Skip to content
Consultation on changes to SIP 2 – Questions
- Statement of Insolvency Practice 2 - Investigations by Office Holders in administrations and insolvent liquidations and the submission of conduct reports by Office Holders
1.
Name of individual providing a response:
2.
Firm name (if applicable):
3.
Do you think the revised SIP identifies all relevant principles and key compliance standards?
Yes
No
Comment (if required)
4.
Is adding analysis to the SIP’s title and content a useful improvement to the Standard?
Yes
No
Comment (if required)
5.
Does the SIP clearly reflect the intended purpose described below, or is further specificity needed?
The headline amendment to SIP2 is the introduction of specific reference to a requirement for ‘Analysis’ within in the title and the body of the SIP. The intention behind the introduction was to ensure that it was explicit, when deemed necessary (i.e., when proportionate, economic etc.) that the SIP required an interrogation of information/data (analysis) rather than instead a gathering in, and non-interrogation, of that data.
Furthermore, the inclusion of analysis within the SIP to be introduced in a non-specific/non-instructive manner. This approach has been favoured here both to ensure that the SIP is not quickly outdated in the face of the continuing developments in investigative and analytical tools available to the sector (AI etc.) and to ensure that the analysis requirements remain ones which are ultimately dependent on the specifics of the individual cases (proportionality, economic viability etc.).
The intended purpose is clear.
Further specificity is required.
Please provide details of what further specificity you would like to see within the SIP.
6.
Does the continued reference to “books and records (in whatever form)” within SIP2 adequately encompass the full range of a company’s records, including wider operational and business information such as electronic communications (including emails and messaging applications), contractual documentation, and other non-financial records?
Yes
No
7.
If you believe that it does not continue to be the appropriate wording please confirm;
(i) the reasoning behind your having reached that conclusion, and
(ii) your thoughts on a more adequate wording to cover the full range of a company's records.
8.
Does the proposed amended SIP sufficiently address any concerns held relating to the key areas of the SIP including investigation, analysis and reporting?
Yes
No
Comment (if required)
9.
We would welcome any feedback on the draft and revisions generally
10.
It may be useful to contact you to discuss your comments. Would you be willing to be contacted?
Yes
No
11.
Please provide contact number.
12.
Please provide a contact email address
Thank you for sharing your views.
IPA
