Insolvency practitioner sanctions: Richard Hilton Savage (2) 9 September 2016
On 9 September 2016 , an Investigation Committee Order was made against Richard Hilton Savage of Chorley, Lancashire
PDF, 150KB, 2 pages
This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology. Request an accessible format.
If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email firstname.lastname@example.org. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.
Mr Savage as supervisor of an Individual Voluntary Arrangement:
Did not explain sufficiently to the debtor between November 2011 and 13 March 2012 that the lump sum payment offered in full and final settlement of her IVA may not lead to the conclusion of the IVA within a reasonable timescale as she anticipated.
Misled the debtor in a letter dated 28 June 2012 in that he stated the case would be sent to the closures team to complete the arrangement and that the process could take 3-6 months.
Having considered the investigation report, the complainants’ and member’s representations, the committee found there was a prima facie case in respect both heads of complaint. As a consequence, the committee decided that Mr Savage had performed his professional work inefficiently or incompetently to such an extent as to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.
Taking into account all circumstances, the committee decided that Mr Savage should be asked to consent to the making of an order that he be reprimanded, fined £3,000 and pay costs.
The committee had regard to the common sanctions guidance which indicates the starting point in respect of a material breach of the fundamental principles of the Insolvency Code of Ethics is a reprimand and fine commensurate with the breach.
Following the finding of a prima facie case, on 9 September 2016, with the agreement of Mr Richard Hilton Savage, the Investigation Committee ordered that he be reprimanded, fined £3,000 and pay costs.