CROMWELL INSOLVENCY

Please do not deal with this company. Period...

They were all nicey nicey when I approached them to help liquidate my Ltd company, once I had paid their fee's that is when the trouble started.
They would not answer my emails or recieve my phone calls.they only responded about a month later when they emailed me saying I took money from my business that I was not entitled to and proceeded to ask me to repay thousand and thousands of pounds back.

They would not tlak to my accountany or myself at all.
They continually threatened to make me bankrupt for three years and evenyually they have done.

They accused my of taking money from my business that I was not entitled to and say I was running my company into the ground effectivly saying that I was robbing my company - although they didnt say this...

Seeing this artical that they have been severly repremanded and fined is just the start of justicejustice.

I have put review on their website and they have removed them, hopefully this review will stay and be a thorn in their side.

They deserve everything they get, sactiones against them hopefully is just the start.

Type of Order: DISCIPLINARY CONSENT ORDER

Date of Order: 8 November 2023

Committee name: REGULATION AND CONDUCT COMMITTEE (‘the Committee’)

Details of IP: Kieran Bourne of Cromwell Insolvency Limited an IPA member and Licensed Insolvency Practitioner (IP).

Summary of complaint: This Order is made in relation to an allegation that Kieran Bourne in his role as;

Allegation 1. Liquidator of several companies, breached the Fundamental Principle of Professional Competence and Due Care of the Insolvency Code of Ethics when he:
1. Failed to take sufficient steps to verify employees’ claims before submitting the RP14As to the Redundancy Payments Service
2. Failed to carry out independent verification of the information provided to him by the companies’ directors before submitting the RP14As
3. Failed to raise any concerns with the Redundancy Payments Service as to the veracity of the employees’ claims, either before or after submitting the RP14As.

Allegation 2. potential liquidator/liquidator of several companies, breached Statement of Insolvency Practice (SIP) 1 and Regulation 13 of the Insolvency Practitioners Regulations 2005 when he failed to keep contemporaneous records to evidence his meetings with directors/ shareholders during which identification documents were produced and verified.

Allegation 3. as a potential liquidator/liquidator of two companies, breached the fundamental principle of Professional Competence and Due Care of the Insolvency Code of Ethics and Regulation 27 and/or Regulation 28 of the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (‘MLR17’) when he failed to carry out due diligence and verify the identity of the entity paying his fees.

Summary of sanctions: Allegation 1. The Common Sanctions Guidance (‘CSG’) provides for a Severe Reprimand and a fine of £5,000, as the starting point for a serious breach of the Fundamental Principle of Professional Competence and Due Care.

The Committee agreed that the repeated course of conduct (it had occurred in seven cases) and potential loss of public funds were both aggravating factors.

The Committee imposed a disciplinary order that Mr Bourne be severely reprimanded and fined £10,000.

Allegation 2. The CSG provides for a Severe Reprimand and a fine of £5,000 as the starting point for a serious breach of a SIP, the Insolvency Act and rules and regulations thereunder.
The Committee did not identify any mitigating factors to take into consideration, however it decided that the repeated nature of the conduct was an aggravating factor.

The Committee decided to impose a disciplinary order that Mr Bourne be Severely Reprimanded and fined £6,000.
Allegation 3. The Committee agreed that whilst the breach was proven on both competence and the MLR17 Regulations, but the conduct was more accurately encapsulated as a breach of MLR17. The AML Guidance provides for a Severe Reprimand and a fine of £8,000 as a starting point, for a failure to conduct adequate Customer Due Diligence.
The Committee did not identify any mitigating or aggravating factors to take into consideration. The Committee decided to impose a disciplinary order that Mr Bourne be Severely Reprimanded and fined £8,000.
Overall Sanction

The Committee agreed to impose a disciplinary order that Mr Bourne be Severely Reprimanded, fined £24,000 and pay costs of £13,110.