Protect Yourself and your Business from Business FraudFraud within the corporate environment has been on the increase. What might surprise some is that there is no such thing in law as a business or commercial fraud. There are however types of behaviour and circumstances that give rise to causes of action that are more commonly known as fraud.

So, when faced with the decision of reporting the fraud to the police or not, what key factors should you take into account?

 

All fraud is a criminal offence open to being pursued by the appropriate prosecuting authorities in the criminal courts against an individual, known as the defendant. The Magistrates Court and the Crown Court are where these types of cases are heard and the sanctions can be a fine and/or imprisonment. Any decision made at a criminal trial will be made by a jury. The company would have to report the fraudulent activity in order to see whether the police will investigate it further. Resources are often limited and it is not guaranteed.

The party wronged can also pursue a private court case in the civil courts to seek recovery of money or assets that have been lost as a result of the fraudulent conduct. Any decision made in the civil trial is usually made by a judge as opposed to by jury.

 

In the Criminal Courts, the burden of proof is placed upon the prosecution to show “beyond reasonable doubt” that the defendant committed the alleged fraud.

In civil proceedings, the burden of proof is on the victim to prove that “on the balance of probabilities” that the defendant committed the alleged fraud. It is therefore considered easier to prove a case in the civil court and it is in the criminal court.

 

The perpetrator of the fraud can be convicted in the criminal courts and face a prison sentence up to 10 years or an unlimited fine or indeed both. Any sentence is highly likely to be disclosable to a future employer.

In the civil courts, if successful, the claimant would obtain an order against the defendant to repay the money or assets taken and potentially to pay damages. The sanctions are reimbursement and potentially compensation but not punishment as in the criminal court. There is no loss of liberty.

 

When convicted in the criminal courts, the defendant can face a Compensation Order which requires a convicted defendant to pay compensation to his victim. This is not guaranteed though.

In the civil court, a successful victim obtains an order that the defendant repay the money or assets taken as well as possible damages. It may therefore be possible to obtain a judgement against the individual although this does not necessarily mean that the money will be recovered. Once the judgment is secured against the defendant, the process of tracking down assets and money to repay the sums and enforce the order begins if the defendant does not pay willingly.

 

The first response of many is to report the matter to the police. It is important to understand that when doing so, this will not automatically begin the process of recovering what has been lost. The criminal court seeks to convict an individual for their behaviour and not recover what was taken.

Pursuing a case in the civil court can be relevantly quick in comparison to the criminal court and without waiting for any further authority (e.g. the CPS) to complete an investigation. The whole objective of any civil proceedings is the recovery of what has been lost and any compensation. To be financially compensated is therefore the sole focus where as in the criminal proceedings unless the prosecutor is persuaded to seek a Compensation Order, no such financial compensation is payable to the victim.

In civil proceedings, the format, structure and pace of the proceedings is predominantly within the court and the parties control compared to a criminal matter when the police decide the extent of the investigation and whether to prosecute. There is no guarantee that the defendant would be investigated or prosecuted and there is no control over any investigation. It is also unlikely that regular updates are given and after providing a statement, it is unlikely that there be further involvement. Resources within the police force are limited.

The civil process provides a series of tools and applications that require a defendant to produce documents to the Court and which can be useful in tracing the defendant’s money and assets. This is important for enforcement purposes and not something readily available to individual businesses in the criminal court.

With the burden of proof being less in the civil courts, there is potentially more likelihood of securing a positive outcome on liability and the main challenge is then recovery of what has been lost and the costs of pursuing the action. The costs of pursuing a criminal investigation are borne by the authority not the company.

It is also quicker to bring a civil case then it would be to investigate and have a criminal matter prosecuted. Civil court trials are much shorter than in criminal trials given the latter focuses upon issues which could lead to loss of liberty.

With all of the above being borne in mind, the police and investigative governmental authorities have wider powers to search and investigate than private individuals. They can execute search warrants without notice, locate bank accounts and telephone records and a lot more confidential information simply not available to the public is accessible to them.

Whilst the prospect of a custodial sentence and hefty fine can be a way of redress, it will not reimburse a business for the sums they had been lost nor provide any financial compensation.

 

If you or your business are part of the regulated sector, you may have a duty to report a fraud. However, there is no legal obligation to report a fraud to the police or any other body if you are not regulated.

