Tag: Company Insolvency

Categories
General Insolvency Liquidation, Pre-Packs & Phoenix Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Falling Confidence Among SMEs Supports Evidence of a Long L-Shaped Recession

Recently released insolvency figures show relatively little change year on year, suggesting that the debate about whether the recession would be a V-, U-, W-, or an L-shape Is now over.
It is four years since the economy collapsed and the evidence is piling up that it is flatlining. Whatever the technical definition for coming out of recession may be (ie two successive quarters of growth), a growth of 0.2% for the UK economy means it continues to bump along the bottom of an L-shaped economic decline, whether it is called a recession or not.
Had the recent decline followed the pattern of previous ones the numbers of insolvent companies would by now be climbing noticeably, as they are generally held to do when an economy is on the road to recovery.
However, the latest CBI quarterly survey shows a sharp decline in confidence among small and medium sized businesses, reporting flat domestic orders in Q3 and export orders down by 8%. They expected domestic orders to fall by another 4% in the final quarter, no growth in exports and were indicating intentions of reducing their stock holdings – hardly suggestive of any optimism there.
Perhaps the most interesting feature of the just released quarterly insolvency figures is the noticeable increase in the number of Company Voluntary Arrangements (CVAs) relative to the numbers of companies in Administration as going concern formal insolvency procedures. Compared to the same quarter last year, CVAs rose by 29.6%, while Administrations rose by only 6.3% perhaps reflecting the adverse publicity over the use of Pre-Pack Administrations.
Many commentators are predicting a lot of insolvencies lining up for the end of Q4. Since a rise in insolvencies traditionally indicates the emergence from recession, perversely, this suggests that they are being optimistic rather than pessimistic.
But if the economy doesn’t recover and there is a rise in corporate insolvencies, this will be truly damaging for the UK. There is a huge difference between insolvency to restructure a business to prepare it for growth and insolvency to close it down.
Continuing low interest rates and no discernible evidence of banks or other creditors really piling on the pressure, nor any sign of the restructuring that normally indicates the bottom of a recession, plus the plummeting confidence of the country’s SMEs, suggest that the economy will bump along the bottom Japanese-style for the foreseeable future at best or will decline further at worst.

Categories
Banks, Lenders & Investors Cash Flow & Forecasting Debt Collection & Credit Management Factoring, Invoice Discounting & Asset Finance General Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Voluntary Arrangements - CVAs

Businesses Should Pay Down Debt and Beware Offers That Seem Too Good to be True

Many businesses are overburdened with debt and desperate for ways to deal with pressure from banks, HMRC and other creditors. All too often they are prepared to pay off old debt by taking on new debt which leaves them vulnerable to unscrupulous lenders.
Prior to 2008, interest-only loans and overdrafts were a common method of funding, and were reliant on being able to renew facilities or refinancing.
Like many interest-only loans, an overdraft is renewed, normally on an annual basis, but it is also repayable on demand. What happens when the bank doesn’t want to renew the overdraft facility?  With the economic climate continuing to be volatile and uncertain and banks under intense pressure to improve their own balance sheets, they are increasingly insisting on converting overdrafts to repayment loans and interest-only finance is disappearing.
This has created a vacuum for alternative sources of funding to enter the market where distinguishing between the credible salesman and the ‘snake oil’ salesman can be very difficult. Desperate businesses are desperate often try to borrow money and become more vulnerable to what at first sight seem to be lenders that can offer them alternative funding solutions that the banks cannot.
Generally the advice is to beware, as the recent eight-year prison sentence handed to “Lord” Eddie Davenport illustrates.  The charges related to a conspiracy to defraud, deception and money laundering, also referred to as “advanced fees fraud”. 
The court found Davenport and two others guilty in September. Meanwhile a large number of businesses had paid tens of thousands of pounds for due diligence and deposit fees for loans that never materialised and left victims even deeper in debt. The case only became reportable in October, when restrictions were lifted.
Many businesses just want to survive and are trading with no plan or in some cases no prospect for repaying debt. In such instances they should be considering options for improving their balance sheet by reducing debt. Options might include swapping debt for equity, or debt forgiveness by creditors or setting up a CVA (Company Voluntary Arrangement).

Categories
Banks, Lenders & Investors Business Development & Marketing General Insolvency Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Are Estate Agencies Safer Businesses Now than they were in 2008?

The sub prime mortgage crisis that precipitated the 2008 global recession led to plummeting property prices, very limited mortgage lending, repossessions and to a dramatic slump in the housing and commercial property markets.
Estate agencies were among the first businesses to feel the effects of the crisis. By December 2008 an estimated 40,000 employees had lost their jobs while around 4,000 estate agency offices -approximately one in four – had closed.
The smallest agencies, of perhaps four or five branches or less, were worst affected particularly if they depended solely on property sales.
So is the worst over now for the estate agency business? Not if the most recent information on the housing market is any indication.
Gross mortgage lending declined to an estimated £9.8 billion in April 2011, down 14% from £11.4 billion in March and the number of mortgages approved for house purchases hit a new low in April, at 45,166, the lowest April figure since records began in 1992.
The Council of Mortgage Lenders predicts that the numbers of homes repossessed will rise from 36,000 in 2010 to 40,000 in 2011 and 45,000 in 2012 and the online housing company Rightmove reports that average unsold stock rose from 74 to 76 properties per branch, reaching the highest ever level for May.
Although the housing market varies significantly in different parts of the UK, with London booming and East Anglia holding steady while the north suffers there is also evidence that the demand for rented property and buy to let property is rising along with rent levels.
None of this suggests that the business of estate agency is likely to be any more secure for a few years yet.  If the High Street agents are to survive they need to revisit their business models, diversify their activities into letting, make use of online marketing and be sure they are up to speed on all the regulations governing landlords’ and tenants rights’ and other property letting regulations.

