Sep 6, 2021
As providers of insolvency litigation funding, we talk to Insolvency Practitioners daily.
There are two things that really stand out when we describe our services:
1) Our responsiveness
We are a small team of experienced decision makers. We understand that IPs often need a quick decision, so we will get back to you quickly one way or the other, allowing you to move on. No credit committees that only meet the last Thursday of every month
2) Our focus and willingness to go the extra mile
This recent case study illustrates our tenacity and desire to find solutions when most people would have given up.
· Last summer we were offered a case involving a Director who had reached a settlement with the liquidator to pay £130K of a £185K claim. The liquidator was going to take a charge over the Director’s property.
· £85k was paid quickly as agreed to be followed by instalments of £1,750 per month – however only a few of the instalments were paid.
· Before the charge was completed the Director sold the house and disappeared, with no known forwarding address.
· Following this, the director was disqualified and Companies House showed up a new address following the disqualification order.
· Although we initially rejected the case, as we could not trace the Director, following further frank discussions with the IP we decided that it may be worthwhile investing our time to see if he could be located and that we would “shake the tree very hard to see what falls out and would share the proceeds”.
· We reached an agreement to take the case, paying a small sum for the assignment and a proportion of any net recovery.
· After trawling through old correspondence and Companies House records, we identified an address that looked promising. A search at Land Registry revealed it was also previously known as “Plot 1”. This indicated to us that it potentially might have been a development and it also had an association with the director over many years.
· We sent three registered letters before action, to three addresses that we thought might be possibilities, as well as an email to the last known and still active email address. The letters were all signed for with one looking particularly promising that it might be the Director’s signature and name.
· As he did not respond after 28 days, we served a statutory demand at two of the addresses on 23rd December.
· The process server confirmed service at the Plot 1 address and although he wasn’t at that address, he was next door at 4b.
· The Director called four days later, on 27th December, confirmed that he had received the statutory demand and was living and owned 4b which he had just completed building. The property had a value of c£1m.
· An agreement was reached with the debtor to pay the debt in full.
RESULT! Achieved because we rarely give up at the first hurdle and pursue all avenues.