We are Company Rescue and Not Clear Company Rescue

Published on : 24th August, 2023

We are Company Rescue and Not Clear Company Rescue!

Clear Company Rescue are offering a solution to your issues by offering to buy your insolvent company.

Does this sound too good to be true?

The actual process is legal as there is nothing stopping anyone from buying an insolvent company in the hopes of turning it around.  However, if the correct course of action is that it should be liquidated, as the debts could never be paid back from current trading, then you have to think why would they do it?!

Why take on the debt and the hassle?  They will of course most likely allow the company to be wound up eventually by a creditor. Check whether you will be charged for this somehow.  Bear in mind that just resigning as a director of a company does not mean that any responsibility for what happened in the past is just wiped away. You could still be disqualified or made personally liable for any of the debts if you have not acted properly.  In addition, under the Insolvency Act 1986, when a company is insolvent the directors have a duty to act in the best interest of the creditors.  If you pay someone to take it off your hands are you actually acting in the best interest of the creditors or yourself?  It is questionable to be sure, and there may be action against you down the road when the company is eventually wound up by the court. Insolvency Practitioners are licensed and under the regulations they have to act in the best interest of creditors.

Be very wary if you somehow manage to keep the assets of the company without paying for them.  This can be what is deemed as a “transaction at an undervalue” and can be reversed up to 2 years later by a liquidator.

Also what about a preference?  If you pay back some monies to a family friend instead of HMRC or BBL then again that can be reversed or voided at a later date.

It goes without saying that selling the company will not absolve you of any personal guarantees that you gave on behalf of the company.

What if you owe the company money?  The new directors will pursue you for the debt.  Directors responsibility under law, if the company is insolvent, is to act in the best interest of creditors.  So they may pursue you personally for the debt.  Many directors are not aware that they owe the company money.  If you have paid yourself drawings and not via PAYE and now the company is insolvent it is highly likely that you owe tax that the company has to pay.  More on overdrawn directors loan accounts here.

Ultimately these sort of schemes and legal gymnastics carry risk. Insolvency is highly regulated and there are no shortcuts.

Do you want to take the risk and give your money to a firm that is unregulated by any professional body?

Remember that company directors are not protected by the law in the same way that general members of the public are.  They are deemed to be “street wise” and knowledgeable.  So there are no cooling off periods, consumer rights, ombudsmen, distant selling rights etc.

PPe

PPE Medpro in Administration Move

PPE Medpro Limited, linked to Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman has filed a notice of intention to appoint administrators.  This follows the judgement by the High Court today that they must repay the government £122m for supplying non-compliant surgical gowns to the NHS.It should be noted that the intention to appoint administrators is a way of protecting the company from aggressive creditor actions, such as winding up petitions.  It gives the company protection for 10 days whilst it tries to rescue the business.  This might be additional finance or a sale.However, following the loss of the High Court battle many will ask can the government get its money back.  There may be legal appeals, so it may not be the end of the matter.  However, if the company does go into administration, which needs to be likely in order to be allowed to file the "intention" then it will be difficult to get money back.  The company only has assets of £666k having spent £4.2m on legal fees.The company will be run by the admistrators and most likely put into liquidation very quickly as it cannot trade.  The liquidators will then have to go through all the books and records and investigate the conduct of the directors etc.  If, and it is a very BIG if, the liquidators find wrongdoing on behalf of the directors then they may be able to claim against the personal wealth of the directors or ex-directors (not Mone or Barrowman as they were never directors).  The liquidators would have to PROVE that they were fraudulent and wilfully negligent in the handling of the business/contract.  There is or has been NO suggestion that this is the case.  The argument centred around the contract and what was agreed that should be supplied.People will be angry that the PPE was not fit (according to the NHS) but that does not mean that it was the directors fault and they should be held liable.  This is simply a breach of contract case.It is worth remembering the extraordinary circumstances in which PPE procurement took place. Many companies and individuals came forward in good faith, wanting to help meet urgent demand in the Pandemic. With the pace and pressure of the situation, it was almost inevitable that misunderstandings etc would happen​.Here is what Michelle Mone had to say about the case"Today’s judgment against PPE Medpro is shocking but all too predictable. It is nothing less than an Establishment win for the Government in a case that was too big for them to lose. According to the judgment, PPE Medpro won its original pleaded case, having spent 4.5 years and £4.4 million defending it. However, on the opening day of trial, the Government pivoted to an entirely new argument, one that had never been pleaded beforehand. They claimed there was a lack of original “source documentation” around sterilisation, even though seven fully accredited sterilisation plants supplied gowns to other Governments and suppliers worldwide throughout the pandemic, without an issue. This quantum leap of faith on the part of the judge gave the government an overall win.  To use a simple analogy,  if a car looks, feels, and drives like, say, a Range Rover, then unless you can show how the car is assembled by the manufacturer, it’s not a Range Rover! That’s essentially what the judgment states, which contradicts all the evidence presented in court during the month-long trial in June of this year.   I've attached the complete press release from my husband’s spokesperson for your review. It lays bare the injustice of this judgment and the Establishment cover-up behind it."​

Read
PPE Medpro in Administration Move

Worried Director? We Can Save Or Restructure Your Company!

Call now for free and confidential advice