IP for MVL recommendations or experiences

[Demo]

Hi,

After 5 years of contracting I'm looking to retire and close the company. I'm interested in recommendations for, or against, Insolvency Practitioners for an MVL.

There are 4 shareholders (business partner and spouses) so MVL Online can't help unfortunately. Only assets will be cash at the bank.

I had a quick scan of the forums but any similar threads appear to be several years old and I didn't want to resurrect them.

Any feedback on companies would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

[cojak]

Try Begbies Traynor - Gareth Rusling is your man.

I haven’t used him but did get a personal recommendation from someone I know who used him.

[Old Greg]

I’m using MVL Online and am very happy with them.

Maslins is the poster here but you can google them easily enough.

What have you got planned next, cojak?

[cojak]

What have you got planned next, cojak?

Gone to the dark side for the couple of years before I retire OG.

[Old Greg]

Gone to the dark side for the couple of years before I retire OG.

Needs must. Best of luck with it.

[cojak]

Needs must. Best of luck with it.

I saw the way the wind was blowing so had the luxury of time to research a good consultancy to slip into.

[Darren at Fox-Bartfield]

Hi,

After 5 years of contracting I'm looking to retire and close the company. I'm interested in recommendations for, or against, Insolvency Practitioners for an MVL.

There are 4 shareholders (business partner and spouses) so MVL Online can't help unfortunately. Only assets will be cash at the bank.

I had a quick scan of the forums but any similar threads appear to be several years old and I didn't want to resurrect them.

Any feedback on companies would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Would recommend the guys at SFP Group, dealt with a couple of clients and good feedback. Suggest chatting with Daniel Plant on
[email protected]

[Maslins]

Sorry it's not one MVL Online can do. The licensed IP behind MVLO would no doubt be able to do it from his mainstream practice Traverse Advisory, but cost would be quite a bit higher (perhaps £2.5k-3k plus the normal costs). The process would be a bit different (more bespoke, less template based) to MVLO's, but in terms of risk it's the same legal bod responsible so he gets my endorsement for integrity/reliability etc.

Otherwise, pains me to say this...but have you had a look at some of MVLO's direct competitors? Perhaps one of the "cheap and cheerful" online brigade may be a bit more flexible about multiple shareholders. If I name them here I'll come out in a nasty rash...but Google "MVL" and you'll see a fair few other online firms. Obviously check their criteria, some may have the same restrictions we have, others may be more flexible.

[Demo]

Sorry it's not one MVL Online can do. The licensed IP behind MVLO would no doubt be able to do it from his mainstream practice Traverse Advisory, but cost would be quite a bit higher (perhaps £2.5k-3k plus the normal costs). The process would be a bit different (more bespoke, less template based) to MVLO's, but in terms of risk it's the same legal bod responsible so he gets my endorsement for integrity/reliability etc.

Otherwise, pains me to say this...but have you had a look at some of MVLO's direct competitors? Perhaps one of the "cheap and cheerful" online brigade may be a bit more flexible about multiple shareholders. If I name them here I'll come out in a nasty rash...but Google "MVL" and you'll see a fair few other online firms. Obviously check their criteria, some may have the same restrictions we have, others may be more flexible.

I do have David's contact details, courtesy of Daniela, so I will drop him an email. Out of interest, what makes 4 shareholders more complicated than 2 if the only asset is cash?

I have been looking at a number of insolvency companies but there is little feedback to be had. A recommendation is always good to have, even if it's on an internet forum.

Thanks to the others who have replied.

[Maslins]

Out of interest, what makes 4 shareholders more complicated than 2 if the only asset is cash?

Well, it's twice as many physical distributions (payments) to make, more people to list on multiple documents, more people to get to sign bits, more people to potentially disagree. More work and more potential for things to go wrong. If we catered to 4 shareholder companies, why not 20 shareholder companies? Could also put the same logic on why can't we deal with cases with stock, debtors, liabilities? To offer a simple, affordable "one price" offering we had to restrict the situations we cater to to just the simplest.

I appreciate there could easily be the counter question "well, why 2, why not just do 1 shareholder companies...surely that would be easier?". Well, yes it would. However there are a lot of jointly owned companies, typically spouses. Being able to cater to 1-2 shareholder companies rather than just 1 shareholder probably doubles our market, so we felt it was worth it to be flexible to them despite it adding complications our end. Expanding from 1-2 to 4 wouldn't have anywhere near the same positive impact.