Resources
SRG Publications and SubmissionsBusiness Debt |
Personal Debt
Government Departments |
SRG Publications and SubmissionsBusiness Debt |
Personal Debt
Government Departments |
Background |
Actions taken |
Our result |
We came into contact with a married couple who were each directors of an engineering company that appeared on an ASIC list as being in Voluntary Administration. The couple told us they were surprised they had got into this situation as their business had been profitable for the past 20 years.
The couple had not wanted to go into administration, but their accountant had encouraged them to do so. Their accountant handled all their dealings with the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), which was their only hostile creditor at the time of Voluntary Administration. We advised the couple that if we were aware of their predicament earlier, we would have NOT advised them to go into Voluntary Administration. Instead, we would have sought an adjournment of proceedings with the ATO while we investigated the cause of the company’s problem. |
We suspected that the accountant may have had a hidden agenda in pushing for them to go into Voluntary Administration. While analysing the company’s ATO Running Balance Account and comparing it to the money they had transferred to their accountant, it had become clear that their accountant had not passed on all the funds to the ATO over a seven-year period. We alleged the accountant stole more than $500,000 from the couple.
The accountant was arrested, police laid a fraud charge and seized electronic equipment including computers for forensic examination. While all this was occurring, the appointed administrators continued to charge the couple exorbitant fees despite the fraud they had just learned. Fees which would have never occurred if it weren’t for their accountant committing fraud and encouraging them to place the company into Voluntary Administration in the first place. |
Through our recommendation of a trusted lawyer, the couple were able to overturn the appointment of the original administrators in court. The new administrators, and subsequent liquidators, charged far more reasonable fees and were of the viewpoint that were it not for the alleged misappropriation “this company would not be in liquidation”. The couple were able to come to an arrangement with the liquidator and have recommenced business operations, while the police investigation into the accountant continues.
Thankfully, our clients were resilient and used our advice effectively to wriggle out of a horrible situation of betrayal. |
We originally spoke to Managing Director Susie Barnett from the SR Group on the phone, we were going through a horrific experience with our business due to fraud committed by our accountant. We were in voluntary administration and things were looking very bad for us.
Their positivity and their attitude helped us hold it together and get through it. Their advice and professionalism gave us confidence and the tools to fight the whole process. We went to Sydney and met with the team twice, they arranged a lawyer for us and were with us every step of the way.
Through every meeting with the administrators Tom and Susie were there with advice and support. While the administrators tried to wind us up they kept them at bay. Their advice was invaluable and know without them we would have lost everything. The end result wasn’t what we hoped but it could have been far worse.
I feel confident that had we been with the SR Group earlier the result would have been even better. I have no hesitation in recommending the SR Group; their experience, advice, professionalism got us through the worst time in our life.
BackgroundWe provided advisory services to the director of a company that provided financial solutions to businesses who sold small ticket items. Our client’s company had operated successfully for several years before a combination of environmental and market conditions caused a significant downturn in revenue.
After numerous attempts to revitalise the business and diversify, and in keeping with his directorship duties, our client made the decision to wind up his company and appoint a liquidator. After appointing the liquidator, our client found employment in a managerial role in a different company. While, the salary of the new role covered his living expenses, it did not leave enough money for him to meet his monthly creditor repayments, which were in substantial arrears. However, our client did not want to abrogate his personal creditor responsibilities and take the personal insolvency route. |
Actions takenWe acted on behalf of our client in aiming to settle each of his eight credit providers for the lowest possible amount on the grounds of financial hardship. A family member of our client generously offered a small pool of funds to help settle his creditors. Overall, we were able to reduce our client’s debt from $261,000 to $84,000, a reduction of 68%.
Our client now only had to pay 32 cents in the dollar, which he had to do immediately upon receipt of each offer in the form of a lump-sum settlement. |
Our resultFor the ATO, we were able to secure a mutually agreeable payment arrangement. While negotiating with each creditor, we successfully requested for them to not list a default against our client or pursue any recovery action until an agreement was reached.
|
BackgroundAn established travel agency established in 1998 incurred financial distress, due to ongoing family health issues over a 10-month period. This difficult period resulted in neglect of the business, which ultimately led to a winding up application from the Australian Taxation Office (ATO).
|
Actions takenOn behalf of our client, we negotiated with the ATO and reached a settlement equivalent to 48% of the initial debt.
|
Our resultWe achieved a full remission of interest and penalties on the debt, as well as establishing a monthly payment plan over two years to settle the debt, allowing the client to effectively manage their cash flow as the business got back on its feet.
|
BackgroundOur client was a user of a trading platform that allows for Contract for Difference (CFD) trading. He had many short positions in the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJI) as he believed the US market would fall following the election of Donald Trump in 2016. On 6 February 2018 the DJI fell heavily and our client aimed to benefit from closing many of his short positions. However, the CFD provider’s app and webpage did not allow for him to close these positions. Eventually, after about seven minutes the app worked and he closed his short positions, but at a higher price. The CFD provider argued that he should have called the trading desk since the app and webpage were not operating properly.
|
Actions takenFollowing extensive research, we wrote many submissions to AFCA, arguing that the CFD provider was at fault for not allowing our client to close his positions online.
|
Our resultThe CFD provider was ordered to pay compensation of $22,086 for not providing the best service it could.
|