Suky Mann successfully defends another Bounce Back Loan (BBL) disqualification investigation.
Background
Following the demise of a small family-run restaurant, the Insolvency Service commenced an investigation against our client, alleging that she applied for a BBL using inaccurate turnover figures.
The challenge
On the face of it, the BBL application had been made with inflated turnover figures, resulting in the company receiving £50,000 (far more than it was entitled to), thus a disqualification was justified. However, our client, despite being the sole director, did not make the application.
It turned out that unbeknown to our client, the accountant had in fact made the application without any input or discussions with our client. Having informally discussed the availability of government support with a company employee, who had no authority to authorise any such application, the accountant completed the application form.
Upon receiving the BBL funds, our client asked why they had been sent to the client. The accountant confirmed that the company was entitled to the maximum support and that he had submitted the application of his own volition. It was not until the company went into liquidation and an investigation commenced that she realised there was an issue with the BBL.
When the Insolvency Service wrote to the director, she immediately contacted the accountant, who unsurprisingly told her to ignore the correspondence and reassured her that it would eventually go away. However, on receipt of the Section 16 letter, the client decided to seek specialist legal advice and contacted Suky Mann.
It was not until Suky’s involvement that it became glaringly obvious that the accountant had forged her signature on the BBL application form.
Our approach
Despite our client’s lack of knowledge, the Insolvency Service was not initially inclined to accept our client’s explanations. Matters were not helped by the accountant denying he had any involvement in the application.
However, having obtained evidence from the employee and being able to show the signature was forged, the Insolvency Service had no alternative but to concede it was not in the public interest to pursue a ban.
“Suky was very committed to my case with the Insolvency Service and was diligent every step of the way. She managed my expectations and very clearly tailored her advice to my case. It is evident that she has years of experience in this field because my case was very unique and was no small feat. However, in the end, what seemed impossible turned out to be an even better outcome than what I expected, all thanks to her. She was in constant communication with me and was empathetic about my personal needs.
“I would highly recommend her services and Higgs LLP without hesitation, for their professionalism and great communication.”
A satisfied client
Our thoughts
The wider implications for our client were significant. She was embarking on a legal career, and disqualification, particularly any findings of dishonesty, may well have ended that dream before it even started.
Ignoring communications from the Insolvency Service is never wise, the investigation will not simply go away. We cannot stress how important it is to engage an experienced director disqualification solicitor to manage the investigation and put forward the best defence possible.
