvency Practice (SIP) 3.2 paragraph 17(d), and
  2. obtain a variation to the length of the CVA before purportedly being implemented in breach of SIP 3.2 paragraph 17(f); and
• in breach of s104A of the Insolvency Act 1986 and Rule 18.7 (6) IR16 failed in no less than eight cases to prepare and/or file four annual progress reports at Companies House, and
• failed in no less than 39 cases to file 82 annual progress reports in a timely manner.

Allegation 2: The IP, as Trustee of a bankruptcy estate, breached the Fundamental Principle of Professional Competence and Due Care of the Insolvency Code of Ethics, Rule 14.28 IR16 and Section 328 of the Insolvency Act 1986 when they:

• failed, pursuant to Rule 14.28 IR 16, to advertise a notice of intention to declare a dividend in the gazette; and/or
• failed, pursuant to Section 328 IA86, to pay a pari passu dividend to all proven creditors.

Allegation 3: The IP breached the Fundamental Principle of Integrity of the Insolvency Code of Ethics when they submitted a signed licence renewal form confirming that the required 50 hours of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) had been completed for the previous two years when only 13 hours were completed.

Allegation 4: The IP as potential liquidator of at least four companies breached the Fundamental Principle of Professional Competence and Due Care of the Insolvency Code of Ethics and Regulation 27 and Regulation 28 of the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (MLR17) when they failed to carry out due diligence and verify the identity of the entity paying his fees.

Accordingly, the IP was found liable to disciplinary action under the IPA’s Articles of Association.

Published 7 October 2024