Ace, too, bears some liability. Although they told Perfect Products plc, ostensibly in good faith, that their situation was hopeless and liquidation was the only answer, when Perfect Products decided to ignore their advice and attempt to avoid voluntary liquidation, Ace failed to use diligence in making the case for liquidation; later, when they are notified in writing that Perfect Products intends to cancel insurances, lay off workers and generally attempt to struggle along despite the opinions of two of its own directors that it cannot survive, the accountants fail to respond. In this respect, they are also failing to exercise diligence in carrying out their role as accountants to the company. Indeed, the accountants' liability would have been minimized at that point had they made a second written representation of their findings and recommendation, even recommending strongly against the hopeless efforts the Chairman was almost forcing the company to engage in.
There is almost no entity involved in the Perfect Products dissolution that is without liability. The Chairman bears at least ethical liability for forcing the directors to go along with a reckless plan, even over the objections of some. The directors who remained bear liability; had those who disagreed resigned, it would at least have denied tacit approval for the effort. The HRM Manager is liable for almost unconscionable disregard of equality statutes and practices. The Risk manager bears liability for cancelling coverages, but more for failing to disclose facts that later rendered useless the coverage he or she kept. The insurance company bears liability for failing to exercise...
Moreover, it is tempting to think that there would be criminal liability for the risk manager because of the failure to keep in force and EL policy, which is compulsory. The company thus had failed in its obligation to governing bodies as well). It had also failed to pay wages and salaries, and thus maintains a liability position with regard to current and former employees.
Ultimately, the Chairman and the directors are responsible for the conditions at Perfect Products plc; the accountants and the insurance company have secondary responsibility.
References
Bergman, D. (1998) Bosses get away with murder. New Statesman. Questia database. Accessed 20 June 2005 at www.questia.com.
Fact sheet: Sex discrimination legislation in Britain. (2005). U.K. government Web site. Accessed 20 June 2005 at http://www.womenandequalityunit.gov.uk/legislation/
Foster, P. (2001) Tracking down U.K. company information. Online. Highbeam Research. Accessed 20 June 2005 at www.highbeam.com.
Miller, S.K. (1998) Piercing the corporate veil among affiliated companies in the European Community and in the U.S.: A comparative analysis of U.S., German, and U.K. veil-piercing approaches. American Business Law Journal, 36(1). Highbeam Research. Accessed 20 June 2005 at www.questia.com.
Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Group PLC. (2003) Risk & Insurance. Highbeam Research. Accessed 20 June 2005 at www.highbeam.com.