 

It is possible to pursue a civil action as well as a criminal one. Potentially, both proceedings can take place at the same time although the police may request that the civil process be put on hold so as not to compromise any evidence or criminal investigation.

 

Any decision whether to opt for civil or criminal proceedings is likely to be governed by the individual circumstances and objective. Exploring those options and understanding how the Company can best achieve its goals thereby leaving directors to act in accordance with their statutory duties is an important way forward.

For further advice and assistance please contact our Private Client Team on 01604 828282 / 01908 660966 or email info@franklins-sols.co.uk

MediationThere are some key criteria to consider when selecting a venue that can help a mediation run smoothly.

If the parties have solicitors or barristers representing them, often a mediation can take place at one of their offices. It’s often the cost effective option and therefore makes sense but there is a word of warning.

It is a false economy if one of the parties will perceive themselves to be on the others “turf” and be uncomfortable from the start. That isn’t conducive to securing a resolution and will not be in either parties interests.

The environment is important and given that there will already be tensions between the parties, increasing this with a venue that is not seen as neutral can start the process off on the wrong foot. If it can’t be avoided, take steps to ensure that both parties feel just as comfortable even if it means arranging to arrive much earlier and look around. A neutral venue has advantages providing it is equipped to handle the mediation; however with good preparation steps can be taken to even out any perceived advantage if that proves necessary. In any event, the mediation should ideally be somewhere convenient for all.

The general rule of thumb is a room per party and one for the mediator.

The reasoning is that each party can then have their own private space for the duration of the mediation in which they can talk together and with the mediator without being overheard. This is important. The mediator generally has a room as well that is large enough to host a joint meeting between the parties if appropriate or to bring individuals together to discuss elements of the dispute. The mediator’s room is neutral and, similar to the point above, if you are to organise the mediation without a third room, there may, as above, be a need to consider how one of the parties would feel walking into the others room for a joint meeting. Territory can be relevant! Having said that there are many successful mediations that take place every day with only two rooms. It is helpful to talk over with your mediator as to what might best suit your mediation.

The rooms should also be able to accommodate those attending comfortably. If the room is tiny and everyone is squashed together, it will not help those attending to focus on the key issues in dispute. That might be seen as a good thing, but it isn’t.

Mediations vary in length and therefore it can be helpful for the venue to be able to accommodate the unpredictability of the process. The rooms might be needed for longer than initially anticipated and it makes it easier if you know that you can stay put if additional time is required. The alternative could be losing the good progress made and then having to re-locate somewhere else risking the loss of the momentum of the negotiations.

There should be water and drinks available and also refreshments for lunch and something in the afternoon to sustain everyone to overcome any dip in energy levels as the basic minimum. Alternatively, the parties should come prepared with food, snacks and plenty of drinks. It is not unheard of for local takeaways to be called upon to provide much needed sustenance when the process goes on after hours.

Having a good phone signal is important along with Wi-Fi/internet points, plug sockets for charging laptops and phones. A printer and/or copier is also very helpful. It can be helpful for each of the rooms to have a flip chart or white board and pens available.

If the mediation is taking place in the summer, having air conditioning is likely to be appreciated to keep everyone comfortable. Ensuring that the rooms are warm enough in the winter is of likewise importance.

If you have parties that are particularly acrimonious, it can be necessary to consider separate entrances to your venue or agreeing arrival times and also checking whether toilets facilities are in separate areas just so there is the reassurance of knowing that there is no risk of bumping into each other.

Having parking at the venue or nearby is also really helpful. It is also worth checking if using a public car park when it closes! Good transport routes may also be relevant to those attending.

There are venues that cater very well for mediations and promote themselves for this purpose. It is always important just to check that they do meet your needs. Alternatives are meeting rooms at hotels, conference venues, corporate boxes at sporting venues and community centres to name just a few.

Always make sure on arrival that you have a means of contacting the manager or event co-ordinator on the day in case there is anything you need.

For further advice and assistance please contact our Private Client Team on 01604 828282 / 01908 660966 or email info@franklins-sols.co.uk

Online mediation can bring together parties in dispute from all over the UK and abroad. It provides a means of resolving issues that are preventing progress and keeping individuals and businesses locked in the past.

As with all mediation, all those participating have to have agreed to take part in the process. A mediation will not work if someone does not want to take part and a mediator will not force someone to do something that they do not want to do.