Categories
Banks, Lenders & Investors Factoring, Invoice Discounting & Asset Finance General Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

It is obvious why Bank Fees are High and Business Lending is so Difficult

The figures for January to March showed a shortfall of 12% against the £19bn that represents a quarter of the annual £76bn target agreed with the government under the Project Merlin scheme for lending to smaller businesses.
Only 16% of FSB members had approached banks for credit and 44% of those had been refused, including some seeking credit to fulfil firm orders.
Growing businesses need working capital to fund the goods, materials, marketing and staff for new growth. While some of that can be obtained by borrowing against the sales ledger (through factoring and invoice discounting), the banks are seeing them as too high risk.
This is actually a reasonable response by the banks where businesses have been clinging on by their fingernails since the 2008 recession and, having used up most of their working capital on paying down old loans, are therefore according to the bank models seen as at high risk of insolvency.
It is a vicious circle. Less working capital means businesses neither have sufficient funds to buy materials to fulfil orders nor are they adequately capitalised to justify new loans.  This is why it is very common for businesses to go bust when growth returns following a recession.
Once banks are realising that a company with outstanding debt is in difficulty, they are providing for the bad debt by adjusting their own capital ratios to cushion against increased risk and in anticipation of the new Basel lll rules requiring bank Tier 1 capital holdings (equity + retained earnings) to rise from 2% to 7% to be phased in from 2015 to 2018.  
The result is higher fees and higher interest rates to businesses and it is no surprise that some companies already seen as a bad risk cannot borrow money, even when orders are rising.
Businesses that have used their land and buildings to secure loans or mortgages may also face huge risk related costs due to the bank’s exposure because banks already have so much commercial property as security that cannot be either leased or sold. The bank will therefore impose penal fees in a bid to recover the provisioning costs.
It has never been more urgent for businesses to mitigate this catch 22 by calling on expert help to look at fundamental solutions and recognise they will not be able to borrow money to limp along as they have been for the last two years.

Categories
Accounting & Bookkeeping Business Development & Marketing Cash Flow & Forecasting General

Franchising Can Be Great if You do the Research and Check the Small Print

Many people dream of owning their own business and in the current economic climate are finding themselves pitched into starting up perhaps before they are quite ready.
A franchise often comes with an established brand, support in training, promotional materials and advice so it is tempting to see buying into a franchise as a safer option than going into business completely independently. 
But sinking savings or redundancy payments into any kind of business is a risk and a franchise is no different.
The big danger in taking on a franchise is getting a false sense of security that someone else is responsible for your business. They aren’t and a business plan is as important for a franchisee as for an independent trader.
Also, while the franchise provides support, it may also impose limits on independent action in order to protect its brand and reputation. The most successful franchises have tested their business model and methods and incorporated these into the package. It can happen that a franchise has failed because the franchisee has failed to follow the advice.
In a recent case of a franchise business in difficulty one of the biggest issues was that the franchisor declined to take any legal steps to protect its intellectual property or its franchisees’ rights.  
The franchise model offered complete geographical coverage and each local franchise unit’s success depended on the whole network‘s efficiency, but there was nothing to stop people who had gained privileged knowledge within the franchise from setting up in competition.
It is essential when setting up any business to scrutinise any legalities required, take advice and to negotiate. Until comfortable with the terms do not buy into a franchise.
Essentially, yes, a franchise can be a very good business opportunity but it does not eliminate much of the risk inherent in setting up a business and needs the same preparation work as for any business start-up.

Categories
Cash Flow & Forecasting Debt Collection & Credit Management Factoring, Invoice Discounting & Asset Finance General Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery

Do Small Businesses Understand Working Capital and Liquidity?

When borrowing against current assets, such as the sales ledger using factoring or invoice discounting or against fixed assets like plant and machinery or property, there seems to be a widespread misunderstanding among businesses about business funding and, in particular, working capital.
While credit is the most common form of finance there are many other sources of finance and ways to generate cash or other liquid assets that provide working capital. Understanding these is fundamental to ensure a company is not left short of cash.
Businesses in different situations require finance tailored to their specific needs. Too often the wrong funding model results in businesses becoming insolvent, facing failure or some degree of painful restructuring. In spite of this, borrowing against the book debts unlike funding a property purchase is a form of working capital.
Tony Groom, of K2 Business Rescue, explains: “Most growing companies need additional working capital to fund growth since they need to fund the work before being paid. For a stable business where sales are not growing, current assets ought to be the same as current liabilities, often achieved by giving and taking similar credit terms. When sales are in decline, the need for working capital should be reducing with the company accruing surplus cash.”
Restructuring a business offers the opportunity of changing its operating and financial models to achieve a funding structure appropriate to supporting the strategy, whether growth, stability or decline. Dealing with liabilities, by refinancing over a longer period, converting debt to equity or writing them off via a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA), can significantly improve liquidity and hence working capital.
While factoring or invoice discounting, like credit, are brilliant for funding growth, businesses should be wary of building up liabilities to suppliers if they have already pledged their sales ledger leaving them with no current assets to pay creditors.

Categories
County Court, Legal & Litigation General Insolvency Voluntary Arrangements - CVAs Winding Up Petitions

A Significant Increase in Winding Up Petitions

The last couple of months have seen a significant increase in the numbers of Winding Up Petitions (WUPs) being filed in the High Court.
K2 Business Rescue has been monitoring the number of petitions and notes that since April 2011 they have significantly increased.
Weekly averages of 100 WUPs were filed during February and March and have increased to 150 per week in April and May. This compares to a weekly average of 92 during the last quarter of 2010
Many companies in difficulty have been hanging on by their fingernails while hoping their sales will pick up.
While the picture and possible explanations are unlikely to be clear until the quarterly insolvency statistics are released, the increase in the number of petitions is likely to have been influenced by the enduring lack of cash with businesses trying to collect in their overdue debts.
A WUP is normally only filed after efforts to collect payment have been exhausted or more often ignored where the petition is a last resort, the result of frustration. This is certainly the case with HMRC who file most of the petitions.
In view of the rising numbers of compulsory WUPs it is possible that they may overtake the previously historically higher numbers of voluntary liquidations as creditors run out of patience.

