They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
We have operated under a base set of values for a considerable amount of time, it is these that many comment on when they speak of the sort of reputation that we as a Practice have. Amongst these has been a key one that we have always referred to as the “Preservation of Stakeholder Value”.
So what do we mean by this? It stems from being a fundamental mindset on how we approach the various matters we deal with. It will impact each matter in both numerous and various ways, from how you approach trade-on’s, the preparation work that is done before accepting an appointment and the fact that you seek to settle something from the start rather than go straight to litigation. All of these things can have a significant impact on how a matter runs and the costs incurred, which in turn, sets the scene for the amount that may be available ultimately to creditors, that is, it represents the value that has been preserved.
It continues on to even wider aspects though, things such as are two appointments really necessary? Does someone need to antagonise either directors or suppliers or creditors to a point that resolution of almost any point requires two or three times the effort than it should? There’s actually a significant legal case on this potential point that was all the rage in the latter part of last year! You can also move onto areas of legislative stupidity where you work to the rules incurring increasing levels of costs, but now is not the time for that. These are all artful ways that an appointee can go about legitimately increasing their costs without necessarily being seen to be the actual cause of the increase in costs
Don’t get me wrong there are times when stern action is necessary, but I can also assure you it’s not every time. So it’s with some genuine pleasure that I read insolvency related articles in the business press recently where members of other firms have finally caught up with the phrase and are using it. The real question is do they truly believe it, and therefore enact it, or is it merely the marking puff of the day that they must profess so as to be seen as true players in the current market?
Only time will tell. In the interim, we’ll just bask in the broader use of one of our essential strategies.