Ex-director of closed company pursued for speeding fine
Discussion
Hello everyone,
A relative of mine ran a building company (the company director) until a year or so ago.
A number of employees used a van registered to the company, one of whom was caught speeding and a ticket resulted. The company director didn't know who was driving it at the time and the possible divers were understandably shy about coming forward.
The court/police initially attempted to pursue the director and to add points to his licence, though it was subsequently accepted that he was not driving.
The company was then wound up and it wasn't making any money.
Since the company was wound up, there appears to have been some court action regarding the unpaid speeding fine and court bailiffs have appeared at the ex-director's house, claiming that it is the registered address of the (now closed) business.
He managed to fob them off for a day or two, but they said that next time they'd bring a locksmith and the police along to sieze goods.
Is this legal? The company no longer trades then can they still pursue a director for a company-related fine? People close companies down all the time oweing contrators money and they aren;t allowed to pursue the directors at the home addresses.
any help greatly appreciated
A relative of mine ran a building company (the company director) until a year or so ago.
A number of employees used a van registered to the company, one of whom was caught speeding and a ticket resulted. The company director didn't know who was driving it at the time and the possible divers were understandably shy about coming forward.
The court/police initially attempted to pursue the director and to add points to his licence, though it was subsequently accepted that he was not driving.
The company was then wound up and it wasn't making any money.
Since the company was wound up, there appears to have been some court action regarding the unpaid speeding fine and court bailiffs have appeared at the ex-director's house, claiming that it is the registered address of the (now closed) business.
He managed to fob them off for a day or two, but they said that next time they'd bring a locksmith and the police along to sieze goods.
Is this legal? The company no longer trades then can they still pursue a director for a company-related fine? People close companies down all the time oweing contrators money and they aren;t allowed to pursue the directors at the home addresses.
any help greatly appreciated
I think you will have to be a bit more specific about the actual legal charges here. There should be correspondence.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1991/40/sectio...
"Where a body corporate is guilty of an offence under this section and the offence is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to neglect on the part of, a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or a person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he, as well as the body corporate, is guilty of that offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
(6)
Where the alleged offender is a body corporate, or in Scotland a partnership or an unincorporated association, or the proceedings are brought against him by virtue of subsection (5) above or subsection (11) below, subsection (4) above shall not apply unless, in addition to the matters there mentioned, the alleged offender shows that no record was kept of the persons who drove the vehicle and that the failure to keep a record was reasonable."
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/corporate_prose...
"Prosecutors may consider proceedings against the company officers where the company has been dissolved, for example."
So the company director is personally liable, even after the company has been dissolved, if he failed to identify the driver, whom he knew to be driving the vehicle, OR if he failed to keep records of drivers, where it would have been reasonable for him to do so.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1991/40/sectio...
"Where a body corporate is guilty of an offence under this section and the offence is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to neglect on the part of, a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or a person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he, as well as the body corporate, is guilty of that offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
(6)
Where the alleged offender is a body corporate, or in Scotland a partnership or an unincorporated association, or the proceedings are brought against him by virtue of subsection (5) above or subsection (11) below, subsection (4) above shall not apply unless, in addition to the matters there mentioned, the alleged offender shows that no record was kept of the persons who drove the vehicle and that the failure to keep a record was reasonable."
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/corporate_prose...
"Prosecutors may consider proceedings against the company officers where the company has been dissolved, for example."
So the company director is personally liable, even after the company has been dissolved, if he failed to identify the driver, whom he knew to be driving the vehicle, OR if he failed to keep records of drivers, where it would have been reasonable for him to do so.
Edited by thelawnet1 on Friday 2nd October 17:32
Just got some more clarification from him, it's basically a fine for not promptly informing the police of who was driving - apparently after sending details of who was driving (the driver was actually known) the response from the police was that it was too late, and a chain of fines resulted. The fine is now up over £1200.
However they still seem to be pursuing the company, rather than the individual.
Can the director (quite reasonably) claim that there are no company assets at his address?
However they still seem to be pursuing the company, rather than the individual.
Can the director (quite reasonably) claim that there are no company assets at his address?
tommyjj said:
Just got some more clarification from him, it's basically a fine for not promptly informing the police of who was driving - apparently after sending details of who was driving (the driver was actually known) the response from the police was that it was too late, and a chain of fines resulted. The fine is now up over £1200.
However they still seem to be pursuing the company, rather than the individual.
Can the director (quite reasonably) claim that there are no company assets at his address?
Who are the debt collectors? County court baliffs, or another type? The powers they have are different depending on their title. However they still seem to be pursuing the company, rather than the individual.
Can the director (quite reasonably) claim that there are no company assets at his address?
Also how far have they got? Have then noted down goods etc? Have they been in the house?