Categories
General Insolvency Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround Voluntary Arrangements - CVAs

First decline in household income for 30 years causes pain on the High Street

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported recently that in 2010 real household disposable income fell by 0.8%, its first drop since 1977.
A plethora of profit warnings from major high street retailers is therefore no surprise. JJB successfully agreed a new Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) for repaying debt, just two years after its last one. Oddbins’ attempts to agree a CVA were rejected which led to it going into administration.
Meanwhile travel company Thomas Cook announced a 6% fall in holiday bookings from the UK. Dixons announced that it was cutting capital expenditure by 25%. H Samuel and Ernest Jones, Argos and Comet all report falling sales. Mothercare is to close a third of its 373 UK stores and HMV has just sold Waterstones for £53 million to pay down some of its £170 million of debt.
Falling consumer confidence, the Government’s austerity measures and rising commodity prices have led to a steady erosion of disposable income. An April report indicated an increase in retail sales, up 0.2% on February’s, but this was attributed to non-store (internet) and small store sales and probably conceals a continued decline in High Street sales.
After a few years of expansion fuelled by debt, it is entirely logical that the marketplace is now facing a sharp contraction as consumers spend less money while they are concerned about their job security and repaying their huge levels of personal debt.
Many companies need to contract and reduce their cost base if they are to survive. For the High Street retailers this means concentrating on profitable stores and reviewing strategy.
Growth is likely to involve developing experience based retail outlets in dedicated shopping environments or direct sales such as online. The High Street has failed to reinvent itself and the recession has accelerated its decline.

Categories
General Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

The Current Conundrum Over Inflation and Interest Rates

The most recent inflation rates show that the Consumer Price Index (CPI) has risen to 4%, a surprise drop of 0.4% from February and the Retail Price Index (RPI) to 5.3%, also a fraction less than February’s 5.5%.
If times were normal these figures would nevertheless trigger a rise in the interest rate to 7 % to 8%, about 2.5% above the RPI.
However, times are still clearly not normal following the financial “tsunami” that was the 2008 Great Recession. Many businesses are still struggling to survive and grow in the face of reduced spending by consumers and clients and cope with soaring materials and commodity prices and volatile oil prices because of uncertainty over events in North Africa and the Middle East.
As a result the fear that an interest rate rise might push the economy back into a recession has led to interest rates being decoupled from inflation.  Inflation is a form of currency devaluation.  It means that every £1 buys less than it did when inflation was lower.  Interest rate rises help to correct this. 
I would argue that currently many businesses are operating with huge levels of debt and not doing all they could to reduce even though they can only survive because interest rates are currently so low.  But this current situation is only temporary.
While a viable business should be able to build a surplus of cash in this situation to provide itself with a cushion once interest rates start to rise again, a business in difficulty will not have this option. It therefore needs to think ahead and revamp the business model and restructure to survive and be ready for to what will happen when things are more “normal”.

Categories
General Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

K2 believes the budget is positive for business and for those in difficulties

With the latest inflation figure showing an increase to 4.4% and a lower amount of tax collected in February, both announced the day before the budget was due, arguably the Chancellor had little room for manoeuvre.
There were some small comforts for smaller enterprises though the bulk of George Osborne’s measures are likely to benefit big corporations the most.
Cutting fuel duty by 1p per litre, and delaying a planned 4p per litre rise to April 2012 along with scrapping the fuel duty escalator was welcome particularly to hauliers, couriers and other companies that depend heavily on transport.
Keeping personal tax at its current level and increasing the personal tax allowance next year will also moderate any pressure on wage inflation, which is in any case not great given the current uncertainty over employment.
The money for apprenticeships, the new enterprise zones, the relaxation of planning laws and the new decision deadline should also make life easier for businesses.
However, I believe most of the budget’s measures are likely to benefit larger corporations, rather than the smaller, UK-focused businesses.
Overall this is a budget that doesn’t load yet more pressure on struggling businesses but the real concern among businesses is the prospect on interest rate rises which will squeeze those who are struggling to survive and precipitate a significant increase in the number of formal insolvencies.

Categories
Debt Collection & Credit Management Factoring, Invoice Discounting & Asset Finance General Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery

Factoring and Invoice Discounting: Be Wary of Hidden Fees

Factoring and invoice discounting (borrowing money against invoices) can be a helpful tool for funding the working capital of a business.
While it used to be regarded as a means of borrowing by businesses in financial difficulties, it is now a common source of finance for managing cash flow and has the additional benefit of imposing discipline on the collection of outstanding sales invoices.
The service charge fee is pre-agreed with the finance provider and generally relates to the level of service provided. Fees for factoring are generally at a higher rate of between 0.8% and 3%, than for invoice discounting because the factoring service charge includes debt collection.
However, hidden in the small print are usually contingency fees that can be triggered by a default. These fees are sufficiently large to justify some lenders looking for reasons to trigger them.
There are many examples of companies in financial difficulties where the factor or invoice discount provider pull the plug on a facility and collects in the outstanding debts to recover funds loaned as well as their retaining the default and recovery fees.
Typical default fee are 10% of the ledger held plus recovery fees which are generally not specified. Such is the scope for earning fees that advisers to lenders might be persuaded to recommend the exercising of rights under a default knowing that they, as advisers, can be paid out of the recovery fee clause as well as repaying their lender client the loan and default fee.
Such self interested behaviour may swell the coffers of lenders but it doesn’t help preserve businesses or improve the reputation of the finance community.

Categories
Banks, Lenders & Investors General Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Will Project Merlin Make any Difference to Business Lending?

