Secured creditors ahead of trade
Rule id: securedCreditorStack · Version: 2026.05.27-v1
Microsoft Responsible AI Transparency artefact. One Model Card per ML signal RecoupIQ ships. Generated fromlib/modules/intelligence/canonical-warning-adapters.ts, re-runnable withnpx tsx scripts/responsible-ai/generate-model-cards.ts.
What this rule does
This company has 4 secured creditor charges on its property. In insolvency, secured creditors are repaid from charged assets before unsecured trade creditors.
When it fires
- Severity (when fired): High
- Confidence in detection (when fired): high
Severity is bounded by the magnitude observed. Confidence is bounded by the number of independent dimensions that agreed. The two are deliberately separate: a High warning at high confidence has very different triage weight from the same rule at confirmed confidence.
Inputs
Evidence the rule cites when it fires (illustrative, actual values vary per company):
- Companies House, charges register, 4 outstanding charges (2 floating, 2 fixed). (source)
- Top secured creditor, A Major Bank PLC
- Recent charge filings, 1 new charge registered in the last 60 days.
- Unsecured recovery outlook, Recovery score for an unsecured creditor in insolvency: 18/100 (lower = worse).
Known false-positive triggers
Documenting where the rule is most likely to mis-fire is a Responsible AI Transparency requirement. RecoupIQ surfaces these directly to buyers in the report panel so they triage informed.
- Floating charges on standard banking facilities are common and not in themselves a distress signal, context matters.
- Satisfied charges may still appear in older snapshots; verify each charge's current status against CH.
Recommended next steps
Review the charges list to assess your position as an unsecured creditor. If extending credit, consider security (retention of title, personal guarantee, factoring) or staged payment terms.
Notes on language: this is process language only, review, verify, escalate. RecoupIQ does not give regulated financial advice ("do not pay", "refuse the contract") in any report. See lib/modules/intelligence/canonical-warning.ts for the validator that enforces this.
Intended use
- Pre-contract due diligence on a UK counterparty.
- Pre-credit-extension sizing for trade credit or invoice finance.
- Post-default forensic evidence pack (Practitioner Pack tier).
- Litigation / SBC adjudication evidence (Practitioner Pack Plus tier).
- M&A / investment diligence snapshot.
Out-of-scope use
- Not legal advice. Always consult a regulated insolvency practitioner, solicitor, or compliance professional before acting on a warning.
- Not a definitive determination of solvency, sanctions status, or director fitness. RecoupIQ reports on public-record signals; the registers themselves are the authoritative source.
- Not a credit score. The signals correlate with but do not predict insolvency probability in any calibrated sense.
- Not suitable as the sole basis for refusing service to a counterparty.
Data sources
Detailed lineage lives in the Methodology page linked at the top of this card. Source registers cited above are the immediate inputs.
Versioning + reproducibility
Reports stamp the rule id + version ([email protected]) in their footer. To reproduce an older report, pin the same version of lib/modules/intelligence/canonical-warning-adapters.ts from git and re-run the screen.
Right of reply
Subjects of any fired warning may submit a structured rebuttal via the Right-of-Reply endpoint linked from every report panel. RecoupIQ does not auto-suppress a warning based on rebuttal, but the rebuttal is recorded against the report and surfaced in any downstream version.