£544k
Director
Misfeasance

header 986

 
   

 IP Firm

Top 4 Accountancy Firm

 

Type of Investment

Funding the Office Holder

Start Date
December 2012

Completion Date
October 2015 (34 months)

 

     
   
 

We are known for our rapid resolution to claims but this case took rather longer to complete. This was because we first launched the case as a Transaction at Undervalue against the Director's Newco, which had taken the Insolvent Company's valuable assets for nil value whereas he had left the toxic assets in the Insolvent Company. However, the Director then liquidated that Newco. Manolete was left chasing an endless line of new companies clearly designed to frustrate us. So we re-cast the claim as a s212 (Misfeasance) against the Director personally. This led to a mediation and final settlement.

“A very good result in the end". We are now on our 4th case with this firm.
– QUOTE FROM THE OFFICE HOLDER

 
 
£544k
Director
Misfeasance

header 986

 
   

 IP Firm

Top 4 Accountancy Firm

 

Type of Investment

Funding the Office Holder

Start Date
December 2012

Completion Date
October 2015 (34 months)

 

     
   
 

We are known for our rapid resolution to claims but this case took rather longer to complete. This was because we first launched the case as a Transaction at Undervalue against the Director's Newco, which had taken the Insolvent Company's valuable assets for nil value whereas he had left the toxic assets in the Insolvent Company. However, the Director then liquidated that Newco. Manolete was left chasing an endless line of new companies clearly designed to frustrate us. So we re-cast the claim as a s212 (Misfeasance) against the Director personally. This led to a mediation and final settlement.

“A very good result in the end". We are now on our 4th case with this firm.
– QUOTE FROM THE OFFICE HOLDER

 
 

header 986

£544k
Director
Misfeasance

 IP Firm

Top 4 Accountancy Firm

 

Type of Investment

Funding the Office Holder

Start Date
December 2012

Completion Date
October 2015 (34 months)


We are known for our rapid resolution to claims but this case took rather longer to complete. This was because we first launched the case as a Transaction at Undervalue against the Director's Newco, which had taken the Insolvent Company's valuable assets for nil value whereas he had left the toxic assets in the Insolvent Company. However, the Director then liquidated that Newco. Manolete was left chasing an endless line of new companies clearly designed to frustrate us. So we re-cast the claim as a s212 (Misfeasance) against the Director personally. This led to a mediation and final settlement.

“A very good result in the end". We are now on our 4th case with this firm.
– QUOTE FROM THE OFFICE HOLDER