After February’s relative lull in Bounce Back Loan-related announcements, March saw a return to form with five stories shared by the Insolvency Service.

As in previous months, we’ve put together a summary of those announcements:

• Company dissolutions after obtaining loans
• Abuse of multiple Covid support schemes
• False turnovers used to obtain loans.

Company dissolutions after obtaining loans

March 2023’s roundup starts with two directors who dissolved their companies soon after acquiring Bounce Back Loans, without notifying their creditors.

Simon Gorgin, from Kings Langley in Hertfordshire, obtained a £45,000 Bounce Back Loan in May 2021 through his company P3 Estates Ltd. He had applied to dissolve the company a month earlier, in April 2021. Gorgin did not inform the Bounce Back lender that he had applied to dissolve P3 Estates.

Despite the company having been incorporated in April 2010, investigators revealed that P3 Estates had never traded and was therefore not entitled to support through the Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBLS).

Gorgin fabricated a 2019 turnover of £180,000 in order to acquire the loan. Furthermore, he transferred the full amount of the loan from P3 Estate’s business bank account to his personal bank account three days after receiving the funds.

Gorgin has received a twelve-year director disqualification.

Rukia Begum ran a takeaway in Oldham from September 2018. She obtained a £35,000 loan through the BBLS for her company New Polash Oldham Ltd in May 2020.

In July 2020, only two months later, Begum applied to dissolve the company and failed to tell her creditors about the application.

In addition, Begum had continued to trade in the three months before applying for the company’s dissolution – also an offence under the Companies Act 2006.

And, Insolvency Service investigators found that New Polash’s turnover had been inflated by Begum in her BBLS application. The director stated that the company’s turnover was £154,000 when it was, in fact, less than £44,000. As a result, Begum had been able to obtain a loan at more than three times the value New Polash was entitled to within the scheme.

Begum has been banned from holding directorships for ten years.

Peter Smith, Deputy Head of Dissolved Company Investigations at the Insolvency Service, said about the cases:

“Bounce Back Loans were designed to help businesses to survive the pandemic. Rukia Begum and Simon Gorgin abused the scheme and took taxpayers’ money at a time when many businesses were in genuine need.”

The money is yet to be recovered from either director.

Back to contents

Abuse of multiple Covid support schemes

James Ireri successfully applied for the maximum £50,000 allowed under the Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBLS) through his Surrey-based recruitment business Safi Care Ltd in May 2020.

A lack of company account keeping by Ireri meant that Insolvency Service “investigators were unable to determine whether Safi Care Ltd had ever been eligible to apply” for the loan based on the company’s turnover.

During the Covid pandemic, companies were able to apply for either a Bounce Back Loan or a Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan. Despite having secured a loan through the BBLS, Ireri applied for and obtained a £100,000 loan (from a different lender) through the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme, three months after Safi Care was given its Bounce Back Loan.

Businesses were allowed to “obtain a second loan if the money was used to repay the first in full.” However, Safi Care went into liquidation a year later (in August 2021) owing around £231,000 including the full amount of both loans.

In the fifteen months between obtaining the first loan and Safi Care’s liquidation, nearly £500,000 was withdrawn from the company’s bank account, with over £80,000 used by Ireri “for personal spending” and nearly £94,000 transferred into his personal bank accounts.

Ireri has received a seven-year director disqualification.

Back to contents

False turnovers used to obtain loans

Michael Higgins, from Sheffield, ran Steel Rigging Ltd – a company working on outside TV broadcasts providing driving services – from March 2015. Higgins obtained a £20,000 Bounce Back Loan in November 2020 by claiming his company’s turnover in 2019 was £80,000.

In fact, Steel Rigging’s 2019 turnover was around half the figure stated by Higgins. The company was therefore entitled to only half of the acquired loan (at most).

Steel Rigging went into liquidation just over a year later in December 2021, owing the full amount of the Bounce Back Loan.

Higgins has been banned for eight years.

Dean Miller, also from Sheffield, incorporated his company IBODYTALKS Ltd in April 2019.

Companies incorporated after 1^st January 2019 were told to use an estimated turnover in their Bounce Back Loan applications. Miller claimed that IBODYTALKS had been dormant until April 2020 when he applied for a £42,000 loan in May 2020. However, investigators found that the company has been trading since December 2019 and Miller had exaggerated the turnover estimation in comparison to money received by the company during its trading period.