He needs to inform them in writing ASAP (email is okay), saying that no company property is at his address. Let a lawyer tell you what the legal threats to make are. The police will not want to get involves (rightly). You need to make them think life will be difficult for them if they try and act like bullies. if you can record everything that is done and said. Stick a videocamera in their face and they will be more careful about what they say.
If a dissolved company was convicted then the fine and costs are not the responsibility of an ex-director.
Who was the defendant?
When was the company dissolved? If it's still in liquidation then that might be a problem.
Check the company's status here:
https://www.gov.uk/get-information-about-a-company
Who was the defendant?
When was the company dissolved? If it's still in liquidation then that might be a problem.
Check the company's status here:
https://www.gov.uk/get-information-about-a-company
Edited by agtlaw on Friday 2nd October 18:06
agtlaw said:
If a dissolved company was convicted then the fine and costs are not the responsibility of an ex-director.
Who was the defendant?
When was the company dissolved? If it's still in liquidation then that might be a problem.
Check the company's status here:
https://www.gov.uk/get-information-about-a-company
Would this still be the case if the secretary or director were convicted prior to winding up? i guess for a small business this could even be a possible reason for winding up and starting again (if it's a business with limited assets etc).Who was the defendant?
When was the company dissolved? If it's still in liquidation then that might be a problem.
Check the company's status here:
https://www.gov.uk/get-information-about-a-company
Edited by agtlaw on Friday 2nd October 18:06
thanks for the help everyone.
I've discussed the issue further and it appears there are a few issues I wasn't aware of.
It does seem like a fine for failure to furnish after a speeding fine, for a van owned by the company. The company has not actually been wound up but is in liquidation.
A letter was received at the registered address notifying of the intention to take it to court (prior to the company entering liquidation) but no subsequent information was sent, so the court date was missed.
The collectors were court bailiffs who refused to show the court order while at the door, although it is understood that the court order/fine was in the name of the company, not the director or secretary.
It would seem from all your comments that bailiffs cannot force entry and/or seize goods for a private house or target an individual if the order only has the company name on it?
I've discussed the issue further and it appears there are a few issues I wasn't aware of.
It does seem like a fine for failure to furnish after a speeding fine, for a van owned by the company. The company has not actually been wound up but is in liquidation.
A letter was received at the registered address notifying of the intention to take it to court (prior to the company entering liquidation) but no subsequent information was sent, so the court date was missed.
The collectors were court bailiffs who refused to show the court order while at the door, although it is understood that the court order/fine was in the name of the company, not the director or secretary.
It would seem from all your comments that bailiffs cannot force entry and/or seize goods for a private house or target an individual if the order only has the company name on it?
thanks for the help everyone.
I've discussed the issue further and it appears there are a few issues I wasn't aware of.
It does seem like a fine for failure to furnish after a speeding fine, for a van owned by the company. The company has not actually been wound up but is in liquidation.
A letter was received at the registered address notifying of the intention to take it to court (prior to the company entering liquidation) but no subsequent information was sent, so the court date was missed.
The collectors were court bailiffs who refused to show the court order while at the door, although it is understood that the court order/fine was in the name of the company, not the director or secretary.
It would seem from all your comments that bailiffs cannot force entry and/or seize goods for a private house or target an individual if the order only has the company name on it?
I've discussed the issue further and it appears there are a few issues I wasn't aware of.
It does seem like a fine for failure to furnish after a speeding fine, for a van owned by the company. The company has not actually been wound up but is in liquidation.
A letter was received at the registered address notifying of the intention to take it to court (prior to the company entering liquidation) but no subsequent information was sent, so the court date was missed.
The collectors were court bailiffs who refused to show the court order while at the door, although it is understood that the court order/fine was in the name of the company, not the director or secretary.
It would seem from all your comments that bailiffs cannot force entry and/or seize goods for a private house or target an individual if the order only has the company name on it?
Be interesting to see how it goes.
Certainly having limited liability will protect the directors from the financial liabilities of the business. I'd always assumed that it doesn't protect against legal proceedings. imagine this was an accident and someone was hurt, I suspect they would continue to pursue the secretary / directors as they do have some personal responsibilities that the position dictates (specifically not the financial liabilities as long as they have acted legally in the build up to admin or liquidation).
Seems OTT for speeding but the authorities also seem to take a bit of offense at this defense for a speeding prosecution.
Watching with interest OP so please keep us informed.
Certainly having limited liability will protect the directors from the financial liabilities of the business. I'd always assumed that it doesn't protect against legal proceedings. imagine this was an accident and someone was hurt, I suspect they would continue to pursue the secretary / directors as they do have some personal responsibilities that the position dictates (specifically not the financial liabilities as long as they have acted legally in the build up to admin or liquidation).
Seems OTT for speeding but the authorities also seem to take a bit of offense at this defense for a speeding prosecution.
Watching with interest OP so please keep us informed.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff