The meeting begins with a stack of unpaid invoices, a worried finance director and a question nobody wants to ask aloud: can this company still be saved?
An Insolvency Practitioner sits across the table, listening while the directors explain what happened. A major customer has disappeared. Tax arrears are mounting. The bank wants answers. The practitioner may eventually recommend administration, liquidation, a Company Voluntary Arrangement or another formal procedure, but the quality of that advice will depend heavily on who is giving it.
Hiring a corporate Insolvency Practitioner is not simply a matter of choosing the first firm that appears in a search result. The person you appoint may control company assets, deal with creditors, investigate directors’ conduct and make decisions that affect employees, suppliers and shareholders. A polished website is not enough.
Start with the licence, not the sales pitch
In the UK, only a licensed Insolvency Practitioner can act as a liquidator, administrator, receiver or supervisor of a Company Voluntary Arrangement. That makes authorisation the first check, not an administrative detail to deal with later.
Licences are issued by three professional bodies: the Insolvency Practitioners Association, ICAEW and ICAS. As of 1 January 2025, those bodies recorded 1,504 authorised Insolvency Practitioners in total: 678 authorised by the IPA, 748 by ICAEW and 77 by ICAS.
Ask the individual who would actually handle the appointment for their licence details and authorising body. Do not rely only on the name of the firm. A company may employ accountants, lawyers, restructuring advisers and case administrators, but the formal insolvency appointment must be taken by a suitably licensed practitioner.
You can check a candidate through the official Insolvency Practitioner search facility using their name, firm, town or postcode. The database is not a complete directory of every Insolvency Practitioner in the UK, so an unsuccessful search should prompt a direct question rather than an immediate accusation. Ask the practitioner to explain their authorisation and confirm which licensed person would be appointed.
A second safeguard also matters before the appointment is made. The practitioner must have the required security bonding in place. This insurance protects against fraud or dishonest conduct and is part of the framework surrounding formal insolvency work. A reputable practitioner should be able to explain how the bond applies to the proposed appointment without becoming evasive or irritated.
Choose experience that matches the company’s crisis
“Corporate insolvency” covers very different situations. A small family-owned manufacturer with machinery, leases and twenty employees does not present the same problems as a software company whose value lies in contracts, code and customer relationships. A property business, a construction contractor and a regulated professional firm each bring their own risks.
Ask how many cases similar to yours the practitioner has handled recently. The useful question is not whether the firm has existed for decades. It is whether the person in front of you understands the company’s particular assets, creditors and trading pressures.
A suitable practitioner should be able to discuss the likely routes in plain English. Administration may be considered where the business or its assets could be preserved or sold. Liquidation may be appropriate where there is no realistic rescue route. A CVA may give a viable company time to reach an agreement with creditors, but it requires a credible proposal and a business capable of meeting its commitments. Receivership has its own legal and commercial context, often connected with secured lending.
You are not looking for a guaranteed outcome. No responsible practitioner can promise that every company will be rescued or that creditors will receive a particular return. Be wary of anyone who speaks with certainty before reviewing management accounts, bank statements, creditor information, tax liabilities, contracts and details of company assets.
The first conversation should also reveal how quickly the practitioner gets to the substance. Do they ask about payroll, asset finance, personal guarantees, stock, threatened legal action and recent payments to connected parties? Do they want to understand why the company became insolvent, or are they rushing straight to a package with a fixed price?
I would pay close attention to the questions they ask before paying attention to the furniture in the meeting room. Insolvency is too consequential to be managed by presentation alone.
Test the advice before handing over control
Before making an appointment, request a written explanation of the proposed procedure, the practitioner’s role and the immediate steps required from the directors. It should be clear who will make decisions, which powers will change hands and what information must be supplied.
Ask for a breakdown of fees and expenses. Depending on the procedure, fees may be approved by creditors, a committee or another authorised process rather than simply set by the directors. The practical effect is still important: you need to understand how the practitioner expects to be paid, what work is covered and which additional costs may arise.
Ask whether the firm has acted for the company, its directors, major creditors or connected businesses before. A conflict of interest may not make an appointment impossible, but it must be identified and dealt with properly. The practitioner should explain any relevant relationship and how independence will be protected.
References can help, although they should be interpreted carefully. A former director may praise a practitioner for achieving a sale, while a creditor may remember the same case for slow responses or a disputed decision. More revealing than a glowing testimonial is a clear description of how the firm communicates during difficult periods.
Ask who will answer the phone once the appointment is made. Will you deal directly with the licensed practitioner, a manager or a case administrator? How often will updates be provided? What happens if an urgent issue arises outside normal office hours? These are not minor service questions. Communication problems were the most common reason for complaints about Insolvency Practitioners in 2025, accounting for 37% of complaints received.
The practitioner should also explain what directors must and must not do before the appointment. Continuing to trade, selling assets, paying selected creditors, taking on new credit or moving company money can create serious problems if handled improperly. Do not treat informal advice as permission to carry on regardless. Get important instructions in writing.
Look beyond the firm’s brochure
A firm can have an impressive insolvency department and still assign your case to someone with limited experience in the relevant procedure. Find out who will be named in the formal appointment and who will supervise the day-to-day work.
Ask how the practitioner handles investigations into directors’ conduct. A director may feel defensive about this part of the process, but it is not a reason to avoid a practitioner who explains it honestly. The office-holder has duties that go beyond protecting the directors’ preferred outcome. Creditors, employees and the wider insolvency process also matter.
Pay attention to the language used around asset sales and connected parties. If a director, shareholder or relative wants to buy company assets, the process should be transparent, properly valued and carefully documented. Casual assurances such as “we can sort that out later” deserve a second opinion.
You should also be cautious if the practitioner pushes one procedure without explaining alternatives. Advice may eventually favour liquidation, administration or a CVA, but the reasoning should be visible. A serious professional will identify the facts that could change the recommendation and tell you what information is still missing.
Poor communication and inadequate professional care or competence were the two most common complaint themes in 2025. The latter accounted for 26% of complaints. Those figures do not tell you whether a particular practitioner is suitable, but they do highlight two qualities worth testing before the appointment: can this person explain difficult decisions clearly, and do they appear to understand the technical work involved?
Know what happens if the relationship breaks down
Raise concerns directly with the Insolvency Practitioner first and keep a written record of the complaint, the response and any supporting documents. If the issue is not resolved, a professional complaint can generally be made only to the practitioner’s authorising body. Complaints are usually limited to alleged misconduct or poor practice from the previous three years.
In 2025, 966 complaints about Insolvency Practitioners were received, and 166 were referred to professional bodies for further consideration. A complaint does not automatically mean that the practitioner acted improperly, just as a clean disciplinary record cannot guarantee a good working relationship. The figures do show why it is sensible to ask how the firm handles complaints before the crisis becomes a formal appointment.
The strongest candidate will not resent these questions. They will explain their licence, bonding, experience, conflicts, fees, reporting arrangements and complaint process without hiding behind jargon. If the company is already close to collapse, you may not have weeks to compare firms, but you still have time to verify the person who may soon be controlling the company’s future.