In addition, “Miller transferred £41,000 to a connected company, and did not provide any evidence to show the money was used for the benefit of IBODYTALKS”, one month after receiving the £42,000 loan.

Miller has been disqualified for nine years.

Director disqualifications prevent individuals from directly or indirectly becoming involved in the promotion, formation or management of a company without the permission of the court.

Insolvency and debt investigations

Seeing the whole picture in insolvency and debt cases is key to maximising returns to creditors. For more information on how ESA Risk can help to identify hidden assets or locate targets who have gone to ground, contact Mike Wright, Investigations and Risk Management Consultant, at mike.wright@esarisk.com, on +44 (0)343 515 8686 or via our contact form.

You can also learn more from our Insolvency & Debt Investigations brochure:

 

Download your copy

February has been unusually quiet for news and announcements related to the Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBLS), compared to recent months (as we’ve been reporting).

The Insolvency Service published only two press releases on the topic, announcing the jailing of a BBLS fraudster on 15^th February and a director disqualification a couple of days before.

Bounce Back Loans were also mentioned in the latest issue of the Insolvency Service’s Dear Insolvency Practitioner (‘Dear IP’) released on 7^th February (although dated January 2023).

All three updates are covered below.

Prison sentence for Bounce Back Loan fraudster

Middlesex-based Kulwinder Singh Sidhu has been handed a twelve-month prison sentence for his abuse of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme in June 2020.

Sidhu obtained the maximum £50,000 loan under the scheme after applying on 9^th June 2020, through his haulage company Wavylane Ltd. Less than three weeks later, Sidhu filed to dissolve the business, “having transferred the funds to his personal bank account within two days of receipt.”

In dissolving Wavylane Ltd, based in Stanwell, Sidhu failed to notify the Bounce Back Loan lender – a criminal offence.

In October 2020, when the company was dissolved, the Insolvency Service discovered that Sidhu had exaggerated his company’s turnover in order to acquire the maximum loan amount, along with the transfer of the funds – first to Sidhu’s personal account and then “to his son and another company.”

Sidhu was sentenced to twelve months in prison on 13^th February at Guildford Crown Court, having pleaded guilty to charges under the Fraud Act 2006 and the Companies Act 2006 on 19^th December 2022.

About the case, Julie Barnes, Chief Investigator at the Insolvency Service said:

“Any other company directors who might be tempted into dissolving their business to try to keep public money they are not entitled to, should be aware they are risking a lengthy prison term.”

The fifty-eight-year-old also received a six-year director disqualification and a confiscation order for the full value of the loan, which he has paid in full.

Barnes added: “Our action has ensured repayment of the loan money and taxpayers have not been left out of pocket.”

Seventy-six-year-old given ten-year ban

Thomas Whyte also obtained a £50,000 Bounce Back Loan, stating that his company Fortress Restructuring Ltd had an annual turnover of £250,000.

Fortress Restructuring was liquidated and it was revealed that the company “had no trading address [and] had never traded”. In the year before Whyte made the loan application, “less than £1,000 had been received into” the business’s bank account.

Additionally, once Whyte was informed that the Secretary of State for Business had petitioned for the company to be wound up, “the balance on the company bank account reduced from £28,150 to a little over £1,590” in the space of twelve days, with payments made to Whyte among others.

The fact that Fortress had filed dormant accounts, and only £949 had passed through its bank account should have made it abundantly clear to Thomas Whyte that his company was not entitled to a £50,000 loan, yet he took it anyway and used the majority of that money for his own benefit.

The company’s liquidator – Bill Cleghorn of Aver Chartered Accountants – has recovered £37,500 of the £50,000 owed.

Rob Clarke, Chief Investigator at the Insolvency Service, said:

“The fact that Fortress had filed dormant accounts, and only £949 had passed through its bank account should have made it abundantly clear to Thomas Whyte that his company was not entitled to a £50,000 loan, yet he took it anyway and used the majority of that money for his own benefit.

“We thank the liquidator for their efforts which have seen £37,500 recovered, and repeat that we will not hesitate to take action against directors who have abused Covid-19 financial support in this manner.”

Whyte has been disqualified as a director for ten years, effective from today (28^th February 2023).

Update and guidance from the Insolvency Service

The Insolvency Service has published an update on Bounce Back Loans and advice to insolvency practitioners related to the reporting of BBLS misconduct in issue 157 of Dear IP (pdf).

Firstly, the Insolvency Service has started to share information about organisations that received loans and other support as part of Covid-19 schemes, with the expectation that this will “be useful in instances where this information has been difficult to obtain, or where it has been deliberately concealed from the office holder.”