What do I need to undertake an on-line mediation?

How does it work?

The mediator will agree with the parties the best way of organising the mediation. This is likely to be by video conferencing or Face Time. Often Skype, Microsoft Team meetings or Zoom are used and there are of course other alternatives too.

Trying out the technology beforehand is key to ensuring as much as possible that everything will run smoothly on the day and that the online mediation is feasible.

The process can involve the mediator simply contacting each party separately and confidentially to explore the issues important to them and begin to open up communication for negotiations to take place. This can be with the mediator acting as a “go-between” or it could mean the mediator facilitating direct communication by video conferencing the parties together to speak directly. The mediator would always prepare everyone for this session beforehand if it were to take place.

Whilst there is an overall structure and framework to the mediation process, every mediation is different and the mediator will always be flexible and adapt the time spent to ensure that the best possible chance of securing a resolution is achieved.

Any agreement is circulated between the parties, signed and scanned back in exchange. It may also be agreed that electronic signatures could be used to create a contractual binding agreement.

Is online mediation easy to arrange?

Yes, very easy. All that is needed is a reliable network, a mediator who works with the technology and parties that are willing to engage to resolve their dispute.

For further advice and assistance please contact our Private Client Team on 01604 828282 / 01908 660966 or email info@franklins-sols.co.uk

Key task for now…and in the future

The first task for any business is to review their contracts and these may vary depending upon whether your company negotiates a bespoke contract for each business relationship.

The second job, is to ensure that any contract you are entering into from now on has a wider drafted “force majeure” clause or exclusion clause to cover situations like this or ones that arise that are similar.

Why do I need to do this when the government has declared COVID-19 a pandemic?

Whereas the Chinese Government has issued force majeure certificates to companies that are unable in the current outbreak of the virus to satisfy their commercial terms, companies in England and Wales will find their position governed by their contract.

Key clauses in your contract

The key clauses to review in your contract are:-

Why does everyone refer to force majeure and what does that mean?

Evident from its spelling, force majeure, is not an English term. It originated from French law.

This type of clause will usually outline what happens in the event of something unforeseen happening and what impact it has on the parties to the contract.

The principle is that if an event, defined in the contract, occurred that was out of the control of the parties, they could seek to rely upon this clause. The party unable to fulfil the contract are effectively excused from performing their obligations or entitled to suspend performing them. Law is rarely straight forward though so it will depend upon the circumstances and what the parties envisaged at the time the contract was drawn up.

These types of “force majeure” events are usually extreme and ones not caused by either contracting party.  In the past, they have been natural disasters and war.  Whether or not the current COVID-19 is such an unforeseeable event will depend upon how this has been defined within the contract itself.  Some clauses will refer to disease or epidemics.

Too late to add an exclusion clause?

A force majeure clause cannot be added to a contract at a later date. The parties seeking to use this specific exclusion have to rely upon what was understood at the time the clause was drafted.

The Courts when considering these clauses, interpret them true to their wording and therefore strictly.

Type of wording to look out for

The scope of the clause therefore would dictate its coverage.

Frustration

There will probably be a lot of frustration with the uncertainties…but the legal implications of a contract frustrated are clear.

It may be that if your force majeure or clause does not apply, then your contract could be frustrated under English law.  Frustration means that if an event prevents a party fulfilling its contractual obligations and they are commercially impossible, the contract can be deemed frustrated.

The contract is automatically terminated upon the occurrence of the frustrating event.  As neither party is at fault and there is no party therefore against whom damages can be claimed, the common law provides that losses are dealt with where they lie.

Would a Court classify the COVID-19 as a force majeure event?

It depends upon your contract.

There is currently very limited case law testing the scope of the clause and we go back to 1920 and the case of Lebeaupin v Crispin [1920] 2 KB 714 which suggests that an epidemic may constitute a force majeure of event:

“Force majeure. This term is used with reference to all circumstances independent of the will of man, and which it is not in his power to control…  this, war, inundation is and epidemics are cases of force majeure or; it has even been decided that a strike of workmen constitutes a case of force majeure”

The above has not been tested in court relative to these current circumstances. The contract will play a big part in the interpretation of the various clauses.

What do I do now?

