The Administrators - am I alone in hating?

[rpguk]

This thread reminded me how frustrated with the administrators I've ended up everytime I've had to deal with a company that's been wound up.

Fortunately this has only been a few times but everytime I've got the impression that they'd make claim forms to include deliberately ambiguous or unclear questions resulting in me calling for clarification (thus increasing their fee), they'd ask the same information several times, charge obscene fees for everyones time (most people on hundreds of pounds an hour), send out pointless reports and generally milk the situation for all they could.

I know it's a bit of an over simplification but surely all they need to do is split the creditors into secured, unsecured and taxman then split the money.

Who appoints them anyway?

(I will admit that I only have limited knowledge and then from the bitter position of chasing money and seeing pennies in the pound if I'm lucky while the administrators walk off with a big chunk of what was left, please feel free to pick my rant apart )

Edited by rpguk on Wednesday 26th September 21:44

[GreenV8S]

rpguk said:

(I will admit that I only have limited knowledge and then from the bitter position of chasing money and seeing pennies in the pound if I'm lucky while the administrators walk off with a big chunk of what was left,

My experience is exactly the same!

[johnfm]

Spot on. Like undertakers, I expect they'll never be out of work.

[TDIPLC]

A friend of mine is an Insolvancy Practitioner so I have some insider knowledge.

They are a "busines" too so are under pressure to make money. Need I say more ?

[Jasandjules]

That is interesting, I am looking into a company who administered a friends insolvency, the fees charged seem rather high to my mind - are there any guide lines anywhere? They also seem to have paid a creditor twice for the same debt.

[rpguk]

Just got a cheque from a claim I put in for just under £1500. Having jumped through hoops for as long as I can remember (must be 2 or 3 years) I've got under £150 for it.

The breakdown shows receipts to be £55,569.08, supervisor's fees £23,760. Just before I get annoyed, would I be right in saying they've taken half the bloody money for themselves?

Edited by rpguk on Friday 30th November 14:55

[thewave]

Insolency practitioners don't usually leave much.

It's a horrible business to be in, ruins lives, not always that persons fault either.

[JakeR]

in my experience, the more 'value' left in a company, the higher their fees are.

legalised theft in my opinion.

[JakeR]

rpguk said:

Just got a cheque from a claim I put in for just under £1500. Having jumped through hoops for as long as I can remember (must be 2 or 3 years) I've got under £150 for it.

The breakdown shows receipts to be £55,569.08, supervisor's fees £23,760. Just before I get annoyed, would I be right in saying they've taken half the bloody money for themselves?

Edited by rpguk on Friday 30th November 14:55

yep, you got it.

[POORCARDEALER]

wife invloved in this business........clerks who earn £8 p/h are charged out at £50 and partners/practitioners can be as much as 300 an hour

[bga]

POORCARDEALER said:

wife invloved in this business........clerks who earn £8 p/h are charged out at £50 and partners/practitioners can be as much as 300 an hour

That's cheap.

The rates are generally the same as the accountancies would provide for auditing, tax advising etc. Many of the people will not be purely focused on Liquidation.

I don't work for an accountancy now but the principle remains that why should my rate be significantly different for a job that uses the same skills?

[JakeR]

the timesheets I've seen that these leeches put in are total fabrications. No one checks them, and they can charge whatever they like. Hence, they charge every penny they can squeeze out of the corpse of the company.

[bga]

JakeR said:

the timesheets I've seen that these leeches put in are total fabrications. No one checks them, and they can charge whatever they like. Hence, they charge every penny they can squeeze out of the corpse of the company.

Charges are stated at the start of the engagement and are in line with the other work they do. Why should someone charge less for their skills because they are working on an engagement that relates to company that is screwed rather than one is doing well?

Time on site often does not equal time spent working on a client - something that many outside the industry don't realise. Of course, it's not unknown for them to be trying it on too.

[smartie]

I think another issue here is often this is the only time some people see the billing levels of larger accountancy firms, which are significantly more than a local firm might be?

[JakeR]

bga said:

JakeR said:

the timesheets I've seen that these leeches put in are total fabrications. No one checks them, and they can charge whatever they like. Hence, they charge every penny they can squeeze out of the corpse of the company.

Charges are stated at the start of the engagement and are in line with the other work they do. Why should someone charge less for their skills because they are working on an engagement that relates to company that is screwed rather than one is doing well?

Time on site often does not equal time spent working on a client - something that many outside the industry don't realise. Of course, it's not unknown for them to be trying it on too.

I dont have a beef with the hourly rates. It's the hours they have supposedly put in. A pal of mine has recently gone through it. They got him to do all the leg work (unpaid) and then stuck in £35k worth of fees. I am an accountant btw, so I have a pretty good idea of what is involved.

[POORCARDEALER]

bga said:

POORCARDEALER said:

wife invloved in this business........clerks who earn £8 p/h are charged out at £50 and partners/practitioners can be as much as 300 an hour

That's cheap.

The rates are generally the same as the accountancies would provide for auditing, tax advising etc. Many of the people will not be purely focused on Liquidation.

I don't work for an accountancy now but the principle remains that why should my rate be significantly different for a job that uses the same skills?

Nice work if you can get it and good luck to you

[bga]

JakeR said:

I dont have a beef with the hourly rates. It's the hours they have supposedly put in. A pal of mine has recently gone through it. They got him to do all the leg work (unpaid) and then stuck in £35k worth of fees. I am an accountant btw, so I have a pretty good idea of what is involved.

Fair enough, if they are claiming for work they haven't done then that should be raised with the senior partner surely? If it's any of the big4, the staff will get a right bollocking/poss dismissal for falsifying T&E (and rightly so!)

[POORCARDEALER]

local printing firm bust near me,who owe me a few quid, employed 100 people mid size, fees for liquidation £307K !!!

[edb49]

rpguk said:

This thread reminded me how frustrated with the administrators I've ended up everytime I've had to deal with a company that's been wound up.

Fortunately this has only been a few times but everytime I've got the impression that they'd make claim forms to include deliberately ambiguous or unclear questions resulting in me calling for clarification (thus increasing their fee), they'd ask the same information several times, charge obscene fees for everyones time (most people on hundreds of pounds an hour), send out pointless reports and generally milk the situation for all they could.

I know it's a bit of an over simplification but surely all they need to do is split the creditors into secured, unsecured and taxman then split the money.

Who appoints them anyway?

(I will admit that I only have limited knowledge and then from the bitter position of chasing money and seeing pennies in the pound if I'm lucky while the administrators walk off with a big chunk of what was left, please feel free to pick my rant apart )

Edited by rpguk on Wednesday 26th September 21:44

Bit of common sense here I think. If you're an administrator, would you take a job on if you didn't think you would get paid? I wouldn't. So it makes sense that they are the first people to get a bite at the carcass.

If an operating business pulled in administrators to do another type of job, they would be incentivised to keep their costs low so the business made as much profit as possible. An insolvent business doesn't have this incentive, which is why administrator costs may be of such a concern to the business.

[bga]

edb49 said:

If an operating business pulled in administrators to do another type of job, they would be incentivised to keep their costs low so the business made as much profit as possible.

It always amuses me when the two words "contingent fees" are mentioned to partners.