Secondly, guidance has been issued to insolvency practitioners on reporting misconduct in relation to Covid-19 support schemes, with the Insolvency Service stating that “there needs to be clear evidence indicating that the corporate entity may have either made a false application, for instance inflated turnover figures for the purpose of a loan, or that the funds have not been used for a legitimate business purpose.”

The guidance continues: “When reporting suspected misconduct in respect of a Covid support scheme, office holders should do this using section 13 of the Director Conduct Report form (Finance Support Schemes) which has an option to include Covid support schemes.” This, essentially, further embeds Covid-19 support scheme misconduct as a standard part of the reporting process, as such suspected misconduct was previously reported under a more catch-all heading of ‘Other Investigations’ (section 12).

Insolvency and debt investigations

Seeing the whole picture in insolvency and debt cases is key to maximising returns to creditors. For more information on how ESA Risk can help to identify hidden assets or locate targets who have gone to ground, contact Mike Wright, Investigations and Risk Management Consultant, at mike.wright@esarisk.com, on +44 (0)343 515 8686 or via our contact form.

You can also learn more from our Insolvency & Debt Investigations brochure:

 

Download your copy

As we’ve been reporting, the Insolvency Service’s recent press releases have been awash with director disqualifications and bankruptcy restrictions related to misuse of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBLS).

January 2023 was another busy month for such news. Here’s a roundup of what was announced:

• Barclays actively looking to recover loan funds
• Company dissolutions
• Exaggerated turnovers
• Misuse of loan funds
• A charity case

Barclays actively looking to recover Bounce Back Loan funds

In early January, City A.M. reported that “Barclays is chasing down Covid-19 business loan cash“, backed by the litigation funder Manolete Partners.

Barclays paid out nearly £11bn in Bounce Back Loans, making it the biggest lender in the scheme. Despite the loans being government-backed, Barclays is now actively pursuing “more than 100 companies that have defaulted on” repayments.

While this is the first such programme from a major lender to hit the headlines, there are other similar projects underway elsewhere in the market. Steve Cooklin, Manolete’s chief executive, “told City A.M. that outside of the Barclays project…[Manolete] has worked on a series of projects to recover ‘misappropriated Bounce Back monies’ over the last 18 months.”

Back to top

Company dissolutions

A man, from London, and Antonia Parkes, from Conwy, have been handed suspended prison sentences for their abuse of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBLS).

The man obtained a £50,000 loan for his company, Digital Business Box Ltd, by overstating the business’s turnover. Only two weeks later, he applied to dissolve the company.

In what was described as “an aggravating aspect”, he also tried to secure a £50,000 Bounce Back Loan for his other company, The Home Wills Ltd, despite it being established after the cut-off point for BBLS eligibility. His application was unsuccessful.

He pleaded guilty to four offences under the Companies Act and Fraud Act, and was sentenced to 20 months imprisonment, suspended for 18 months, as well as 300 hours of unpaid work.

In a separate case, Parkes was sentenced to six months in prison, suspended for 12 months, and 120 hours of unpaid work, for an offence under the Companies Act.

Parkes secured a £20,000 loan through the BBLS, “immediately before she applied to dissolve the company.”

When dissolving her company, Conwy Valley Lodge Ltd, Parkes did not notify the Bounce Back Loan lender, despite the notification of interested parties and creditors within seven days being a legal requirement.

In a similar case that has resulted in an eleven-year disqualification for the director, David McGuinness, from Birmingham, obtained a £50,000 loan for his company, MC-Dalt Scaffolding Services Ltd, by overstating the business’s turnover. McGuinness “stated the company’s turnover as nearly £300,000 when its accounts for 2019 showed turnover of less than £20,000.”

The use of the loan funds by McGuinness is questionable, with £15,000 transferred out of his business account the day after receiving the loan with the bank reference ‘Dave’, and “[a] further £35,000…transferred to various third-parties.”

McGuinness applied to dissolve MC-Dalt Scaffolding Services Ltd only two months after securing the Bounce Back Loan. He did not notify interested parties and creditors, including the lending bank.

Peter Smith, Deputy Head of Insolvent Investigations at the Insolvency Service, said: “David McGuinness clearly abused it by making false declarations to his company’s bank.”

Back to top

Exaggerated turnovers

Directors inflating their company’s turnover in order to secure more money through the Bounce Back Loan Scheme is a common theme of these monthly news roundups.

