BHS

Debate between Jonathan Djanogly and Anna Soubry

Monday 6th June 2016 Commons Chamber

[Anna Soubry]

I pay tribute to the great work that the hon. Gentleman and indeed his BIS Committee do. I know that he is already conducting—I think, successfully—an inquiry into the working practices of one business, and he has successfully acquired attendance at the Select Committee. He raises important points, and I will write to him on the specific questions he raises, because I will need to make further inquiries about them. I reiterate that we must await the outcome of full investigations, so that we know all the facts, but he can be absolutely sure that we take these matters extremely seriously and that we will not have the good name of British businesses besmirched by the wrongdoings of others.

[Mr Jonathan Djanogly (Huntingdon) (Con)]

While managers and owners can and should be concerned about, and indeed be answerable for solvency, viability, governance and employee wellbeing in their own companies, does the Minister agree that there are serious legal complexities involved in dictating that owners must assess the viability and character of purchasers or be responsible for purchasers’ business conduct post-sale?

[Anna Soubry]

I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s well-informed contribution, as his contributions always are. He makes some very good points. I am sorry to bang on about this, but it is very important to say that investigations have, quite properly, been started, will continue and will reach conclusions and that if there are any allegations of wrongdoing, we will be absolutely firm in our view that justice will be done.

Draft Companies (Address of Registered Office) Regulations 2016 Draft Registrar of Companies and Applications for Striking Off (Amendment) Regulations 2016

Debate between Jonathan Djanogly and Anna Soubry

Thursday 17th March 2016 General Committees

[Anna Soubry]

We have had some very good and interesting questions. I think I will be able to respond—[Interruption.] Ooh, as if by magic! I may have to write to hon. Members in relation to some of their questions.

Every company must have a registered office to which all communications and notices may be addressed. A company might provide an address that turns out, effectively, to be a bogus one. We have a really good set of regulations to deal with that. I was really struck—and I did not know this until I looked through my notes—that Companies House alone receives 100 complaints a month about the unauthorised use of addresses. That is an astonishingly high number of complaints. There is a real problem out there.

On the basis that companies must provide a registered address, if a company provides one that is then found to be bogus, it is already breaching the law and action can be taken. I suggest to the hon. Member for Cardiff West that there are those powers, because a process will be triggered. Clearly the company does not have a registered address if a complaint has been made that a false address has been used. The company is therefore in breach of existing law.

[Mr Djanogly]

My right hon. Friend mentioned companies giving a bogus address. What happens if individuals hijack a company and give a bogus address?

[Anna Soubry]

I do not know the answer to that question, but I might be able to answer it in a few moments. If not, I shall write to my hon. Friend.

In response to my hon. Friend the Member for Totnes, the registrar is now required to write to every newly appointed director, which will give them the opportunity to object if they have been falsely appointed. I hope that that deals with her question.

Returning to my hon. Friend the Member for Huntingdon, the regulations do not extend to shadow directors. They apply only to directors registered as such at Companies House.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Djanogly]

The other aspect is alternate directors, who have a duty to register. I would have thought that the regulations should apply to them. Do they?

[Anna Soubry]

At the moment, I do not know the answer to that. I will write to my hon. Friend. Is it not excellent that we have Members on the Back Benches who know what they are talking about? They have huge experience of these things. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] My hon. Friend is a very good example of the wealth of experience that exists in this place.

By way of magic, I can say that section 1095 of the Companies Act 2006 provides a way for the registrar to remove factually inaccurate or forged information or material deriving

“from anything invalid or ineffective or that was done without the authority of the company”.

That may be helpful in answering my hon. Friend’s excellent questions.

I am pleased that the regulations are not contentious. Some important and interesting points have been raised, and I will deal with them all by way of letter.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Jonathan Djanogly and Anna Soubry

Tuesday 29th March 2011 Commons Chamber

[Anna Soubry (Broxtowe) (Con)]

19. What progress has been made on proposed changes to the payment of fees to criminal law barristers through the Legal Services Commission.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Jonathan Djanogly)]

The processing, validation and payment of claims under the advocates graduated fees scheme is being transferred from Her Majesty’s Courts Service to the Legal Services Commission. The transfer is taking place on a phased basis between 7 February and 18 April of this year.

[Anna Soubry]

I know that it is not proper to talk about lawyers and fees in the same sentence, but this is an overly bureaucratic system that does not pay out, as may be familiar to many Members of this House. There are criminal barristers who have not received fees for many, many months after they have completed their work. Does the Minister agree that that is plain unfair?

[Mr Djanogly]

If my hon. Friend would like to contact me with specifics, I would happily take them up. However, the responsibility for processing claims began to be passed to the LSC only on 7 February, so delays of six months are impossible. Properly completed claims are currently being processed within two weeks.