An assessment of the Wolf position against the framework within which UK insolvency practitioners are regulated. Six limbs, each stating the requirement, the position and how it is evidenced.
Visit the Insolv PlatformFirst issued 21 January 2026. This edition, IPRA / 2026.01. Third in the series, alongside the Consumer Duty Assessment and the SRA Compliance Assessment.
Wolf builds and maintains infrastructure.
Wolf is not an introducer.
The client decides. The client transmits. Wolf carries.
The Wolf infrastructure this assessment is written against. Every limb below describes how the Insolv Platform is built and operated.
A practitioner who receives work through any channel remains answerable for that channel. Wolf has therefore assessed its own position against the rules the practitioner works under, rather than leaving the practitioner to do it.
The regulatory framework for insolvency practitioners has tightened materially around advertising, marketing and the use of introducer firms. The Insolvency Service has published strengthened guidance for the recognised professional bodies on monitoring those areas, issued amid concern about the activity of some introducers. The Insolvency Practitioners Association states that it does not recognise the use of non FCA regulated introducers.
Wolf engaged with those requirements before building, not after. The architecture of the platform was set against them: the client selects the firm, the client transmits its own file, no record is released by Wolf, no introduction is made, and nothing Wolf is paid depends on any appointment. Each of those is a design decision taken to sit inside the framework, and each is evidenced on the face of every certificate issued.
Where the framework sets a requirement, this assessment states it, states what Wolf does, and states how that can be tested. Where Wolf goes further than the framework requires, that is stated too, and marked as such.
An insolvency practitioner in the United Kingdom is authorised and regulated by one of three recognised professional bodies, each recognised for the purposes of section 391 of the Insolvency Act 1986.
The Insolvency Service is the oversight regulator. The Secretary of State holds a set of oversight sanctions over the recognised bodies, introduced into the Insolvency Act 1986 by the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015, and the bodies account to the Insolvency Service for how they supervise their own members. During 2025 the Insolvency Service introduced a data led, risk based approach to monitoring the bodies, with quarterly returns in a consistent format.
This assessment is written against all four, together with the Statements of Insolvency Practice issued through the Joint Insolvency Committee and the Insolvency Code of Ethics.
Each limb opens on click. The requirement is stated first, in the terms the framework uses. The Wolf position follows. The evidence is what a monitor or a compliance officer can test.
The Insolvency Service has published strengthened guidance for the recognised professional bodies on their monitoring of insolvency practitioners' advertising, marketing and use of introducer firms, issued amid concern about the activity of some introducers. The Insolvency Practitioners Association states that it does not recognise the use of non FCA regulated introducers.
Wolf is not an introducer and does not act as one. Wolf identifies no business to any firm, releases no record to any firm, and makes no introduction. A business holding a passport account selects a firm from what is shown in its own account and transmits its own certified passport to that firm. The transmission is the client's act. Wolf operates the infrastructure across which it travels.
Section 2330 of the Insolvency Code of Ethics 2025 addresses agencies and referrals, and the first question a compliance officer asks is who decided which firms are shown. The mechanics are therefore stated in full.
The Financial Conduct Authority prohibits remuneration for debt packagers. The recognised professional bodies' joint guidance of October 2025 states that arrangements must not be used in a way that weakens consumer protections or undermines regulatory requirements, including that ban.
Wolf receives no payment that depends on any appointment, any realisation or any recovery. Charges are for infrastructure: the build, the maintenance of the receiver and validator, a capacity ceiling and a metered rate per certified file received. Nothing Wolf is paid rises or falls with what a practitioner decides.
The Insolvency Code of Ethics 2025, approved by the Joint Insolvency Committee and issued by ICAEW, ICAS and the Insolvency Practitioners Association, came into force on 1 October 2025. Section 2360, advertising, marketing and other promotional activities, requires a practitioner considering an appointment to be satisfied that relevant advertising and marketing is fair, is not misleading, avoids unsubstantiated statements and complies with applicable advertising rules. Where work arrives through a third party, that responsibility extends to the third party. Section 2330 addresses agencies and referrals. The revised Code also introduces duties to safeguard information and to assess the reliability of technology outputs.
Every figure published on any Wolf surface carries its class on the face of the page. Verified means a named publisher, sourced, dated and linked. Reported means a Wolf platform counter, moving continuously and not independently verified. Assessment means an estimate, labelled as one. Nothing is published without a class.
Insolvency Service guidance identifies a responsible approach to the customer journey as an important part of what practitioners must ensure, including satisfying themselves that correct advice has been given before an introduction is acted on.
The journey is documented end to end and every step is dated. A business completes a structured declaration of its own position, elects separately whether it wishes to be contacted and whether it wishes to be introduced, and selects the firm itself. No step is completed on the client's behalf and no default is preselected.
ICAEW, ICAS and the Insolvency Practitioners Association have issued joint interim guidance for office holders on the handling of motor finance redress claims, in place while the challenges to the Financial Conduct Authority scheme continue.
The claim estate module quantifies and evidences. It does not determine, advise or pursue. Every value it produces is an identified value carrying its evidence class, never a realisation and never a forecast of one, and the vesting question is carried as a flag rather than answered.
Recognised professional bodies monitor their members against the Statements of Insolvency Practice issued through the Joint Insolvency Committee, the Insolvency Code of Ethics and their own rules. The Insolvency Service moved to a data led, risk based approach to monitoring the bodies during 2025, with quarterly returns in a consistent format.
Everything the platform produces is built to be producible on a monitoring visit rather than assembled for one. Records are structured, dated and retained in a form a monitor can read without interpretation, and the evidence class of every field is on the face of the record.
Compliance is the floor. Four positions below are taken because they are right, not because any rule requires them.
Every design decision on the platform is tested against one question: would this survive a monitoring visit at the firm receiving it. Anything that would not survive that question does not get built, whatever it would be worth commercially.