With so many companies in financial difficulties will many companies be able to take out further loans as a result of the new agreement known as Project Merlin?
The government last week announced that it had reached agreement with the UK’s four biggest banks to increase the amount of new lending to business in 2011 to a total £190 billion, of which £76 billion would be for small and medium sized businesses (SMEs). The SME portion is an increase of 15% on 2010.  
The lending to businesses will be on commercial terms that reflect the reduced number of lenders in the market. With bank base rates being so low, currently 0.5%, companies are being charged a huge premium with interest rates being set as 8 – 9% above the base rate. In addition, huge arrangement fees are also being applied, where fees representing 5 – 10% of the loan are not uncommon.
Many balance sheets are so decimated carrying huge liabilities to creditors such as HMRC, suppliers and asset based lenders (often at over value) that many businesses will not be able to justify a loan.
Business advisers, who see the effects of policy on the ground, say that one effect of Project Merlin will be for the banks to convert short term revolving facilities, such as overdrafts renewable daily, monthly or quarterly, into medium term loans. These will almost certainly be categorised as new loans in the quota reports but won’t actually represent additional, new funding. The banks continue to run rings around the politicians.
Converted loans are increasingly repayable on demand and therefore are being agreed on terms that allow the bank to keep all its options for essentially demanding immediate repayment.
Andrew Cave, of the Federation of Small Businesses, commented that the majority of small businesses were not seeking finance from the banks at the moment because the cost of existing and new borrowing is increasing and David Frost, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, also cast doubt on whether the agreement will make any difference because of what he called the banks’ poor and opaque decision-making and over-centralised processes, with a lack of good frontline relationship managers locally in the banks.

Categories
Banks, Lenders & Investors Business Development & Marketing General Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Is it Realistic for Private Businesses to Employ more Staff in 2011?

The majority of businesses in the UK are defined as small and employ fewer than 50 people while only one per cent of UK companies employ more than 1000 people.
Small businesses would generally be defined as having fewer than 50 employees, assets worth less than £5 million and a turnover less than £5 million, yet they account for two thirds of the UK’s private sector.
The Government is pinning its hopes of recovery on dramatically and quickly reducing the country’s budget deficit with a combination of cutbacks, including making an estimated 330,000 people in the public sector redundant, a figure revised downwards in November 2010 from its estimate of 490,000 the previous June.
This revision, albeit in human terms still a large number of people, is based on its forecast for growth in the economy in 2011 of 2.1% for all of which it relies on the private sector – the majority of which is made up of small businesses.
Economists and politicians are both emphasising that the opportunities for growth lie largely in increasing exports on the grounds that there is a burgeoning middle class in the fastest growing economies, like China, India, Brazil and Russia (the BRICS) with a growing appetite for sophisticated technology and household products.
But while this might be an option for businesses involved in manufacture it does not help those many small businesses providing services and products to local businesses and consumers in the UK only.
The UK manufacturing sector currently accounts for 26% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the Government’s Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) published a White Paper proposing to expand adult apprenticeships by up to 75,000 by 2014-15 and to set up a new £50 million Growth and Innovation Fund, with financial support to SMEs to co-fund the costs of training for lower skilled employees.
Help with skills training by 2014-15 is hardly much use in 2011 and in any event growth will depend on being able to both increase sales and availability of finance from the banks to fund the additional working capital needed to support them.

Categories
General HM Revenue & Customs, VAT & PAYE Insolvency Turnaround Voluntary Arrangements - CVAs

HM Revenue and Customs is Increasingly Rejecting CVA Proposals

It is not being much talked about in the marketplace but it is becoming increasingly common for HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) to reject Company Voluntary Arrangements that would previously have been accepted.
In the past HMRC has appeared to be a great supporter of CVAs, but recently they have been rejecting a number of CVA proposals that they would have approved in the past.
While there are no published statistics on the numbers of liquidations resulting from failed CVAs, historically a large percentage have failed. Business rescue advisers and insolvency practitioners believe that the failure rate of CVAs post approval is somewhere between 60% and 70%.
HMRC website guidelines to case officers indicate that they should attempt to get arrears repaid within 12 months with longer periods being the exception. This may explain why HMRC is now rejecting more proposals.
A CVA can be used to improve cash flow quickly in order to keep trading while paying off its debts in a manageable way.  It is a legally binding agreement between an insolvent company and its creditors to repay some, or all, of its historic debts out of future profits, over a period of time.
For a business in difficulty a low level of contributions in the early period of a CVA allows it to get back on its feet in the short term while refocusing the business on survival and increasing profits, thus enabling it to pay higher contributions later in the CVA.  This increases the chances of the business being able to maintain its payments throughout the CVA period and reducing the risk of failure. High repayments required in the early stages will mean it cannot do this.
However, many CVAs are drafted by insolvency practitioners with a view to the proposal being approved, and as a result many of those being approved today are offering significant contributions to creditors, some exceeding 100p in the £.
While the greater contribution improves the chances of a CVA proposal being approved by creditors, the lack of realism about a company’s ability to achieve the commitments is the reason for such a high failure rate post approval.

Categories
Banks, Lenders & Investors General Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Business Survival Depends on Stakeholder Co-operation and Collaboration

The support and co-operation of its stakeholders can be crucial to the success or failure of the efforts by a business in difficulty to restructure and survive.
Stakeholders are all those people who have an interest in the business and are likely to be affected by its activities and most crucially by its failure, and they include shareholders, investors, creditors, the bank, suppliers, landlords, employees (and their union representatives) and customers or clients.
Plainly, when a business is in difficulty and has called in a rescue adviser to review its activities, costs, business model and viability, any actions it may need to take as a result will be more likely to succeed if its stakeholders both understand the situation and support the proposed solutions.
While there is one key interest that all hold in common, which is that all have an interest in the business surviving if they want to continue to receive income from it, it is probable that the interests of some stakeholders will conflict with those of others.
Employees will be most concerned about keeping their jobs and their co-operation in any restructuring is likely to depend on whether they feel the management is considering their concerns as well as involving them in the changes that may need to be made.  If there are unions involved getting them on board can be the key to persuading employees to co-operate.
Creditors and investors, on the other hand, may just want to be paid what they are owed and whether they are prepared to forgo or renegotiate payments or finance in the short term will depend on how much confidence they have in its future. 
The bank’s primary concern is to ensure loans are secure, safe and will be paid and will want to be kept informed as well as being given evidence that the business has been properly looked at by a specialist adviser, shown to be viable and any proposals are realistic and have a good chance of achieving the desired results.
It is crucial that the rescue adviser is involved in the management of the stakeholders thus ensuring that their concerns are understood. This will go a long way to ensuring stakeholders’ co-operation.

