Tag Archives: HM Government

David Parker, the business manager of UB40 and a qualified tax accountant, gave a disqualification undertaking to the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy on 15 June 2017, four days into a disqualification trial.

On the same date, Earl Acton Falconer, UB40’s bass player also gave a disqualification undertaking to the Secretary of State, which prevents him from managing or controlling a company without leave of the Court until 5 July 2021.

Lanval Reginald Storrod who was also connected with the band gave a disqualification undertaking to the Secretary of State, which prevents him from managing or controlling a company without leave of the Court until 5 July 2021. The undertaking prevents him from managing or controlling a company without leave of the Court until 5 July 2028.

The voluntary undertakings were given during a trial that commenced on 12 June 2017, in which a number of witnesses gave evidence, including UB40’s Terence ‘Astro’ Wilson and his wife Dawn Wilson.

The misconduct accepted by David Parker, was that he breached his fiduciary duty as a director of Reflex Recordings Ltd (Reflex) by deliberately and knowingly causing the dissipation of £252,980 of company assets between 9 December 2013 and 18 December 2013, without making due provision for subrogated rights and/or claims of at least two creditors. The dissipation was at a time when Reflex was insolvent and Mr Parker knew about the subrogated rights and/or claims of at least two creditors.

The misconduct accepted by Mr Falconer and Mr Storrod, was that each breached their fiduciary duties as directors of Reflex by abrogating their duties resulting in or, in the alternative, by allowing, the dissipation of £252,980 of company assets between 9 December 2013 and 18 December 2013, without making due provision for subrogated rights and/or claims of at least two creditors. The dissipation was at a time when Reflex was insolvent and they knew, or ought to have known about the subrogated rights and/or claims of at least two creditors.

Reflex’s assets consisted of the music catalogues of UB40, which were charged to a bank. The company conducted business in regard to the affairs of UB40 including receiving royalties in connection with the catalogues. On 18 December 2013 Reflex entered administration following the appointment of administrator by the Court.

Susan MacLeod, Chief Investigator, Insolvent Investigations Midlands & West at the Insolvency Service, said:

In investigating insolvent companies, the Insolvency Service always looks very closely at individuals who demonstrate a disregard for creditors and appropriate action is taken where wrongdoing is uncovered.

Notes to editors

Reflex Recordings Ltd (company registration number: 05972216) was incorporated on 19 October 2006 with its registered office at C/O Parkers, Corner Chambers 590a Kingsbury Road Birmingham B24 9ND. David Parker and Lanval Storrod were appointed directors on 19 October 2006. Earl Falconer was appointed as a director on 01 July 2008.

Subrogation occurs in property/casualty insurance when a company pays one of its insureds’ for damages, then makes its own claim against others who may have caused the loss, insured the loss, or contributed to it.

David Parker’s 11 year disqualification undertaking, Earl Falconer’s 4 year disqualification undertaking and Lanval Storrod’s 4 year disqualification undertaking were all signed on behalf of the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy on 15 June 2017, each will be effective from 6th July 2017.

The matter of unfitness, which David Parker did not dispute in the disqualification undertaking, was that he breached his fiduciary duty as a director of Reflex Recordings Ltd (Reflex) by deliberately and knowingly causing the dissipation of £252,980 of company assets between 9 December 2013 and 18 December 2013, without making due provision for subrogated rights and/or claims of at least two creditors. The dissipation was at a time when Reflex was insolvent and Mr Parker knew about the subrogated rights and/or claims of at least two creditors.

