INSOLVENCY - IPA members call for single regulator

Two-thirds of insolvency practitioners believe that creditors, the general public and practitioners themselves would benefit from a single regulator, according to a survey published by the Insolvency Practitioners Association (IPA) last week.

The key benefit of a single regulator would be consistency, according to 84% of respondents; cost-effectiveness and efficiency were also highlighted by over half.

Currently, receivers and administrators of bankrupt companies and individuals are monitored and controlled by eight recognised professional bodies (RPBs), which include the English and Scottish ICAs, and the law societies of England and Scotland.

One-third of respondents thought the existing regulatory system was good or very good, 29% said it was ‘adequate’. However, 32% said the structure ‘could be better’ and 7% thought it ‘poor’.

The existing system was perceived to be slightly better at monitoring the insolvency profession than at disciplining it: 36% felt discipline was adequate, 28% said it could be better and 8% said it was poor.

The IPA asked who should bear the cost of regulation, investigation and discipline, and found over half of practitioners said they should bear the cost of self-regulation. Roughly 40% supported the idea of an ombudsman to evaluate and handle complaints against insolvency practitioners, including setting penalties.

In an assessment of the best RPB for practitioners in larger firms, the survey found English ICA members had a higher opinion of their body than did members of the IPA.