Categories
General HM Revenue & Customs, VAT & PAYE Insolvency Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround Voluntary Arrangements - CVAs Winding Up Petitions

Guide to Company Voluntary Arrangements (CVA) and When to Use Them

A Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) is a binding agreement between a company and those to whom it owes money (creditors).
It is based on a proposal that will include affordable, realistic and manageable repayment terms. It normally allows for repayment to be spread over a period of three to five years and can also be used to offer to repay less than the amount due if this is all the company can afford.
The proposal is sent to the Company’s Creditors along with an independent report on the proposal by an insolvency practitioner acting as Nominee.
Creditors are invited to respond to the CVA proposal by voting to either accept it, or reject it, or accept it subject to modifications that the Creditor proposes as a condition of their vote for acceptance. The votes are counted by value of claim where the requisite majority for approval is 75% of the votes cast. This is subject to a second vote to check that 50% of the non-connected creditors approve the proposals.
A CVA can only be used when a company is insolvent but it can be used to save a company rather than close it when creditors are pressing including when a debt related judgement can’t be satisfied or a creditor has filed a Winding Up Petition (WUP).
In addition to proposing terms for repaying debt, it helps to include details of any restructuring and reorganisation along with a business plan so that creditors can assess the viability of the surviving business. The proposals must be fair and not prejudice any individual or class of creditor including those with specific rights such as personal guarantees. These include trade suppliers, credit insurers, finance providers, employees, landlords and HM Revenue and Customs, the latter often being key in view of the arrears of VAT and PAYE that many companies have built up.
A CVA should only be used when the company’s directors are willing to be honest with themselves and face up to the position the company is in, preferably with the advice and guidance of an insolvency practitioner or experienced business rescue advisor but used properly it can improve a company’s cash flow very quickly by removing onerous financial obligations and easing the pressure from creditors.

Categories
General Insolvency Liquidation, Pre-Packs & Phoenix Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround Voluntary Arrangements - CVAs Winding Up Petitions

Guide to Insolvent Liquidation and When and How it is Used

Insolvent Liquidation involves a formal process to close a company. It happens when a company is insolvent, which means it does not have enough cash or liquid assets to pay its debts and the directors have concluded that continuing to trade will be detrimental to creditors.
There are four tests (set out in the Insolvency Act 1986) any of which can be used to establish whether a company is insolvent.  The tests don’t necessarily mean that the company will have to close down, although often directors assume that it must.  However, there are remedies that could save the company if at this stage it calls on a licensed insolvency practitioner or business turnaround adviser, who would carry out a review of the accounts, the assets including property, stock and debts and the liabilities. With help from the adviser, the company can develop realistic plans for it to survive and trade out of insolvency.
Once it is decided that the company is insolvent, and cannot be rescued, it should be closed down in an orderly fashion which means via a liquidation process. This involves the company’s assets being turned into cash and used to pay off its debts to creditors.
There are two types of liquidation, one compulsory and one voluntary and both are legal processes.
Voluntary liquidation through a Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation (CVL) is when the directors of the company themselves conclude that the company can no longer go on trading and should be wound up.
Normally they would engage an insolvency practitioner to help guide the directors through the formal procedure, which involves a board meeting to convene shareholder and creditor meetings.
The nominated liquidator normally sends out notices to shareholders and creditors having obtained their details from the directors and helps directors prepare the necessary formal documentation that is legally required.
The nominated liquidator must be a licensed insolvency practitioner who provides his consent to act which must be available for inspection at the meeting.
If the directors have left consulting too late they can then find themselves facing the court winding up procedure rather than having the option of a CVL.
Compulsory liquidation is triggered by a creditor formally asking the courts to have a company closed down by submitting a Winding Up Petition (WUP. In this case the court decides whether or not to support the petition by ordering that the company be wound up (compulsorily liquidated).
Upon a winding up order being made, an officer called the official receiver is automatically appointed to take control of the company to oversee the process of closing it down.  The official receiver may, if he/she wishes, appoint a liquidator to assist in dealing with recovering and selling any assets.

Categories
Banks, Lenders & Investors General Insolvency Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround Voluntary Arrangements - CVAs

Dealing with the Bank When Considering a Company Voluntary Arrangement

The large number of companies in financial difficulties is swamping the banks and as a result there is a lack of experience in banks when dealing with companies in the process of restructuring.
If a company is subject to a Winding-up Petition (WUP) the bank can be held liable for any funds that are paid out of its bank account once the Petition has been advertised in the London Gazette. As a result banks tend to freeze the accounts of any company with an outstanding WUP as soon as they become aware of it. The only way for a company to free up money in a frozen account is via an application to Court for a Validation Order.
When attempting to save a company where there is no WUP, however, the lack of experience among banks means that in some instances they are behaving as if there were a WUP and this is getting in the way of attempts to restructure because banks do not understand the distinction between the various restructuring tools.
An example of where this is happening is when a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) is being proposed.  The process of agreeing a CVA involves notifying creditors of the intention and allowing time for a meeting to be set up for creditors to approve the CVA proposals. Usually there is a hiatus period of at least three weeks between notification and the meeting, which allows creditors to consider the proposals and make any comments or request adjustments before the meeting.
However, banks’ inexperience of CVAs is leading some of them to freeze company accounts during the hiatus period and this has an adverse effect in that the company is no longer able to trade. While banks generally do not have the right to freeze their clients’ bank accounts unless there is either a WUP, an order by the Court or a breach of contract, they may take precautionary action out of fear when they don’t know what is going on. Concern about fraud can always be used to justify such an action.
It therefore makes sense for a company to talk to its bank beforehand to let them know what’s going on. Where the company is overdrawn clearly the bank is a creditor and should be notified of any restructuring proposals, in particular where there is a CVA.