• the bank registered a charge against Reflex on 06 October 2008. Personal guarantees were also given by six of Reflex’s directors at that time
• Reflex filed three abbreviated accounts at Companies House, showing it was balance sheet insolvent, with net liabilities, for the years ending 31 March 2009, 2010 and 2011. On 13 January 2011 a bank demanded repayment of £1,915,192 from Reflex for a loan obtained in 2008
• Reflex made a partial payment to the bank in February 2012. The bank subsequently enforced three of the personal guarantees and sold these properties to reduce further the demand against Reflex. As a consequence these parties replaced the bank as creditors in Reflex and were owed at least £320,150
• on 2 July 2013 an email was sent to Reflex’s solicitors and one of Reflex’s directors was copied into it. This email advised them of the subrogated rights and/or claims of at least two creditors
• on 6 December 2013 Reflex sold its final asset and settled the bank’s charge against it in full. On 09 December 2013, Reflex received surplus funds of £330,337
• on 9 December 2013 a freezing order was obtained against Reflex and it was served on the company on 10 December 2013
• between 09 December 2013 and 10 December 2013 Reflex dissipated £252,980. These payments were made against invoices dated 04 December 2013 and 05 December 2013 and each invoice was paid in full
• of this sum, £19,980 was paid to the two creditors with subrogated rights and/or claims. This reduced their subrogated rights and/or claims to £300,170, which was outstanding at the date of Administration
• by the date of Administration Reflex sole asset was £37,460 cash

The matters of unfitness, which Earl Falconer and Lanval Storrod did not dispute in their Disqualification Undertakings, were they breached their fiduciary duties as directors of Reflex by abrogating their duties resulting in or, in the alternative, by allowing, the dissipation of £252,980 of company assets between 09 December 2013 and 18 December 2013, without making due provision for subrogated rights and/or claims of at least two creditors. The dissipation was at a time when Reflex was insolvent and they knew, or ought to have known about the subrogated rights and/or claims of at least two creditors.

• the bank registered a charge against Reflex on 06 October 2008. Personal guarantees were also given by six of Reflex’s directors at that time
• Reflex filed three abbreviated accounts at Companies House, showing it was balance sheet insolvent, with net liabilities, for the years ending 31 March 2009, 2010 and 2011. On 13 January 2011 a bank demanded repayment of £1,915,192 from Reflex for a loan obtained in 2008
• Reflex made a partial payment to the bank in February 2012. The bank subsequently enforced three of the personal guarantees and sold these properties to reduce further the demand against Reflex. As a consequence these parties replaced the bank as creditors in Reflex and were owed at least £320,150
• on 2 July 2013 an email was sent to Reflex’s solicitors and one of Reflex’s directors was copied into it. This email advised them of the subrogated rights and/or claims of at least two creditors
• on 6 December 2013 Reflex sold its final asset and settled the bank’s charge against it in full. On 09 December 2013, Reflex received surplus funds of £330,337
• on 9 December 2013 a freezing order was obtained against Reflex and it was served on the company on 10 December 2013
• between 09 December 2013 and 10 December 2013 Reflex dissipated £252,980. These payments were made against invoices dated 04 December 2013 and 05 December 2013 and each invoice was paid in full
• of this sum, £19,980 was paid to the two creditors with subrogated rights and/or claims. This reduced their subrogated rights and/or claims to £300,170, which was outstanding at the date of Administration
• by the date of Administration Reflex sole asset was £37,460 cash

David Parker’s date of birth is 27 March 1962 and he is of Birmingham.

Earl Falconer’s date of birth is 23 January 1959 and he is also of Birmingham.

Lanval Storrod date of birth is 8 April 1959 and he is of Bromsgrove, Worcestershire.

A disqualification order has the effect that without specific permission of a court, a person with a disqualification cannot:

• act as a director of a company
• take part, directly or indirectly, in the promotion, formation or management of a company or limited liability partnership
• be a receiver of a company’s property

Disqualification undertakings are the administrative equivalent of a disqualification order but do not involve court proceedings. Persons subject to a disqualification order are bound by a range of other restrictions.

The Insolvency Service, an executive agency sponsored by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), administers the insolvency regime, and aims to deliver and promote a range of investigation and enforcement activities both civil and criminal in nature, to support fair and open markets. We do this by effectively enforcing the statutory company and insolvency regimes, maintaining public confidence in those regimes and reducing the harm caused to victims of fraudulent activity and to the business community, including dealing with the disqualification of directors in corporate failures. Further information about the work of the Insolvency Service, and how to complain about financial misconduct, is available.

BEIS’ mission is to build a dynamic and competitive UK economy that works for all, in particular by creating the conditions for business success and promoting an open global economy. The Criminal Investigations and Prosecutions team contributes to this aim by taking action to deter fraud and to regulate the market. They investigate and prosecute a range of offences, primarily relating to personal or company insolvencies.

