Bankruptcy opposition

[Simonbanks]

Hi,

Can someone sate they are opposing a bankruptcy petition without actually stating why, and simply asking for more time to obtain evidence, despite the initial hearing being 2.5 years ago, and the request to set aside the SD2 being more than 2.5 months ago.

Surely they have had enough time to collate any evidence ?

Thanks,

[atticus]

That approach will not get that person far, particularly given the failed application to set the statutory demand aside.

[Simonbanks]

Thank you. I have now received his opposition but it all looks very dubious. On one hand he is asking to vary the judgement 2 years after the CCJ was awarded in my favour and he hasn’t paid a penny since. Plus within the same opposition which seems to clearly accept the debt by virtue of the fact he is now offering payment (back against the wall), he is asking for an adjournment due to ‘new evidence’ he claims he has from the transcript of the hearing over 2 years ago that he still doesn’t have. He lost the hearing he lost 3 appeals against the outcome so this argument is old news

[Simonbanks]

Can anyone advise, following my successful petition and subsequently obtaining bankruptcy against a Rogue Builder.

It is my understanding that it is illegal to act as a company director when you know you are insolvent. The individual concerned knew they were insolvent at least as far back as the service of the SD2, if not well before then, i.e. when the initial claim was made and won in Dec 2022. Subsequently and despite knowing they were insolvent, they have applied to CH to change the name of their company, and within court submissions at the bankruptcy hearing, tried to convince the judge that the company name should have been X instead of Y, in an attempt to hide behind the corporate veil. This failed in court, but clearly this action was taken well after knowing they were insolvent, and was not nearly a matter of a name change but an attempt to pervert the course of justice. Is this action therefore illegal, and should the IS take steps to prosecute as I believe this is a criminal act?

Thanks.

[Missimaxo]

It is illegal to act as a director when bankrupt (s11 cdda86) and when disqualified (s13 cdda86) but not illegal to act when insolvent so the IS will not prosecute unless he has acted aince the bankruptcy and he will be given time to either resign or apply for leave to act as a director under s17.

What can be dodgy is wrongful or fraudulent trading, so trading with knowledge of insolvency. The IS may consider a BRO if it can be shown the trader carried on trading after knowledge of insolvency and there is a detriment by the continued trading eg. Creditors increased. This would be civil not criminal action. The IS rarely takes action on fraudulent or wrongful trading, it is usually a process an Insolvency Practitioner will use if appointed to try and get a recovery.

[Simonbanks]

Doesn’t anyone have any ideas ?

[Pezza54]

I think OP posted at the same time Missimaxo posted, so post 6 is irrelevant
There was a recent thread where a builder asked a customer to pay for work by bank transfer into his personal bank account, not his business account. The customer paid as the builder requested. The contract was agreed with his limited company. The company then went into voluntary liquidation. That has to be an example of fraudulent trading