ANNEX 1 – IPA response to Recommendations
Published 11 February 2022
© Crown copyright 2022
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/insolvency-practitioner-association-ipa-monitoring-report-2021/annex-1-ipa-response-to-recommendations
1. Recommendation 1
The IPA should consider drafting a policy which sets out how staff should set deadlines for both Insolvency Practitioners and informants to respond to requests for extensions and set reasonable expectations with their members on how such requests would be dealt with. This will remain relevant to changes the IPA intends to make to its rules in respect of Regulation Officers having a more active role in the sanctioning process.
2. IPA Response
A formal policy will be considered to replace the guidelines in place since September 2020.
3. Recommendation 2
The IPA should share a copy of their newly developed policy on RCC appointments and removal of members, including for reasons of sanctioning by the IPA with the Insolvency Service.
4. IPA Response
Actioned, copy shared with the Insolvency Service.
5. Recommendation 3
The RCC meeting minutes should more fully, detail the rationale for a decision, especially in cases where consideration is required as to whether an Insolvency Practitioner remains a fit and proper person to hold a licence.
6. IPA Response
Noted; IPA will encourage RCC to consider when appropriate (based on the seriousness of the misconduct identified), the IPs ongoing fitness and propriety to retain their licence.
7. Recommendation 4
The IPA should designate a member of the Secretariat who can guide the committee and provide references to the IPA’s Rules, particularly when the revised Rules are agreed and implemented, and the committee functions are updated.
8. IPA Response
There is always a legal adviser or other appropriate person available to advise on rules and procedures.
9. Recommendation 5
The IPA should ensure the RCC gives broader consideration to factors that could influence the sanction. The RCC should not just use factors that are listed on the CSG. The IPA should consider undertaking further training with the committee on mitigating and aggravating factors and how they should be applied to cases where a prima facie case is found.
10. IPA Response
IPA will encourage this and already adopts that practice.
11. Recommendation 6
The IPA Secretariat should ensure timely responses to any actions ordered by the RCC, detail of next steps and a deadline for return to the committee for further consideration are set. The IPA could consider use of the new decision form as a live document to be used to detail progress through the committee stage and set deadlines for progress.
12. IPA Response
IPA accepts that in a very small number of cases there were delays in issuing letters however those cases do not accurately reflect the IPA’s process. The Decision Sheet is already in use.