Categories
General Insolvency Liquidation, Pre-Packs & Phoenix Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Guide to Creditors Voluntary Liquidation (CVL) from K2 Business Rescue

Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation is a process by which the directors of an insolvent company can close it down in an orderly fashion without involving a court procedure. There are four tests of insolvency laid down in the Insolvency Act 1986.
Insolvency does not necessarily mean that a company should be closed down, but depends crucially on whether or not continuing to trade will enable the company to emerge from insolvency and will improve the position for creditors.
If the company does continue to trade, the directors should seek professional advice as they have a legal obligation to act in the best interests of the company’s creditors and if the company eventually does have to be closed down they will need documented proof of this or they risk becoming personally liable for the company’s debts.
The CVL procedure is defined by the 1986 Act and involves a board meeting at which the directors formally agree that the company should cease to trade. The next step is to seek shareholder consent. At least 75% of the shareholders must approve the directors’ proposal and at least 50% must approve the nominated liquidator. The shareholders may disagree and wish to appoint new directors to save the company.
Documents must be prepared including Statutory Information on the company, a history of the business, historical financial information of the company, deficiency account, a statement of affairs and a list of creditors.
A creditors’ meeting is also convened to confirm the nominated liquidator or appoint the creditors’ own nominee, who will need approval by at least 50% of the creditors. All nominated liquidators must be licensed insolvency practitioners who have provided consent to act, which must be available for inspection at the meeting.
The liquidator’s duties include dealing with assets which are normally sold, accessing creditors’ claims and distributing surplus cash to creditors following a strict order of legal priority. They must also investigate the accounts and activities of the company and in particular look at the transactions prior to the company being placed into liquidation. Having done this they report to the Insolvency Service on the conduct of the directors.
A CVL is a very efficient procedure with the liquidator taking over responsibility for dealing with creditors and closing down the company. It also demonstrates that the directors were responsible in carrying out their duties by closing down the company in an orderly manner when they believed it should cease to trade.

Categories
General Insolvency Interim Management & Executive Support Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Directors Could be Storing Up Trouble for Later by Sacrificing Pay and Drawings Now

In the current economic crisis company directors are cutting their drawings and foregoing their salaries in order to save their companies still hoping that the market will recover.
As a result they are retaining costs that their companies cannot afford by sacrificing their personal drawings on the company today.
For how long can, or should, directors sacrifice their income and dividends in order to retain the company’s capacity for growth in the hope the order book fills up?
Once a company’s creditors are affected by a worsening balance sheet then there is a risk that the directors could be held personally liable for the increasing debt if they do not take decisive action to get the situation under control, for example by consulting a business turnaround adviser.
In any event no company can continue in a situation of insolvency for long in the hope of an upturn in the market without taking some measures to try to move it back to profitability.
At the time of writing it is estimated that there are more than 370,000 Time to Pay arrangements between businesses and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). Such a huge number suggests that a lot of directors have sacrificed their drawings in order to prop up their company to keep it going in the short-term by deferring payments rather than restructuring the business for long term survival. This highlights the need for a lot of companies to change their business model and significantly cut their costs.
Doing so would benefit a company’s directors, who could then start to pay themselves once the company resumed profitability.
While it may be easy in such circumstances to cut your drawings, pension contributions or health insurance this can only ever be a short term measure. 
Without a proper review of the company or the ability to make profits you may be prejudicing your personal futures.
It is a very rare company that does not need to review its business model from time to time, and it may also be that there is a viable core business buried under the current problems that an objective but supportive turnaround adviser may be able to identify and help the directors to nurture.

Categories
Cash Flow & Forecasting General Insolvency Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Turnaround Forecasting is About Reality, Not Wishful Thinking

Most forecasting is generally done for lending, fund raising or other investor related purposes and therefore with hope of future growth built into the forecast. Such forecasts show how loans will be repaid and investors will achieve a return on their money. Such forecasts are often more about hope than reality.
On the other hand, a turnaround forecast must be achieved and ideally exceeded and is more oriented towards improving cash flow than making future profits.  Low expectations are set so that the business does better than forecast, especially if the business is looking for support from the bank or additional finance that tends to have expensive penalties for failure. Therefore turnaround forecasting will deal with a level of detail where a turnaround business plan is essential.
So the turnaround forecast is used to show the pre-turnaround business model, and then the costs of implementing the turnaround and then the post-turnaround business model. To illustrate this take the situation of a company recently helped by K2 Business Rescue, that has shrunk and no longer needs two factory units and is looking to consolidate into one to reduce premises costs.
The less expensive but ideal unit needs three-phase electricity installing to operate the heavy equipment that is in the second unit, but the electricity supplier has switched off the power in that unit due to an overdue account. The cost of reinstating the existing supply, however, is similar to the cost of installing the new three-phase supply.
K2’s turnaround forecast showed a significant cash saving if the move was brought forward by investing in the three-phase installation which both cut premises costs and saved the cash that would otherwise have been needed to pay to reinstate electricity as well as install the three-phase. The focus on cash helped make this decision, the profit and loss benefit helped justify it. And the electricity supplier liability was bound in a CVA (company voluntary arrangement).
It challenged the orthodoxy that not spending money is going to save money whereas investing a little now could save a lot later. 
The essential point is to distinguish between short term and medium turn benefits and a turnaround forecast is looking at cash flow in the short and medium term rather. It is dealing in reality rather than hope and incorporated into the medium term is the effects of what fundamental change is being made in the short term.

Categories
General Insolvency Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround Voluntary Arrangements - CVAs

A Business in Difficulty Can Terminate its Property Leases and be Fair to Landlords

In April 2009 the retailer JJB successfully proposed a CVA designed to save 250 stores and 12,000 jobs. It has become the model for subsequent CVAs in the retail sector.
The proposal included closing 140 unprofitable stores but made available a fund of £10m for the landlord creditors of these premises, equating to a payment of approximately six months rent and JJB also made a significant compromise in bearing the substantial costs of the business rates of the unprofitable stores.
No leases were ‘torn up’ by the CVA and it was left to individual landlords to decide whether they wished to accept a surrender, consent to an assignment or forfeit the lease. The landlords as a group recognised that there was a substantial risk that JJB would go into administration, with a loss of their payments of rent or business rates for the closed stores and appreciated being consulted in a transparent process and being offered a genuine compromise.
It often happens that the core of a struggling business is viable and it need not go into administration if it can be restructured to focus on the parts that are profitable.
That can be beneficial to the creditors too, because they will then see some return on what they are owed, as the above example illustrates. In many cases the creditors will include landlords who own the property or properties from which the business is trading.
The forced termination of a lease can only be done by a liquidator following a company’s liquidation. If a company goes into administration and is sold the Administrator can also force termination of those leases no longer required.
However, in the JJB illustration negotiation with the landlords to terminate some leases was made possible by proving to them how much they would receive in the event of a liquidation and showing that the alternative offer set up using a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) was better than liquidation.
Forcing a change in the terms of a lease is extremely difficult and the courts will want to test whether or not a landlord has been treated fairly as a creditor in a CVA, regarded as vertical and horizontal tests.