Media enquiries for this press release – 020 7674 6910 or 020 7596 6187

You can also follow the Insolvency Service on: * Twitter * LinkedIn * YouTube

read more

My first visit to Morocco was in 1998. I liked the country so much that I came back again in 2000. Those two visits left me with a tremendously positive impression of a country rich in history, culture and diversity. Little did I think that I would be back here nearly 20 years after my first visit as the British Ambassador.

It is a huge honour and a privilege to act as the representative of the UK in Morocco. I am delighted to be here now and to arrive during Ramadan is an additional blessing. Over the years, I have enjoyed Ramadan in Jordan, Kuwait and Egypt and I am looking forward to sharing it in Morocco too, as well as to learning more about Morocco during my time here. My family (who are not yet with me in Rabat) are also very excited to be moving to Morocco and are looking forward to living and learning here.

That the Morocco/UK relationship is a strong and enduring partnership, is clearly demonstrated by the fact that it is already more than 800 years old. As British Ambassador, I will be following in the footsteps of innumerable predecessors, dating back to the formal establishment of diplomatic relations when Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth I sent her Ambassadors to the Court of Morocco’s Saadi Sultanate. In exchange, Sultan Ahmed al-Mansour sent his Principal Secretary, Abd el-Ouahed Ben Massaoud as Moroccan Ambassador to the Court of Queen Elizabeth. This appointment has had a lasting impact on British culture – Abd el-Ouahed Ben Massaoud is reputed to have been the inspiration for Shakespeare’s hero, Othello. Queen Elizabeth I spoke of Morocco in very warm terms – “The great friendship and cooperation that exists between our Crowns” – a warmth and closeness between the monarchies of both our countries that endures to this day.

That Royal relationship is replicated across our societies – each year more than 600,000 British tourists visit Morocco, drawn by the history, culture, geography, climate and most importantly by the warmth and generous hospitality of the people of Morocco. One of my ambitions for my time here in Morocco is to encourage even more British tourists to visit and have the chance to explore and get to know this unique Kingdom and its people.

The UK and Morocco also enjoy close commercial ties, with bilateral trade worth more than $2 billion each year. The UK is among the top six foreign investors to Morocco. Another of my priorities is to foster an ever closer partnership between Moroccan companies and their British counterparts to further strengthen these commercial ties and increase bilateral trade through mutual support in niche commercial areas.

One of those niche areas is renewable energy, where there are some very exciting opportunities. Morocco aims to increase its renewable electricity generation to 52% of energy demand and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 32% by 2030. These goals clearly demonstrate Morocco’s ambition and drive in this sector and the potential to become a global leader in the sustainable and renewable energy sector. In this context, the city of Ouarzazate, renowned as the location for the filming of Lawrence of Arabia, is pioneering a revolutionary solar power station, one of the largest of its kind in the world. The UK also has substantial experience in renewable energy and in regulating energy markets. Morocco also needs gas for its power stations and British companies are well-placed to work with Morocco to meet this need.

UK diplomatic policy in North Africa is focused on building a secure, peaceful and prosperous region, underpinned by shared values of human rights and democracy. This policy aim is supported by a number of projects in which Morocco is a key partner. For example, earlier this year the Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD) and the House of Councillors of the Moroccan Parliament signed a Memorandum of Understanding whose objective is to support the Parliament in upholding human rights, share public policy evaluation experiences and help Morocco’s Parliamentary Research Centre build its capacity.

Another area of shared interest is education and academia. I am looking forward to working with Morocco on building deeper academic and educational links between our two countries. The UK is home to some of the best universities in the world and we are proud to share them with Morocco’s future leaders through our Chevening Programme, through which Moroccan students have the opportunity to study at Universities all over the UK. So far, over 160 talented Moroccans have benefitted from this great initiative and I hope very much to increase that number during my time as Ambassador.

The relationship between our two countries today is in many respects stronger now than it has ever been and I look forward to building on this relationship to continue to develop an even closer partnership of equals across the different sectors which bind Morocco and the UK so closely together.

I would like to close by taking this opportunity to wish you a happy, blessed and above all peaceful end of Ramadan and a happy Eid.

read more

The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy has today (30 June 2017) announced the appointment of 2 new members to the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas) Council.