Mathius Thompson, from Birmingham, took out a Bounce Back Loan worth £50,000 through his company, West Midz Cars Ltd, in May 2020. In his application, Thompson stated that the business’s turnover for the relevant year (2019) was £287,500. In the Insolvency Service investigation which followed the used car salesroom company’s liquidation in August 2021, investigators found that the company’s actual turnover for the period was £2,500 – more than 100 times less than Thompson had claimed. Thompson has been banned from holding directorships for eleven years from 30^th January 2023.

Muhammad Arif, from Uxbridge in London, ran a clothing business for nearly ten years, trading as Ayesha Boutique. He applied for the maximum Bounce Back Loan amount of £50,000 in June 2020, based on a stated turnover of £219,000. In reality, his turnover was “around ten times less than he had claimed in the application.”

In addition, the Official Receiver has been “unable to verify the explanation [Arif] gave to account for…payments” made using the loan monies.

Arif applied for his own bankruptcy and was made bankrupt in December 2021 owing more than £50,000. He has been made the subject of bankruptcy restrictions lasting ten years for his abuse of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme.

Vasile Matcas, from Haverhill in Suffolk, also claimed the full £50,000 available under the scheme for his business, Matcas Ltd. Matcas stated a company turnover of £280,000. However, investigators found that Matcas Ltd’s actual turnover was under five times less than that, at only £49,200.

When Matcas Ltd went into liquidation in July 2021 – at that time trading as a carwash – it owed “the full amount of the loan”.

Matcas was disqualified as a director for ten years.

Back to top

Misuse of Bounce Back Loan funds

Under the terms of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme, loan funds had to be used for the economic benefit of the company.

Ioan Mociar made payments of nearly £40,000 from his business’s bank account during a three-week period in 2020, after securing a £41,000 Bounce Back Loan, “without any evidence to show that they were for the economic benefit of the company.” Additionally, Mociar’s business, Midi Construction Ltd, had claimed more money than it was entitled to under the scheme, as Mociar’s estimated turnover for the building company and the actual turnover at the end of the first year of trading (to the end of May 2020) were wildly different. Mociar has been disqualified for eleven years.

Moira Wood has been banned for eight years for her misuse of Bounce Back Loan funds obtained through her IT consultancy, Clockwork Compliance Services Ltd. Wood secured a £24,000 loan in September 2020, then “transferred £23,400 to herself between October 2020 and January 2022, just before the company folded, with no evidence that the money had been used for the benefit of Clockwork Compliance Services.”

Back to top

A charity case

And finally, Darren Baker has been banned from becoming a director for seven years, effective from 15^th December 2022 (first reported in January).

Baker secured £50,000 from the Bounce Back Loan Scheme – an initial loan of £45,000 and a £5,000 top-up – through his charity, The Leanne Baker Trust. Baker claimed the charity’s 2019 turnover was £200,000. In reality, it was around £26,000, meaning the charity was not eligible for funding under the scheme.

Baker then put around £38,000 of the loan to personal use, including “over £25,000 to pay off personal legal fees”.

“Despite the humanitarian purpose of the trust as established, Darren Baker took advantage of the support available during this difficult time for his own personal gain”, said Rob Clarke, Chief Investigator at the Insolvency Service.

On a rare positive note in these announcements, the charity’s liquidator “has subsequently recovered the full amount” of the Bounce Back Loan.

Insolvency and debt investigations

Seeing the whole picture in insolvency and debt cases is key to maximising returns to creditors. For more information on how ESA Risk can help to identify hidden assets or locate targets who have gone to ground, contact Mike Wright, Investigations and Risk Management Consultant, at mike.wright@esarisk.com, on +44 (0)343 515 8686 or via our contact form.

You can also learn more from our Insolvency & Debt Investigations brochure:

 

Download your copy

As we’ve been reporting, the Insolvency Service’s recent press releases have been awash with director disqualifications and bankruptcy restrictions related to misuse of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBLS).

December 2022 was another busy month for such news. Here’s a roundup of what was announced:

• A repeat offender
• False details from bankrupts
• Abuse through two companies
• Exaggerated turnover
• A lack of record-keeping
• A full house of BBLS offences
• Repaid in full

A repeat offender

A London letting agent who made four applications to the Bounce Back Loan Scheme has been handed an eleven-year director disqualification.

Laszlo Szabo obtained £100,000 from the scheme through three successful applications to two different banks. Szabo was only rejected during his fourth attempted application.