  1. Review each contract and check in the aforementioned clauses: definitions, force majeure, exclusions and termination alongside any further time bars and performance criteria
  2. Assess based upon the wording and any information that is available as to when the contract was drafted, whether the force majeure or clause is likely to cover COVID-19 or not
  3. Take steps to mitigate any non-performance – what measures are you putting in place and what actions form part of your business continuity policy?
  4. Have conversations with the relevant parties in an attempt to work together to find solutions.
  5. Consider the impact of the terminating the contract and any losses that may be it arising as a result. This could be an expensive option for you so not one to be taken lightly and without a full review;
  6. Consider your legal position and gain advice.
  7. Consider any reputational risks.
  8. Consider whether declaring a force majeure or receiving a force majeure claim impacts upon any insurance arrangements that you have in place. You should be checking your insurance in any event.
  9. Any new contract should make provision for COVID-19 (with a wide definition if possible)
  10. At a time when we are bombarded with negative news and challenges, review how you can improve your working relationships with your customers and supply chain to show that you are proactive, collaborative and responsible. There is always an opportunity for good to come from a difficult situation. Morrisons declared that they would pay all small businesses supplying their stores much sooner. They are in a position to be able to do this and many can’t. What can you do that shows how you respond positively in these times?

For more information on Contract Law negotiations or drafting, contact our Business Services team or, for information on how to handle a contract dispute due to the current pandemic situation, please contact our Dispute Resolution team who would be happy to help. Call 01604 828282 / 01908 660966 or email info@franklins-sols.co.uk. 

When does a breach of contract occur? It is usually as a result of one of the following:-

Breaches of contract are categorised depending upon how serious they are to the relationship between the parties. They can be categorised as a:

A minor breach of contract can arise when a service or individual part is substituted for what was originally agreed between the parties in accordance with their contract and yet the contract itself can still be delivered despite the alteration. In other words, the breach only has a minor impact upon the contract.

A material breach of contract arises when there has been a more serious breach that goes to the heart of the contract itself. This generally means that one of the parties would not have entered into the contract without this element being agreed and part of the contract.

A fundamental or sometimes called a repudiatory breach of contract is so severe that the contract itself can be terminated. Termination of the contract is instead of the innocent party seeking compensation or what is known as damages against the offending party as would be the case if the breach were classified as a minor or material breach.

An anticipatory breach is when one party tells the other party to the contract that they will not be carrying out part of the contract or a specific term of the agreement which is still due to take place at a future point in time.

What can you do?

Make sure you have your contract and all associated documents and communication together and begin to consider the implications of what has happened. This will help begin to identify which category of breach the action (or lack of it) falls into.

As it may be possible to terminate the contract, acting promptly is important otherwise you may be deemed to have accepted the breach.

We can help advise you on the nature of a breach and the consequences. This will enable you to decide what steps to take next. Contact our Dispute Resolution team today on 01604 828282 / 01908 660966 or at litigation@franklins-sols.co.uk.

No, the mediator will not force you to reach an agreement.

A mediator’s role is to help the parties in dispute to communicate and find a settlement that each party can live with and move on.

A mediator holds a unique position. Everything said to the mediator is confidential. This means discussions you have with the mediator will be kept private and not passed on to anyone else without your agreement and this enables the mediator to work with you considering all of your options throughout the mediation process.

Your meetings with the mediator may include negotiation tactics, possibly some coaching on how best to proceed as well as assisting you in considering what the alternatives are if a settlement is not reached. The mediator will work hard to ensure that you have the best possible chance of finding a way forward and a solution when you commit to the process.

The benefits of mediation

Whilst settlements cannot be guaranteed, settlement rates at mediation are high. The process is flexible and in fact, the parties can find terms to agree that are best suited to each of them and not limited to those that a court might order as appropriate to the circumstances in law. This can be hugely advantageous offering flexibility in solutions and even payment terms.

Mediation provides you with more control not less. You make the decisions as to what to do, what to offer and if and when to settle. This will not happen in court nor adjudication. The mediator can be your reality check throughout and facilitate the communication and offers between the parties involved, making it easier to manage negotiations.

If you want to find a way forward and have a process that is quicker and cheaper than going to Court, mediation could be your answer.

