Why should insolvency practitioners not go on fishing trips?

As Liquidator or Trustee in Bankruptcy I enter my office as a stranger and I frequently encounter many bankrupts and former company directors (and sadly their professional advisers) who are not tremendously forthcoming with information that I reasonably require for the furtherance of my investigations into the insolvent's affairs, dealings and property.

When seeking the files of accountants and even solicitors who the insolvent may have instructed, a not uncommon attempt to derail this process is for advisers to allege that I might be on something of a fishing expedition. Comments may even extend to you are looking for creatures in ponds that you do not even know exist! Naturally I do not know if those so-called creatures exist - I was not there at the relevant time observing the conduct of the insolvent.

Insolvency Practitioners have a duty to investigate the affairs of the insolvent. Whilst there should not be a presumption that an insolvent person or the relevant personalities will be economical with the truth, it is inconceivable that an Insolvency Practitioner can always undertake his or her investigations without a proper review of not just what the debtor or director is prepared to elucidate has happened in the past but also of the historical documentary evidence.

Interestingly accusations of fishing trips even seem to extend to taking possession of company records. I believe that a practitioner who did not make some reasonable attempt to obtain a company's records for which they are the liquidator, could be at risk of negligence, particularly if such records would have enabled discovery of assets which could have been realised to enhance returns to creditors.

Furthermore, it is to my mind interesting that I seem to encounter many professional advisers who one might have thought perhaps ought to know that their files contain documents that they have received and retain in the capacity as agent and are owned by the insolvent (and any successors), yet who are reluctant to part with such documents. Arguments that the request for such documents might be inappropriate through references to the fishing trip seem irregular. Can you imagine if your neighbour received an item of your post in error and refused to hand it over on the grounds of possession - not to mention the possible offence in light of Section 84 of the Postal Services Act 2000?

If one thought that my risk of coming up empty handed from a fishing trip could not get any worse then how about consideration of the professional adviser who not only is reluctant to part with these documents on their files but then claims ownership of the entire file. If you were to hand over your car to a mechanic for repair, is it possible for your car to be owned by the mechanic? I think not.

Fishing trips, expeditions and searching for those creatures in those ponds is I believe an essential part of the Insolvency Practitioner's role.