Acas is an independent non-departmental public body and the Acas Council is the overarching governance body for Acas. The Council consists of 12 members, including the Chair, and membership is drawn from employer, trade union and independent backgrounds.

Ben Summerskill joins the Council as an independent member and Christina McAnea as an employee representative.

Sir Brendan Barber, Acas chair, said:

I am delighted to welcome Ben Summerskill and Christina McAnea to the Acas Council. Their diverse knowledge and experience within employment relations will be invaluable in our role as independent, impartial and trusted workplace experts.

The Council sets out Acas’ strategic direction, policies and priorities. I look forward to working with Ben and Christina to maintain our reputation as Britain’s leading advisory service on workplace relations.

Ben Summerskill

Ben Summerskill is the director of the Criminal Justice Alliance, a coalition of 120 organisations committed to improving the criminal justice system. Previously he was chief executive at Stonewall from 2003 to 2014 , which campaigns for the equality of lesbian, gay and bisexual people across Britain. Before that Ben Summerskill worked as a journalist at titles including The Observer, Express and London Evening Standard.

Christina McAnea

Christina McAnea is Unison’s National Secretary for Health and is the lead negotiator on behalf of NHS workers across the UK. Christina has held various positions at the union since 1987, including Head of Education. Before that she worked at the GMB trade union.

Role of Acas

Acas aims to improve organisations and working life through better employment relations. It provides 3 main services:

• advice on workplace matters through a helpline which received 943,500 calls in 2015 to 2016 and a website with around 10 million visitors annually
• conciliation services which help resolve disputes between employers and individual employees or groups of employees – last year Acas received 92,172 notifications of individual disputes and was involved in 970 collective disputes
• tailored training and advice for individual organisations – in 2015 to 2016, Acas trained over 34,000 delegates

Acas is independent of ministers, but is one of the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy’s key partners. Acas’ services contribute to delivering a competitive, efficient and effective labour market which supports economic growth and employment.

read more

At a hearing in the Companies Court on 8 June both IGL Labs UK Limited (IGL) and Diffraction Diamonds DMCC (Diffraction) were wound up in the public interest.

The petition to wind up IGL was issued following confidential enquiries into Diffraction carried out by Company Investigations, part of the Insolvency Service.

IGL, a company based near Hatton Garden in London, provided certificates to Diffraction, a company based at Jumeirah Lake Towers in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, that was at the centre of a scheme to sell fancy coloured diamonds to investors, via numerous broker companies based in the United Kingdom.

Diffraction provided an online trading platform to numerous UK-based broker companies who sold the diamonds to members of the public at mark ups so high that investors were unlikely to obtain any return on their investment . The company also offered and controlled the storage of investor’s diamonds in a storage fault in Dubai.

Diffraction was a continuation of part of the business of Diffraction Limited (DIL), a UK company wound up in the public interest on 4 June 2014. DIL was involved in the sale of carbon credits and also diamonds as investments to members of the public. Diffraction took over custody of diamonds stored, on behalf of investors, by DIL in a bonded warehouse in Geneva and moved them to a storage facility in Dubai without the knowledge, or agreement of the investors.

Diffraction was ordered into liquidation following a petition presented by the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to wind up the company on grounds of lack of commercial probity and failure to co-operate with the investigation.

IGL’s website claims:

People from all over the world send their diamonds to the IGL Laboratory for grading and analysis. Our clients put their business in our hands and their trust in our expertise.

However; despite that and certain misleading statements on the certificates issued by IGL, the company never physically saw the diamonds it was appraising and the estimated retail valuations provided by IGL were based on the simple calculation, of the price paid by the investors plus 20%.

The Court heard that in some cases IGL enhanced the characteristics of diamonds, it had never seen, by one to two grades over and above the grading provided by the original and authentic Gemological Institute of America certificates that the diamonds originally came with.

The IGL certificates were used by Diffraction’s client broker companies to reassure investors that the diamonds they had purchased were worth at least what they had paid for them.

Diffraction itself was a continuation of, part of, the business of DIL, a UK company wound up in the public interest on 4 June 2014 that was involved in the sale of both fancy coloured diamonds and carbon credits as investments to members of the public.