Categories
General HM Revenue & Customs, VAT & PAYE Insolvency Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround Voluntary Arrangements - CVAs Winding Up Petitions

Employing Restructuring Advisers to Help Save Your Company

There are a number of options for companies who find themselves in financial difficulties, but a real challenge is finding someone to help.
It’s made more difficult if the directors/owners take the view that they know their business better than anyone else and infer from this that if they don’t know the solution, then no one else will.
A second issue is trying to solve the situation alone, via a self-help route.  It may be that research has revealed a number of options and in a situation of financial difficulty there is a temptation to latch onto the cheapest or first solution. Indeed, you are likely to think you can’t afford help and as a result persuade yourself that the cheap solution is the right one. It is no surprise that a lot of companies fail having not sought any advice.
In either situation eventually a squeeze on cash flow or pressure from creditors tends to be the catalyst that galvanises action and you are likely to start looking for a solution.
Who do you turn to for help when feeling as boxed in as this?  What’s needed is a business rescue adviser, but how do you go about the process of finding one from among the insolvency, turnaround, accounting and consultancy advisers?  
Carry out a thorough vetting process to confirm they have suitable experience and offer a rescue process rather than selling only one rescue solution. The rescue process should involve a thorough business review to identify a viable business that can emerge from the process, then developing and implementing an operational reorganisation and financial restructuring plan. One aspect of the financial restructuring plan will be how to deal with all the company’s liabilities.
In addition to bank and trade creditors a key creditor is likely to be the HMRC (Her Majesty’s Customs and Excise). Too often companies are advised to enter a Time to Pay arrangement with the HMRC to deal with tax, VAT or PAYE arrears or to enter a Company Voluntary Agreement (CVA) to deal with debts without a realistic assessment of the other demands on the company’s cash.
The first thing to find out, therefore, is whether the adviser is selling something or has a vested interest in the company pursuing a particular solution. Having established they are truly independent, the adviser will conduct a review to establish the core issues.
Support from business rescue advisers with broad commercial experience, not just insolvency, will help manage the process while at the same time helping find a realistic solution.

Categories
General Insolvency Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Redundancy Costs Due to Staff Reduction Can Leave a Company Insolvent

Companies struggling to survive a severe economic downturn like the current one often consider ways to reduce their overheads.
Generally one of the biggest costs on a business is the payroll and looking to redundancies as a way to reduce them is a common response to a recession.
The reasons used for making employees redundant are generally economic, technical or organisational. This can be that new technology or a new system has made a job unnecessary, the company needs to cut costs or that the business is closing down or moving.
However, making staff redundant is closely regulated and there are rules for the steps that a business must follow if it chooses to go down this route. These can be extremely expensive and if not managed properly could actually leave the company insolvent rather than achieving the desired objective.
Firstly, many companies consult employment specialists to ensure that it complies with the rules and carries out the process correctly and this in itself can involve paying substantial fees.
If an employer is making fewer than 20 employees redundant in one establishment it must consult individually. 
For more than 20 employees being made redundant within a 90-day period it becomes a collective redundancy and the employer has a duty to consult with representatives of the potentially affected employees. If the employer does not consult then the employees can apply to an Employment Tribunal claim for a protective award. This is an award of up to 90 days’ pay.
Rules about employees’ redundancy entitlements are laid down by the Government. The calculation is based on how long the employee has been continuously employed, their age and their weeks of entitlement up to a certain limit (£380 per week current allowance).
Failure to carry out a redundancy operation can also result in employees taking the employer to a Tribunal with a claim of unfair dismissal. In certain circumstances this can also add to the employer’s costs, not only if the Tribunal rules in favour of the employee but also, in some specific circumstances Tribunals now have the power to award costs of up to £10,000. 
A better option for cost reduction before going down the redundancy route could be to call in a business rescue adviser to carry out a thorough review of the business to assess the business viability, look at its accounts and business model, identify any underlying weaknesses and suggest a restructuring plan.

Categories
General HM Revenue & Customs, VAT & PAYE Insolvency Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Are Government Insolvency Statistics Concealing the Number of Insolvent Companies?

As a consequence of the global financial crisis it is reasonable to assume that the numbers of companies in financial difficulties serious enough to precipitate insolvency would be increasing.
However, figures for the second quarter of this year released by the UK Insolvency Service in August show that there were 2,080 companies in England and Wales that were placed into liquidation.
These are made up of compulsory liquidations and creditors voluntary liquidations and showed a 0.5% increase on the previous quarter but a decrease of 19.1% on the same quarter in 2009.
Compulsory liquidations were down 9.9% on the previous quarter and 21.0% on the corresponding quarter in 2009, while creditor voluntary liquidations were up 5.4% compared with the previous quarter but down 18.3% compared to the same quarter in 2009.
It would be tempting to infer from these figures that the economy is beginning to recover and the pressure on companies is easing.
It is possible, however, that the decline in liquidations is concealing the number of companies in financial difficulties because of a lack of pressure from creditors other than the HMRC (Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs ), the only active creditor currently seeking winding up orders in the courts.
The Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review in October may reveal the full impact on UK insolvencies.
Even if the UK avoids a double dip recession, there is a risk that the UK economy could develop a twin track economy, with public-sector-dependent industries facing higher levels of financial distress than sectors which are less directly linked to government spending cuts.
Some commentators argue that while Corporate insolvencies are still well below the numbers that would normally be expected at this point in the cycle the slight quarterly rise in the number of liquidations may signal that conditions are starting to turn against UK companies once again.
The lower than expected number of insolvencies is ascribed to a variety of proactive measures, HMRC Time to Pay arrangements and bank forbearance, together buying time for companies to deal with their financial situation. However, this may perhaps have only delayed the inevitable for others that are less robust or those that fail to use the time by taking remedial action to reduce costs or implement other steps that ensures survival.

