Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

@Anonymous
Commented on: 8 March 2018 14:23 GMT:

There used to be a rule of thumb that if you could show you had tried to comply with the spirit of the SPCR then that was established as enough and I can't help but wonder if there has been the minimum of compliance here which is enough. There has been borrowing to keep a firm afloat and such borrowing is now after The LSA1997 quite permissable. The fact is thia would not have happened and the solicitors name and profession dragged into the mud. The fact is that all tat appears to have happened us borrowing against the terms of the covenant due to an outside financial services interest in a firm (the arrangement fee of 50%).

This will run and run and I understand this case is not the only one coming up before the SDT

Your details

Cancel