In October 2020, Szabo first applied for a £38,000 Bounce Back Loan for his Holloway Road-based Letting Base Ltd, and the loan was made available to the company almost immediately. Against the terms of the scheme, Szabo then applied for a second loan from a different bank, only five days after his first application. He obtained the maximum £50,000 loan available under the BBLS.

Ten days later, Szabo returned to the first bank and successfully requested a top-up of £12,000 to the initial loan (in itself allowable under the terms of the scheme, but taking his company’s borrowing further above the overall Bounce Back Loan limit).

With £100,000 banked so far, the next day, Szabo applied for another top-up – this time from the second bank and for the maximum £50,000 again. This was not permissible under the terms of the scheme and was rightly rejected by the lender, presumably because they could see that Letting Base Ltd had already been given a £50,000 loan from their own records.

The Insolvency Service started to investigate Letting Base Ltd in 2022, when the company went into liquidation “owing more than £243,000, including the full £100,000 of the Bounce Back Loan money”.

Deputy Head of Investigations at the Insolvency Service, Nina Cassar, said:

“Laszlo Szabo made false declarations to his company’s banks, and then entered liquidation having made no repayments towards its Bounce Back Loans, which resulted in a loss of £100,000 of public funds.

“His blatant and repeat abuse of taxpayer’s money has resulted in a lengthy disqualification, which will serve to safeguard the economy from traders who exploit financial support packages designed to help UK businesses.”

As is implied by Cassar’s statement, it is “unlikely” that the loans will be repaid.

Szabo’s ban began on 12^th December 2022 and last for eleven years.

Back to top

False details from bankrupts

Two cases now of bankrupts who have been made subject to additional bankruptcy restrictions due to their abuse of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme. While both cases were finalised earlier in 2022, they were first reported in December.

Nadia Butt, from Birmingham, obtained a £50,000 Bounce Back Loan by stating that her business had been trading on 1^st March 2020 and that “her anticipated turnover was £220,00” – neither of which were true.

Despite stating that she wished to “start an online consultancy”, Butt paid out the loan money to family members and a friend, with no evidence that the payments were for the benefit of the business.

She was made bankrupt in August 2021 and the Official Receiver discovered details of the loan when they were appointed as her trustee.

Butt is now subject to an eleven-year bankruptcy restrictions undertaking.

Dorota Suchocka, of Barnes in London, secured three Bounce Back Loans in October 2019 worth a total of £75,000. In the applications, “Suchocka used a fake employer and inflated her income as being four times higher than what she earned as a mini cab driver.” In fact, her average monthly income was lower than the combined monthly repayments across the three loans.

Suchocka was made bankrupt in October 2021 and has been subject to a ten-year bankruptcy restrictions undertaking since 30^th May 2022, following an investigation by the Official Receiver while appointed as her trustee.

Back to top

Abuse through two companies

Forty-three-year-old Shahzad Arshad, from Glasgow, ran two companies until January 2022, by which point both had entered liquidation.

Through Town Discount Ltd and Naz Accessories Ltd, Arshad successfully applied for £100,000’s worth of Bounce Back Loans – the maximum £50,000 for each company.

Insolvency Service investigators found that Town Discount Ltd was ineligible for the scheme, as it had not started trading until February 2020. Arshad stated that Naz Accessories Ltd’s turnover was more than twice the actual figure of £98,300, meaning the company was only eligible for up to £24,500 under the scheme and not the £50,000 secured by Arshad.

The director was banned for eleven years from 21^st November 2022.

Back to top

Exaggerated turnover

Savio Pereira, of Market Harborough, has been disqualified for eleven years for exaggerating his company’s turnover in a Bounce Back Loan application and seemingly using the loan funds for activity unrelated to the “economic support” of his business.

Pereira secured a £50,000 Bounce Back Loan for his company Himalayan Zest Takeaway Limited which traded in Lutterworth until November 2021 when it went into liquidation.

The director paid £10,000 of the loan to himself, withdrew £16,800 in cash and paid £28,000 to an unknown recipient.

Back to top

A lack of record-keeping

Sajid Valimohammed, of Leicester, has been disqualified for eight years for misconduct including abuse of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme.

Valimohammed’s company, J Dee Designs Ltd, went into liquidation in December 2020, triggering an Insolvency Service investigation. The investigation showed that the director failed to keep sufficient records, including company accounts. As a result, Valimohammed was unable to prove that withdrawals of around £315,300 from the company’s account – including 199 transfers totalling £286,000 to Valimohammed’s personal account – were transactions “for legitimate trading activity”.