Categories
General HM Revenue & Customs, VAT & PAYE Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Managing Tax Payments with Time To Pay Arrangements

There are hundreds of thousands of businesses struggling to meet their financial obligations to the Exchequer.
Businesses, especially smaller enterprises, have been reporting that in the current difficult economic climate they are struggling with cash flow issues as customers and suppliers try to stretch out the time they take to pay invoices. That means they may not have enough liquidity to pay the tax they owe.
While the majority of these tax monies are repaid, the HMRC (Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs) has reported that 10% of expected revenues are outstanding.
The UK’s Time to Pay (TTP) scheme was introduced in 2008 and allows businesses to pay overdue tax bills over a certain period of time. The scheme is administered by the Businesses Payment Support Service.
According to the HMRC website, arrangements are tailored to the ability of the customer to pay and are typically for a few months although they can be longer.
TTPs lasting longer than a year are only agreed in exceptional cases. Most arrangements involve regular monthly payments being made but in exceptional cases may involve a short period of deferral.
All businesses seeking a TTP of £1m or more need to pay for an Independent Business Review (IBR) to be carried out by an approved firm, normally an insolvency practitioner, and a total of 13 firms have been approved by HMRC to carry out IBRs to establish whether the business can pay back their deferred tax bill.
When the restructuring plans are ready, a business rescue adviser would normally expect to bring in an HMRC approved firm that they already know. The IBR would assess the company’s ability to eventually pay back any tax deferred by HMRC based on a review the proposals prepared by the adviser. These would be prepared with view to demonstrating a viable business.
The most recent statistics issued by HMRC are from March 2010 when it was revealed that 300,000 businesses have entered TTP arrangements since the end of 2008, deferring at least £5.2bn in business taxes. That equates to an average of 4,500 a week.
Concerns have been raised that it is getting tougher to join the scheme, and there have been some predictions that it would eventually have to close. However HMRC has insisted the TTP is still available and the eligibility criteria have not changed. The UK Coalition Government’s Business Secretary Vince Cable, speaking at a recent Institute of Directors event, reinforced this by saying that his department’s instructions to HMRC was to still make it “easy” for applicants to agree TTP arrangements.

Categories
General HM Revenue & Customs, VAT & PAYE Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround

Dealing with VAT Arrears and PAYE Arrears

Owing HMRC (Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs) more than £150,000 for overdue VAT and PAYE when your turnover is less than £3 million is not uncommon in 2010.  
The leniency of HMRC, whose light touch approach to collecting Revenue arrears since the recession began has helped the cash flow of many companies, has also made it easier for them to accrue both VAT and PAYE arrears. But the lack of a recovery has left companies in arrears burdened with debt they can’t easily repay.
Companies in this position have a number of options, but a real challenge is when to do something about it. If ignored, the liability can build up and the underlying business problems can escalate to a point where the company can find it more difficult to recover.
While directors are normally aware of the problems, and in particular of the liability in respect of Revenue arrears, they may not be aware of their options, assuming: “I know my business better than anyone else and if I don’t know the solution, then no one else will.”
Consider three financial solutions when dealing with HMRC arrears. They are immediate payment, a Time to Pay (TTP) arrangement or a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA). However, all too often one of these is implemented without considering other issues that perhaps need to be addressed at the same time.
The build up of PAYE arrears and VAT arrears is an indicator that the business is no longer profitable or that it doesn’t have sufficient working capital. The underlying issues can be identified by a business review and preparation of forecasts. It is obvious that an unprofitable company cannot achieve a payment plan while also covering ongoing payments. Less obvious is the restructuring and reorganisation that may be needed to achieve a viable business, one that is profitable with adequate working capital and positive cash flow.
Surviving the pressure of PAYE and VAT arrears generally involves more than just fixing the financial problem.  the underlying issues need to be identified and workable solutions put in place.

Categories
County Court, Legal & Litigation General HM Revenue & Customs, VAT & PAYE Insolvency Personal Guarantees Rescue, Restructuring & Recovery Turnaround Winding Up Petitions

Guide to Winding Up Petitions (WUP) and How to Deal With Them

A Winding Up Petition is a legal application to the High Court or another appropriate court by a creditor asking that a company be closed down.
If granted by the court, the official receiver is appointed to oversee closing down the company and may then engage a licensed insolvency practitioner as approved liquidator.
The purpose of winding up a company is generally to remove control of a company from its directors so that its affairs can be dealt with properly. At the end of the process the company is dissolved and ceases to exist.
The petition must be properly served on the company, normally by personal delivery at its registered office and also it must be advertised in the London Gazette. The advertisement is intended to notify the public but in practice this is normally how banks and other institutional creditors learn of the petition.
Directors, on receipt of the petition, should be aware that the company’s bank account is likely to be frozen when the bank learns about it. They should also be aware that any further trading after the date of receipt may mean that they can be held personally liable for any company debts accrued after that date if, when their actions are investigated, they are found not to have acted in the best interests of the company’s creditors.
If the directors wish to continue trading in order to save the company then they should seek help from a business rescue adviser if the company is insolvent. If they believe that trading on as a managed workout would benefit creditors through recovering assets, then they should seek help from an insolvency practitioner who might well be introduced by the bank or another secured creditor.
Although the petition is very serious and should not be ignored it does not mean that the company is doomed to closure.  With proper representation based on a credible plan to deal with the company’s difficulties it is possible to have a winding up petition dismissed.
A WUP is often used as an action of last resort initiated out of frustration following attempts by a creditor to agree terms for repayment of money owed or after repeated attempts to contact the company have been ignored. HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) regularly uses the petition when its repeated written reminders and requests for repayment of outstanding PAYE, VAT or tax have been ignored.