THE GOVERNMENT has announced it will review the use of heavily-criticised pre-pack administrations.
A pre-pack administration is where the sale of the business is marketed prior to the company entering administration and subsequently sold on appointment of administrators. However, the administrators must submit a SIP16 report outlining why the pre-pack was chosen as the best course of action for creditors.
The insolvency process has been criticised because creditors are usually left out of the loop until the sale has taken place. In some instances a supplier that is owed money does not realise a pre-pack has taken place until they contact a company to chase payment. As with all administrations, the debt held by a company is usually reduced when it enters an insolvency process.
For example a company could have debts of £1m but the new owner is only willing to pay for £500,000 of those debts. However, £500,000 can be seen as a better alternative to a company being forced to wind up because there are no other buyers.
Various concerns regarding pre-packs were announced by the Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) select committee when it reviewed the governing body the Insolvency Service earlier this year. The committee claimed that there needs to be harsher sanctions on abuse by insolvency practitioners and that there is a need for greater transparency.
"Pre-pack administrations continue to cause concern," said the chairman of the Business, Innovation and Skills Select Committee Adrian Bailey MP, adding: "Greater transparency, higher levels of compliance, and a stricter regime of sanctions are needed."
This is the first time that a review on the insolvency process alone is due to take place. Other reviews have involved the Insolvency Service or the profession as a whole.
A statement from the Insolvency Service regarding the upcoming review said: "The government has listened carefully to the concerns of creditors about pre-packs and that is why we already have measures in place to increase transparency and prevent abuse. Strengthened measures are being introduce to improve the quality of information insolvency practitioners are required to provide on pre-pack deals and we are using targeted monitoring of outcomes to assess whether there is evidence of abuse.
"Used appropriately, pre-packs can be a highly effective process to ensure the best deal for creditors by better enabling the rescue of businesses, preserving value and safeguarding jobs. The independent review announced by the minister will enable further evidence to be assembled on how pre-packs are working in practice and whether further steps are needed."
A timescale of the review will be announced when the review is launched in late spring.
Lee Manning, president of insolvency trade body R3, said: "R3 welcomes the independent review of pre-packs and believes government can do more to increase the transparency of what is an extremely useful business rescue tool. We recognise the concerns from within the creditor community about the pre-pack process... and we hope this review will help to increase confidence in the regime and highlight the vital role pre-packs play in saving businesses and jobs.
"Pre-packs fare considerably better than alternatives in terms of the retention of jobs and returns to secured creditors. This is crucial during the current sluggish recovery. If the economy is to deliver sustainable growth it will need entrepreneurship and to give viable businesses a second chance. We must make sure that any changes do not risk crippling this useful and effective process."
for everything, even pre-packs.
Sometimes it's the only option, sometimes it's just a far 'safer' option. You see, we insolvency practitioners have to live in the real world, one where the optimal solution is a pipe dream, where something less will always attract criticism, sometimes warranted, more often than not it's unwarranted. Often I'm asked if I'll take on someone else's business in an administration, trade it on to try to find a buyer - the problem is often to do that I need to raise some money, to pay wages, buy in fresh supplies, and the only way I can get an overdraft to do that is by putting my own house on the line. That's the reality. I'll let you ask my wife to put my family's livelihood at risk for someone else's benefit. It's simply not going to happen. Far better the pre-pack route, at least that way something is saved, the risk to everyone is reduced.
In summary, nothing is perfect in this life, the real world is a cruel place, pre-packs are often just evidence of these facts.
Posted by: Paul Brindley, 13 Mar 2013 | 09:21
As Paul says, sometimes a pre-pack is the only option.
The cost of trading, the ransom position of some suppliers and the ever-present danger that competitors will use the sale process to gain information and access to employees to destroy the business we're trying to save - as well as the risk to the IP - usually makes trading impossible.
The last report by BIS on pre-packs (2011 stat) showed that about 25% of Administrations in 2011 were prepacks but of those, only 68% were SIP16 compliant, which means over 230 prepacks weren't.
But this doesn't mean the prepacks weren't the right thing to do, merely that the IP didn't report it properly. In fact, only 29 SIP16 reports (from 21 diffent IPs) were so deficient that BIS felt impelled to report the IP to their regulatory body. That's 1% of the Administrations in 2011
So although we shouldn't shy away from scrutiny, it would help to put the problem in perspective
Posted by: Andrew Watling, 14 Mar 2013 | 11:43
You may also like
If budgeting is to have any value at all, it needs a radical overhaul. In today's dynamic marketplace, budgeting can no longer serve as a company's only management system; it must integrate with and support dedicated strategy management systems, process improvement systems, and the like. In this paper, Professor Peter Horvath and Dr Ralf Sauter present what's wrong with the current approach to budgeting and how to fix it.
In this white paper CCH provide checklists to help accountants and finance professionals both in practice and in business examine these issues and make plans. Also includes a case study of a large commercial organisation working through the first year of mandatory iXBRL filing.