£30,000 of this total came from a Bounce Back Loan. The director’s lack of record-keeping meant he was unable to show “whether the loan money had been used for the benefit of the company.”

Furthermore, investigators could not “verify whether J Dee Designs had paid the correct amount of tax it owed, or to ascertain the true financial position of the company when it went into liquidation, including whether liquidators would be able to make any recovery of debts.”

Back to top

A full house of BBLS offences

John McGarvey’s abuse of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme ticked so many of the boxes we see in different BBLS announcements, that we published a full article about his case when it was first reported on 8^th December 2022.

McGarvey obtained more than the maximum allowable total, across more than one loan, by overstating his company’s turnover and he then used the money “for personal gain”.

Read the full article.

Back to top

Repaid in full

And to end on some relatively good news – a £50,000 Bounce Back Loan which was falsely obtained by Alexander Cooper, from Glasgow, for his company Traprain Homes Ltd in June 2020 has been paid back in full “following recovery action by the company’s liquidator.”

Cooper stated the company’s turnover as £1,014,930 in his application, leading to him obtaining the maximum loan amount. However, Traprain Homes Ltd was insolvent at the time of the application, having lost more than £113,000 in the preceding period. The company had stopped trading some four months before Cooper applied for the Bounce Back Loan.

The director paid himself the full amount of the loan he acquired for Traprain Homes Ltd – the majority of it after moving it between the company’s various bank accounts.

Cooper was banned for ten years from 14^th November 2022.

Insolvency and debt investigations

Seeing the whole picture in insolvency and debt cases is key to maximising returns to creditors. For more information on how ESA Risk can help to identify hidden assets or locate targets who have gone to ground, contact Mike Wright, Investigations and Risk Management Consultant, at mike.wright@esarisk.com, on +44 (0)343 515 8686 or via our contact form.

You can also learn more from our Insolvency & Debt Investigations brochure:

 

Download your copy

The sole director of a surveyor’s firm, CKO Civil Engineering and Surveying Limited (CKO), has been disqualified for eleven years for his abuse of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBLS).

John McGarvey, from Rutherglen (a town on the outskirts of the centre of Glasgow), falsely claimed two Bounce Back Loans worth a total of £100,000 and used the money “for personal gain.”

In addition to claiming two loans each at the maximum amount allowed under the scheme (companies were limited to one £50,000 loan or multiple loans totalling no more than £50,000) and using the funds for his own use (instead of “for the economic benefit of the business”), McGarvey also exaggerated his company’s turnover in order to obtain the loans.

The BBLS allowed companies to apply for loans of up to a quarter of their 2019 turnover to a maximum of £50k. McGarvey’s applications through CKO stated the company’s 2019 turnover as £225,000 (in a July 2020 application) and £218,000 (in an application the following month). In reality, CKO’s “most recent accounts showed a turnover of only around £46,400.” Therefore, CKO was given loans worth more than eight times the amount it was eligible for.

CKO, based in Kirkinitlloch (also near Glasgow), entered a creditors voluntary liquidation (CVL) owing around £183,000 in November 2021. The liquidation process triggered an Insolvency Service investigation, which revealed the Bounce Back Loan Scheme abuse.

McGarvey’s disqualification started on 28^th October 2022 – the details of the case have only been announced by the Insolvency Service today (8^th December 2022) – and lasts for eleven years.

Of the case, Steven McGinty, Insolvency Service Investigation Manager, said:

“Not only did John McGarvey grossly exaggerate the company’s turnover to secure an initial loan, he also applied to a second bank for another loan his company wasn’t entitled to. To compound his actions, he used the money for his personal gain.

“His eleven-year ban should serve as a warning that if you abuse government support, we will use our full powers to bring you to account.”

McGarvey’s case was settled through a disqualification undertaking, which was accepted by the Secretary of State. Disqualification undertakings are the administrative equivalent of a disqualification order but do not involve court proceedings.

Insolvency and debt investigations

Seeing the whole picture in insolvency and debt cases is key to maximising returns to creditors. For more information on how ESA Risk can help to identify hidden assets or locate targets who have gone to ground, contact Mike Wright, Investigations and Risk Management Consultant, at mike.wright@esarisk.com, on +44 (0)343 515 8686 or via our contact form.

You can also learn more from our Insolvency & Debt Investigations brochure:

Download your copy

.