Asked by: Preet Kaur Gill (Labour (Co-op) - Birmingham Edgbaston)
Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, whether recognised professional bodies may investigate the propriety of an insolvency practitioner’s decision to assign a claim after ownership of that claim has transferred.
Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
Recognised Professional Bodies (RPBs) can investigate complaints about an insolvency practitioner’s conduct when carrying out their duties where that conduct falls short of professional or ethical standards.
This can include the practitioner’s conduct in deciding to assign a claim notwithstanding that ownership of the claim has subsequently transferred.
The Insolvency Practitioner Complaints Gateway considers whether a complaint raises a disciplinary matter for referral to the relevant RPB. Neither the Gateway nor the RPBs determine commercial or legal disputes, including disputes about ownership of a claim or the validity of its assignment, which are generally matters for the courts.
Asked by: Preet Kaur Gill (Labour (Co-op) - Birmingham Edgbaston)
Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, what assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of safeguards for the transfer and subsequent use of confidential information when insolvency claims arising from related circumstances are assigned to commercial purchasers.
Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Department considers that existing legal and regulatory measures provide appropriate safeguards. Insolvency office holders are qualified and regulated professionals, subject to statutory duties, professional standards, and court oversight.
The Insolvency Act 1986 allows for rights of action to be assigned, and case law supports the transfer of necessary information to pursue the claim.
The transfer of information remains governed by the Data Protection Act 2018 and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Where the office holder considers it necessary, they may make an application to the court for permission before providing confidential information to the assignee.
Asked by: Preet Kaur Gill (Labour (Co-op) - Birmingham Edgbaston)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the Answer of 20 October 2026 to Question 36525, if he will make a comparative assessment of the impact of the difference in treatment between (a) people who settled loan charge liabilities before implementation of the Ray McCann review recommendations with (b) people offered the new settlement opportunity for those with outstanding loan charge liabilities following the Ray McCann review. recommendations.
Answered by James Murray - Financial Secretary to the Treasury and Paymaster General
The independent review's focus was on taking action to help people who do not yet have certainty about their liabilities, or who still owe money, to move on from this matter.
To help bring the matter to a close, the Government is taking the extraordinary step of relieving people of some of their liabilities. The Government has no plans to apply the review's recommendations beyond those with outstanding liabilities who were the focus of the review.
Asked by: Preet Kaur Gill (Labour (Co-op) - Birmingham Edgbaston)
Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, What mechanisms exist for checking whether claims are assigned appropriately in the process of insolvency of companies.
Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
Where a claim belonging to an insolvent company is assigned to another party, the assignee must be able to establish its legal entitlement to pursue that claim. The validity and effect of an assignment are governed by the applicable law, including, where relevant, section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925. This provides requirements for the legal assignment of debts and other choses in action, including written assignment and written notice. Where entitlement is disputed, it can ultimately be determined by the courts. Insolvency practitioners are also subject to professional and regulatory requirements when dealing with assets of an insolvent estate.
Asked by: Preet Kaur Gill (Labour (Co-op) - Birmingham Edgbaston)
Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, what requirements apply to insolvency practitioners to consider information concerning ongoing Insolvency Service investigations before assigning civil claims arising from related circumstances.
Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
There is no general statutory requirement for an insolvency practitioner to check with, or defer to, an ongoing Insolvency Service investigation before assigning a civil claim. Insolvency practitioners are, however, subject to statutory reporting requirements concerning the conduct of directors of insolvent companies, including a requirement to provide relevant new information to the Secretary of State. These obligations continue to apply where the information concerns matters which also give rise to a potential claim.
Asked by: Preet Kaur Gill (Labour (Co-op) - Birmingham Edgbaston)
Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, further to the Answer of 26 October 2026 to Question 36380, what requirements apply to an insolvency practitioner to record and retain their assessment of the evidential basis, available defences and interests of creditors before assigning a claim against a former director.
Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
There is no general requirement for an office-holder to notify a proposed defendant before assigning a claim.