The director of Diffraction, David Ramsey, was also a former director of DIL. As a result of action taken by the Insolvency Service in respect of his conduct in DIL, on 10 May 2017, Mr Ramsey signed a disqualification undertaking; preventing him form being involved in the promotion, formation, or management of a limited company for a period of 14 years.

The Court found that there was no doubt that Diffraction played a central and essential role in the sale of fancy coloured diamonds, by brokers, to the public as investments and profited from such arrangements and that the company was aware of the mark-up applied by brokers as it was an integral feature of its trading platform.

The Court heard testimony from expert witnesses for the Secretary of State and for Diffraction. Both experts agreed that the diamond transactions carried out at retail prices, or above, would not be suitable for investment purposes because of the mark ups applied in retail transactions. Ms Rosamund Clayton, the expert witness for the Secretary of State, explained in her evidence that the price paid by members of the public who bought the diamonds through brokers using Diffraction’s trading platform was far too high for the purposes of investment and that the mark ups on the wholesale price of the diamonds, of between 220% and 745%, made it unrealistic to expect any return on the investment.

The director of IGL, Noam Lenzini told the Court that although IGL never physically inspected the fancy coloured diamonds prior to issuing its valuation certificate; it was nevertheless possible to provide a reliable valuation by reference to the diamond grading report, or certificate issued by the Gemological Institute of America.

Ms Clayton refuted Mr Lenzini’s claims that it possible to properly value the diamonds without examining them, particularly given that in the case of fancy coloured diamonds colour is all important and she concluded that the values on the IGL certificates did not constitute a professional valuation correctly researched and considered. The Court found Ms Clayton’s evidence on that point “entirely convincing”.

The Court noted that;

• the IGL certificates, whilst stating that they were based on a Gemological Institute of America report, also stated “We have taken the utmost effort to examine and grade your diamond objectively using professional gemmological terminology and equipment” which suggested a detailed physical examination had taken place
• IGL was deliberately upgrading the colour and clarity of FCDs one or two grades up from the Gemological Institute of America reports upon which the valuation was ostensibly based
• that correspondence showed that IGL was prepared to change valuations substantially on request of the broker and Diffraction. In one case IGL changed its original valuation from £16,000 to £31,050 at the request of Diffraction who made the request on behalf of the broker

In the Judgement handed down Mr Philip Marshall QC, sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court stated:

Having regard to the evidence as a whole, in my judgment the IGL certificates were not genuine valuations, but are indeed properly classified as contrived. They were simply designed to support a price at which fancy coloured diamonds had been sold to investors and to provide false reassurance that the price paid had an independent professional valuation to support it.

Although the IGL certificates were not provided prior to purchase by investors the fact that they would be supplied featured as part of the sales process that Diffraction had set up and, in some instances, the supply of such certificates does appear to have influenced some investors when making further purchases. The production of the certificates involved the conduct of business with a complete lack of probity.

After examining the evidence the Court concluded that the certificates provided by IGL were misleading and the valuations contrived.

Diffraction argued that the company was registered in Dubai and the substantive trading of the company was not within the jurisdiction of a UK court. Further, should it be held that the company had sufficient connection with the jurisdiction, as provided by Section 453 of the Companies Act 1985, the company did not, at the date of the hearing, have such connections and as such should not be deemed to fall within the jurisdiction of the Court.

The Court, rejecting Diffraction’s argument, accepted the Secretary of State’s position that Diffraction had a real and sufficient connection with the jurisdiction of the Courts of England & Wales in so far as, among other matters:

• the administration of Diffraction’s business has been operated from the United Kingdom
• Diffraction has supplied fancy coloured diamonds for marketing and sale by the Broker Companies to members of the public in the United Kingdom
• Diffraction has supplied services to Broker Companies registered in England and Wales
• Diffraction stored fancy coloured diamonds on behalf of investors who are based in the United Kingdom

Mr Philip Marshall QC sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court in his judgement stated that:

Mr Ramsey must have known perfectly well that investors would almost inevitably suffer loss through the transactions that Diffraction was facilitating.

Documents [have] been deliberately withheld in order to obstruct the enquiries of the investigators.