For further advice and assistance please contact our Private Client Team on 01604 828282 / 01908 660966 or email info@franklins-sols.co.uk

letter of claimOn the 4th February 2020, the Court of Appeal considered the enforceability of restrictive covenants in shareholders agreements.  This was in the case of Guest Services Worldwide Limited v. Shelmerdine 2020 EWCA Civ 85.

The Defendant was a consultant in Guest Services Worldwide Limited and a shareholder. Restrictions in the Shareholder Agreement prevented him from dealing with company customers or soliciting customers, employees or suppliers from the company’s business for a period of 12 months after he ceased to be a shareholder.

The Company alleged breach of restrictive covenants.

The consultant argued that on leaving the company, he ceased to be a shareholder and therefore the restrictions did not apply.  Further, that those restrictions of a 12 month non-solicitation period were unenforceable in restraint of trade and unreasonably wide.

In the High Court, the Judge agreed yet the Court of Appeal came to a different view.

It was held that whilst all covenants in restraint of trade were unenforceable unless reasonable, restrictions contained within a shareholders agreement were akin to those in an employment contract. The company had a legitimate interest in preventing the consultant from competing with the business and soliciting clients given the knowledge that was likely to have been acquired; further, the clause within the shareholder’s agreement had been made between experienced commercial parties and finally the period of restraint lasting 12 months was reasonable when protecting a commercial interest in these circumstances.

The 12 month period ran from the time when the consultant ceased to be a shareholder rather than when his consultancy came to an end.

For further advice and assistance please contact our Private Client Team on 01604 828282 / 01908 660966 or email info@franklins-sols.co.uk

 

The answer it seems is: Yes.

In the case of Neocleous & Anor v Rees 2019 EWHC 2462 (Cn), the Court considered an automatically generated email footer and whether this constituted as a valid signature.

Emails were exchanged between the parties’ respective solicitors relating to the terms of settlement for a dispute about a right of way.

A solicitor’s name, occupation, role and contact details were automatically added in the footer to the bottom of an email. The Court held that the test of a valid signature is whether the name was applied with authenticating intent. This meant that objectively “the presence of the name indicates a clear intention to associate oneself with the email – to authenticate or sign it”.

The Court was satisfied that the solicitor had validly signed the relevant email, which meant that there was a contract.

The Law Commission’s recent Report on electronic execution of documents confirms that an electronic signature is capable in law of being used to execute a document (including a Deed) provided that:

  1. The person signing the document intends to authenticate the document; and
  2. Any formalities relating to the execution of that document are satisfied.

Email communication with an automated signature footing is sufficient to bind a party to a contract.

If you have any questions pertaining to the validity of a contract or indeed in relation to a contract dispute please contact our Dispute Resolution Team on 01604 828282 / 01908 660966 or email litigation@franklins-sols.co.uk.  

Adjudications are a quick method of resolving construction disputes and enabling the parties to move on with a continuing project, or simply put the past behind them and focus upon new projects. They are however occasionally challenged when one of the parties believe that the law has not been properly applied to the circumstances. As the way of challenging or enforcing the decision is through the Court system, it is open for the parties to consider their options in settling for the outcome reached or opening an issue up to further scrutiny of a Judge in the Court setting.

In Willow v MTD Contractors 2019 EWHC 1591, the Court allowed severance of part of an Adjudicator’s Decision. Ordinarily, a Court would enforce an Adjudicator’s decision even if the decision was wrong, provided that an Adjudicator acted in accordance with the rules of natural justice and acted within the Adjudicator’s jurisdiction. With a couple of exceptions to this rule, it has been possible for this to be relied upon quite freely. This rule had therefore deterred many from challenging Decisions reached on the basis that even if wrong, the Court was likely to uphold the overall Decision.

In allowing the severance in Willow, the Court acknowledged that the part containing the flaw could safely be severed without affecting the other parts of the Adjudicator’s Decision. By removing the offending part, the balance of the Decision still fulfilled the above criteria and was appropriate.

There have been a number of cases where the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) has warned parties not to issue challenges to the enforcement of an Adjudicator’s decision; so the Court’s indication that the TCC should be more willing to order severance of an Adjudicator’s decision following this particular case was a shift in emphasis and serves to play a part in a party’s decision on whether to take a matter forward to Court for review if they are unhappy with an Adjudicator’s decision.

If you are looking for advice regarding a dispute, contact our Dispute Resolution Team today on 01604 828282 / 01908 660966 or at litigation@franklins-sols.co.uk.

