The director of C M Commercials Ltd, has been disqualified from acting as a director for 8 years for keeping inadequate company records.

Iain Drysdale Mack, (51) was disqualified following an investigation by the Insolvency Service. At a hearing in Hamilton Sheriff court on 10 August 2016, the sheriff made an eight year order against Ian Mack, which commences on 31 August 2016.

The disqualification prevents Iain Mack from directly or indirectly becoming involved in the promotion, formation or management of a company for the duration of the order, without leave of the Court.

On 16 May 2014, C M Commercials, with liabilities of ?427,348, was placed into voluntary liquidation. Iain Mack was the sole director of C M Commercials at that time.

Following the Liquidator?s appointment the investigation found that from 1 February 2012 to 16 May 2014, the company books and records were inadequate to:

?verify expenditure from the Company bank account totalling ?421,308

?verify whether receipts into the Company bank account between 1 February 2014 and 16 May 2014 totalling ?583,334 are a true representation of the total sales achieved by the Company

?verify the position with regards to assets owned by the Company at the date of liquidation, especially with regards to stock held at 31 January 2012 at a value of ?395,600, or verify sales of those assets between these dates

?establish the true level of liabilities owed to HM Revenue and Customs in respect of VAT

Robert Clarke, Head of Company Investigation at the Insolvency Service said:

?Directors have a duty to ensure that their companies maintain proper accounting records, and, following insolvency, deliver them to the office-holder in the interests of fairness and transparency. Without a full account of transactions it is impossible to determine whether a director has discharged his duties properly, or is using a lack of documentation as a cloak for impropriety. Mr Mack cannot now carry on in business other than at his own risk.

?The Insolvency Service will take action against directors who do not take their obligations seriously and abuse their position of trust.?