The matters relied on by the Secretary of State do provide a substantial connection with the United Kingdom and are ample to found jurisdiction.

Welcoming the Court’s winding up decision David Hill, Company Investigations Supervisor, said:

The Insolvency Service will continue to investigate and work with partners to bring to a halt the activities of companies harming or about to harm the public, including linked, or associated, companies who help facilitate such objectionable trading.

This case also shows that Secretary of State will seek to take action against companies that trade in the UK against the public interest, even where the companies purport to be based abroad.

Notes to Editors:

IGL Labs UK Ltd (Company number 08952478) was incorporated on 21 March 2014.

The registered office of the company is at 14, Grenville Street, London, EC1N 8SB.

The sole director of IGL throughout is shown to have been Noam Lenzini. No company secretary is shown to have been appointed.

Mr Lenzini is shown to be a 20% shareholder in the company with twenty £1 ordinary shares. The remaining 80% shareholder is shown to be Mr Israel Or with eighty £1 ordinary shares.

Abbreviated unaudited accounts for the year ending 31 March 2015 report total assets of £22,258; creditors of £17,338 and a loss for the year of £6,619. Accounts made up to 31 March 2016 were due to be filed by 31 December 2016 and are overdue.

IGL is not to be confused with IGI (the International Gemological Institute) a long established business in the diamond industry and similar to the Gemological Institute of America.

The petition to wind up IGL in the public interest was presented in the High Court on 04 December 2015.

The public interest grounds for winding up the company was a lack of commercial probity – objectionable business model.

Diffraction Diamonds DMCC was incorporated on 21 April 2013.

Diffraction is registered in the Dubai Multi Commodities Centre (DMCC), Free Zone, Dubai, United Arab Emirates and is a member of the DMCC and operates under trade licence no. DMCC-32987 issued by the DMCC Authority, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

The registered office of the company is at Unit No. 3801, Jumeirah Business Center 1, Plot No. G2 Jumeirah Lakes Towers, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

The administration of the company in the United Kingdom was carried out c/o ITransact Limited, 26A Russell Court, Cambridge, CB2 1HW.

The sole director of the Diffraction throughout is shown to have been David Ramsey.

Related petitions by the Secretary of State were issued on 4 December 2015 against Diffraction Diamonds DMCC, CDX Worldwide Limited (Co. No. 08239679) and Heritage FA Limited (Co. No. 08499859).

A winding up order was made against Diffraction Diamonds DMCC on 8 June 2017.

A winding up order was made against CDX Worldwide Limited, at an uncontested hearing on 9 March 2016.

A winding up order was made against Heritage FA Limited at an uncontested hearing on 9 March 2016.

Company Investigations, part of the Insolvency Service, uses powers under the Companies Act 1985 to conduct confidential fact-finding investigations into the activities of live limited companies in the UK on behalf of the Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS). Further information about live company investigations is available

The Insolvency Service, an executive agency sponsored by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), administers the insolvency regime, and aims to deliver and promote a range of investigation and enforcement activities both civil and criminal in nature, to support fair and open markets. We do this by effectively enforcing the statutory company and insolvency regimes, maintaining public confidence in those regimes and reducing the harm caused to victims of fraudulent activity and to the business community, including dealing with the disqualification of directors in corporate failures. Further information about the work of the Insolvency Service, and how to complain about financial misconduct, is available.

BEIS’ mission is to build a dynamic and competitive UK economy that works for all, in particular by creating the conditions for business success and promoting an open global economy. The Criminal Investigations and Prosecutions team contributes to this aim by taking action to deter fraud and to regulate the market. They investigate and prosecute a range of offences, primarily relating to personal or company insolvencies.

By virtue of the appointment of the Official Receiver all public enquiries concerning the affairs of the company should be made to: The Official Receiver, Public Interest Unit, 4 Abbey Orchard Street, London, SW1P 2HT. Telephone: 0207 637 1110 Email: piu.or@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk.

Media enquiries for this press release – 020 7596 6187

[Contact: 2691]

You can also follow the Insolvency Service on:

read more

She replaces Brian Landers who served as chairman between August 2012 and March 2017. Companies House incorporates and dissolves limited companies, registers the information companies are legally required to supply and makes that information available… read more