Regulation 13 of the Insolvency Practitioners Regulations 2005 sets out that insolvency practitioners must maintain records sufficient to explain material decisions taken during the administration of a case. These records must be retained for six years after the office-holder’s release.
Following assignment, there is no general statutory duty to provide new information. Any obligations will depend on the terms of the assignment or directions of the Court. Recognised Professional Bodies monitor insolvency practitioners’ compliance with professional obligations.
Asked by: Preet Kaur Gill (Labour (Co-op) - Birmingham Edgbaston)
Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, further to the Answer of 26 October 2026 to Question 36380, what duties remain on an insolvency practitioner after assigning a claim to notify the assignee of new information materially affecting its merits; and which body monitors compliance with those duties.
Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
There is no general requirement for an office-holder to notify a proposed defendant before assigning a claim.
Regulation 13 of the Insolvency Practitioners Regulations 2005 sets out that insolvency practitioners must maintain records sufficient to explain material decisions taken during the administration of a case. These records must be retained for six years after the office-holder’s release.
Following assignment, there is no general statutory duty to provide new information. Any obligations will depend on the terms of the assignment or directions of the Court. Recognised Professional Bodies monitor insolvency practitioners’ compliance with professional obligations.
Asked by: Preet Kaur Gill (Labour (Co-op) - Birmingham Edgbaston)
Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, what requirements apply to insolvency practitioners to notify a proposed defendant before assigning a claim and provide an opportunity to identify material factual errors.
Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
There is no general requirement for an office-holder to notify a proposed defendant before assigning a claim.
Regulation 13 of the Insolvency Practitioners Regulations 2005 sets out that insolvency practitioners must maintain records sufficient to explain material decisions taken during the administration of a case. These records must be retained for six years after the office-holder’s release.
Following assignment, there is no general statutory duty to provide new information. Any obligations will depend on the terms of the assignment or directions of the Court. Recognised Professional Bodies monitor insolvency practitioners’ compliance with professional obligations.
Asked by: Preet Kaur Gill (Labour (Co-op) - Birmingham Edgbaston)
Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, how many complaints have been investigated by a Recognised Professional Body in exercising their regulatory functions about (a) an Insolvency Practitioner and (b) the assigning of claims in the last three years.
Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Insolvency Service does not hold figures for the total number of complaints investigated by Recognised Professional Bodies (RPBs). It records complaints referred to RPBs through the Insolvency Practitioner Complaints Gateway:
Year | Referrals to RPBs |
2025 | 166 |
2024 | 144 |
2023 | 169 |
These figures do not represent the total number of RPB investigations. Investigations may also arise following regulatory inspections or intelligence received from other sources and not every Gateway referral results in an investigation; the RPB determines whether further investigation is appropriate under its regulatory processes.
The Insolvency Service does not record assignment of claims as a separate category of complaint.
Asked by: Preet Kaur Gill (Labour (Co-op) - Birmingham Edgbaston)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many NHS trusts have implemented AI-enabled chest X-ray technology supported by national funding; and what assessment she has made of the potential impact of that technology on (a) diagnostic turnaround times and (b) staff productivity.
Answered by James Frith - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is committed to ensuring that clinically effective and cost-effective medical technologies are adopted more consistently across the National Health Service, so that patients can benefit from proven innovation wherever they live. The 10-Year Health Plan and Life Science Sector Plan published last year committed to expand National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) technology appraisals used for branded medicines, publish guidance to introduce value-based procurement, and introduce an Innovator Passport.
The National HealthTech Access Programme was launched earlier this year to expand NICE Technology Appraisals to selected medical devices, diagnostics and digital products. The first technologies referred to NICE include capsule sponge tests to support earlier detection of oesophageal cancer and AI-assisted analysis of breast and prostate pathology images. Following publication of NICE appraisals early next year implementation plans to achieve national adoption will be confirmed. The Value Based Procurement guidance was published in June to support more consistent, evidence-based purchasing decisions focused on outcomes rather than lowest cost. The Innovator Passport is due to be launched over the coming months to enable better exchange and reuse of information to speed up local decision making.