Transparency data

Insolvency practitioner sanctions: Rina Rohilla 25 June 2024

On 24 June 2024 a Disciplinary Consent Order was made against Rina Rohilla of The Richmond Partnership

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

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Documents

Disciplinary Consent Order Rina Rohilla

ODT, 33.6 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 a complaint that Ms Rohilla:

1. in her capacity as officeholder of several insolvency estates breached the Fundamental principle of Professional Competence and Due Care of the Insolvency Code of Ethics, when she: a. failed to complete statutory filings in a timely manner; b. provided inaccurate information to creditors on four cases; c. failed to competently deal with an Administration Estate; d. failed in all cases to comply with the provisions of Statement of Insolvency Practice (SIP) 11 – The Handling of Funds in Formal Insolvency Appointments, and SIP 7 – Presentation of Financial Information in Insolvency Proceedings; e. failed to assess insurance risks when she allowed the insurance on a property in a bankruptcy estate to expire.

2. in her capacity as office holder of no less than four cases breached the Fundamental Principle of Competence and Due Care and Statement of Insolvency Practice (SIP2) by failing to conduct and or/record timely and appropriate investigations into the affairs of the companies and their directors.

3. breached The Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations (‘MLR’) 2017, when in her role as:

4. proposed Administrator and Administrator, of a company, she failed to; a. complete adequate Customer Due Diligence prior to the establishment of a business relationship in accordance with Regulations 28 (2) and 30(2), b. adequately assess the level of risk, in accordance with Regulation 28(2)(c), c. conduct ongoing monitoring of the business relationship in accordance with Regulations 28(11).

5. proposed Liquidator of a company, she failed to: a. complete adequate Customer Due Diligence prior to the establishment of a business relationship in accordance with Regulations 28 (2) and 30(2), b. adequately assess the level of risk, in accordance with Regulation 28(2)(c).

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

Published 7 October 2024