Freezing Injunctions are the means of preserving assets that are at risk of becoming moved out of reach and dissipated.

In the case of Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd v Morimoto 11 December 2019 [2019] EWCA Civ 2003, Haddon-Cave LJ provided guidance on the approach the Courts should adopt when facing an Application for a Freezing Order.

The well-established principles he repeated were as follows:

  1. There must be a real risk that a future Judgment would not be met because of an unjustified dissipation of assets (such as concealment or transfer).
  2. Solid evidence of this risk is necessary and a mere generalised assertion that it may happen or mere inference is insufficient.
  3. If there is more than one Respondent, the risk has to be separately established against each individual.
  4. The fact that the Respondent had been guilty of dishonesty is not in itself enough; such dishonesty must point towards a risk of dissipation.
  5. The use of off shore structures can be significant when assessing the risk, but does not in itself equate to such a risk as it is recognised that these structures can serve an entirely legitimate purpose.
  6. What must be threatened is unjustified dissipation. The purpose of a Freezing Injunction is not to provide general security for a claim, nor to restrain a Respondent from operating its business in a legitimate way.

When applying for a Freezing Injunction, this case shows the emphasis placed upon the Applicant to show that it could establish the risk of dissipation in a good arguable case. The Applicant does not have to prove the risk on the balance of probabilities, though does have to show that the risk is “more than barely capable of serious argument.”

The heart of the test is therefore a plausible evidential basis for saying that there is a risk of dissipation. Haddon-Cave LJ said in his Judgment that the test is “not a particularly onerous one.”

The case of PJSC Commercial Bank –v- Kolomoifky 15 October 2019 [2019] EWCA Civ 1708 considered an Applicant’s duty to make full and frank disclosure when applying for a Freezing Order without notice. The majority of requests for Freezing Orders are from those seeking to apply without notice to avoid the risk of putting the other party on notice of the Application and thereby prompt the action that is feared.

The Court identified the following principles:

  1. The Applicant has to make full and fair disclosure of all material facts. What is material is decided on an objective basis by the Court and is not dependent upon the Applicant’s assessment nor those of his legal advisors.
  2. Proper enquiries must be made by the Applicant before the Application is issued at Court. In other words, the Applicant must disclose not only what he knows but what he would have known if he had made proper enquiries. The nature of those enquiries and their extent would depend upon the circumstances. If the Application is particularly urgent, less extensive enquiries may be appropriate.
  3. Whether the Injunction should be discharged depends principally on the importance of the non-disclosed fact to the issues to be decided by the Judge.
  4. However, it is necessary to consider whether the non-disclosure was innocent, or deliberate.
  5. If a non-disclosure was innocent (the Applicant did not know the fact or did not appreciate its relevance) it is an important factor to be noted but is not decisive. The duty to make enquiries must be borne in mind. A non-disclosure is unlikely to be considered innocent if the Applicant failed to make relevant enquiries for fear of discovering inconvenient facts that may thwart such an Application.
  6. If the non-disclosure was deliberate or substantial, the Court is likely to discharge the Injunction.
  7. What is in the interests of justice remains the key priority for the Court. That may include continuing with the Freezing Injunction Order, but marking the non-disclosure in some other way, such as with a suitable Order as to Costs.

The Court of Appeal have overturned the decision of a Judge who has set aside a Freezing Injunction on the basis that while the Applicant should have gone further than it did in making full and frank disclosure and that there was no basis for holding that the failure was deliberate in the relevant sense.

This decision highlights that it is important for the Applicant when applying for a Freezing Injunction to carefully consider what to disclose and why and further, to make all relevant enquiries that can be made in time available so that full and fair disclosure can be fulfilled. Further, it is necessary to be able to explain convincingly why material which has not been disclosed was considered objectively not to be relevant.

A Freezing Injunction still remains a challenging Injunction to secure to provide a party with peace of mind. Recent Case Law during 2019 shows that even though the test for risk of dissipation was a relatively low one of a good arguable case, for the risk to be established there must be evidence and not a mere assertion or inference. An Applicant must make diligent enquiries so that relevant evidence is before the Court to comply with its obligation to make full and fair disclosure.

For further advice and assistance please contact our Private Client Team on 01604 828282 / 01908 660966 or email info@franklins-sols.co.uk