Conflicting advice from 2 Accountants

[TownIdiot]

Eric Mc said:

Clearence with lenders.
Split of sales proceeds on disposal of property at a later date.
Claims about shares of disposal proceeds.
Declarations with Companies House reagrding charges.
Personal guarantees (if they exist)

All sorted

They have employed a qualified mediator to draw up the agreement and each have their own solicitor. It's a totally clean break.
A new mortgage offer is in place for the one mortgaged property.

Edited to add
Thanks to everyone for their input.

[TownIdiot]

Eric Mc said:

What I have listed are POTENTIAL problem areas rather than ACTUAL problem areas.

You seem to have an intimate knowledge of what this couple have discussed and agreed between themselves. Are you acting for them in a professional capacity?

No they are a couple who are long term friends of ours.
Really the woman is a friend of my wife's and when they split she has used us as a sounding board. She's a bit isolated so I've been helping with her life admin and my wife is being more of a supportive friend

Given the circumstances of the divorce they've done well to reach an amicable agreement (mostly because she hasn't gone for the maximum she could get ) and this was supposed to be one of the final meetings before sign off.

Edit.
What surprised me was the second accountant said
You can't do that

Rather than
If you do that then it's going to cost X.

Edited by TownIdiot on Friday 14th June 12:29

[TownIdiot]

Thanks for the replies

I haven't heard any more on this recently. Will update the thread when it's settled.

Edited to add - previously I had found this on the .gov.uk website.

Control by more than one person
Following section 6(c) of the Interpretation Act 1978 we accept that the word ‘person’ can include ‘persons’. But such persons will only meet the requirements of the legislation if together they can secure that the company’s affairs are controlled in accordance with their wishes. Whether this exists will be a question of fact in all cases. For example, there could be an oral or written agreement always to vote together, or the intention could be implied by the relationship between the parties

Edited by TownIdiot on Sunday 23 June 10:12

[TownIdiot]

TNJ said:

Only if they have agreed to act together - which is why I referred to a shareholders agreement or similar

Just being 50:50 shareholders is not sufficient

It's not my gig but I'd be happy to rely on this

"Whether this exists will be a question of fact in all cases. For example, there could be an oral or written agreement always to vote together, or the intention could be implied by the relationship between the parties"

They are married after all, and who doesn't always agree to what their wife says?

[TownIdiot]

Forester1965 said:

Someone who's got to the point of divorcing them?

They are fully in agreement about this.

And I was being facetious.